Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

PL EN


2018 | 18 | 3 | 86-104

Article title

INTEGRATING TECHNOLOGY INTO ESP CLASSES: USE OF STUDENT RESPONSE SYSTEM IN ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES INSTRUCTION

Authors

Content

Title variants

Languages of publication

EN

Abstracts

EN
This paper presented the results of an experimental study investigating the impact of clicker use through a smart phone application called Kahoot!. Despite positive results of clicker use in the existing General English literature, the impact of clicker use has not been examined in the field of ESP. To address this issue, this study investigated the effectiveness of clickers by comparing pre-test and post-test scores of a control and an experimental group and the scores of male and female participants in the experimental group. The results of a 10-week implementation of clicker use with the students of tourism and hospitality department in the experimental group indicated that while post-test scores were significantly higher for the experimental group than for the control group, there was not a statistically significant difference between the post-test scores of male and female participants in the experimental group. Implications for teaching ESP with the help of technology and suggestions for further research were also provided.

Year

Volume

18

Issue

3

Pages

86-104

Physical description

Contributors

  • Bandırma Onyedi Eylül University

References

  • Admiraal, W., Huizenga, J., Akkerman, S., & Dam, G. (2011). The concept of flow in collaborative game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1185-1194. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.013
  • Agbatogun, A. O. (2014). Developing learners’ second language communicative competence through active learning: Clickers or communicative approach? Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 257-269. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://www.j-ets.net/ETS/journals/17_2/21.pdf
  • Albadi, A. M. (2016). Twitter mobile application: A source of communicative and authentic learning. The Journal of Teaching English For Specific and Academic Purposes, 4(1), 49-60. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://espeap.junis.ni.ac.rs/index.php/espeap/article/view/310/209
  • Anthis, K. (2011). Is it the clicker, or is it the question? Untangling the effects of student response system use. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 189-193. DOI: 10.1177/0098628311411895
  • Arnó-Macía, E. (2012). The role of technology in teaching languages for specific purposes. Modern Language Journal, 96, 89-104. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01299.x
  • Barnett, J. (2006). Implementation of personal response units in very large lecture classes: Student perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(4), 474-494. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.1281
  • Battin-Pearson, S., Newcomb, M. D., Abbott, R. D., Hill, K. G., Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (2000). Predictors of early high school dropout: A test of five theories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 568-582. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2000-12129-015
  • Beaty, I. D., Gerace, W. J., Leonard, W. J., & Dufresne, R. J. (2006). Designing effective questions for classroom response system teaching. American Journal of Physics, 74(1), 31-39. DOI: 10.1119/1.2121753
  • Bergtrom, G. (2006). Clicker sets as learning objects. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 105-110. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p105-110Bergtrom.pdf
  • Beshaj, L. (2015). The growing importance of English for specific purposes in Albanian higher education. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 3(6), 10-13. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ijsell/v3-i6/2.pdf
  • Bunce, D. M., VandenPlas, J. R., & Havanki, K. L. (2006). Comparing the effectiveness on student achievement of a student response system versus online WebCT quizzes. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(3), 488-493. DOI: 10.1021/ed083p488
  • Butler-Pascoe, M. E., & Wiburg, K. M. (2003). Technology and Teaching English Language Learners. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Bulter-Pascoe, M. E. (2009). English for specific purposes (ESP), innovation, and technology. In T. Chiang, W. Chuang, & L. Li (Eds.), English Education and ESP (pp. 1-15). Taiwan: Shih Chien University.
  • Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9-20. DOI: 10.1187/cbe.06–12–0205
  • Chen, T. L., & Lan, Y. L. (2013). Using a personal response system as an in-class assessment tool in the teaching of basic college chemistry. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 32-40. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.95
  • Chliaras, P. (2014). Implementing new technologies as instructional models into English for specific purposes classes. Journal of International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language English for Specific Purposes Special Interest Group, 44, 8-11. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://espsig.iatefl.org/?page_id=1167
  • Çelik, S. (2015). Investigating the Effect of Student Response System Supported Think-Pair-Share Pedagogy on Preparatory School English as a Foreign Language Students’ Vocabulary Achievement. (Unpublished master’s dissertation). Ankara: Middle East Technical University. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12619511/index.pdf
  • Dashtestani, R. & Stojković, N. (2015). The use of technology in English for specific purposes (ESP) instruction: A literature review. The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 3(3), 435-456. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://espeap.junis.ni.ac.rs/index.php/espeap/article/view/304/199
  • Dayag, J. D. (2016). Integrating multimedia in teaching English to Omani learners. The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 4(1), 171-180. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://espeap.junis.ni.ac.rs/index.php/espeap/article/view/321/220
  • d’Inverno, R., Davis, H., & White, S. (2003). Using a personal response system for promoting student interaction. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 22(4), 163-169. DOI: 10.1093/teamat/22.4.163
  • Elliott, C. (2003). Using a personal response system in economics teaching. International Review of Economics Education, 1, 80-86. DOI: 10.1016/S1477-3880(15)30213-9
  • Emerson, T. L. N., & Taylor, B. A. (2004). Comparing student achievement across experimental and lecture-orientated sections of a principle of microeconomics course. Southern Economics Journal, 70, 672-693. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/eep/emersontaylor.pdf
  • Fies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101-109. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-006-0360-1
  • Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/221e/ec4c94a3484f6a025d2477b65f00c481c541.pdf
  • Fotaris P., Mastoras, T., Leinfellner, R., & Rosunally, Y. (2016). Climbing up the leader board: An empirical study of applying gamification techniques to a computer programming class. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14(2), 94-110. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from www.ejel.org/issue/download.html?idArticle=490
  • Gan, C. L. (2011). Effective learning in classrooms of tomorrow at Nanyang Technological University Singapore. Paper presented at the E-learning Asia Forum 2011. Singapore. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://elfasia.org/elfa2011/download/presentation/Session%201C_Gan%20Chee%20Lip.pdf
  • Gök, T. (2011). An evaluation of student response systems from the viewpoint of instructors and students. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 67-83. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v10i4/1048.pdf
  • Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2007). Action video game experience alters the spatial resolution of attention. Psychological Science, 18, 88-94. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01853.x
  • Hart, I. (2003). The outsider’s gaze: A learner-centered approach to language – teaching materials. Educational Media International, 40, 287-292. DOI: 10.1080/0952398032000113202
  • Hartley, J., & Davies, I. K. (1978). Note taking: A critical review. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 15, 207-224. DOI: 10.1080/0033039780150305
  • Hove, M. C., & Corcoran, K. J. (2008). Educational technologies: Impact on learning and frustration. Teaching of Psychology, 35, 121-125. DOI: 10.1080/00986280802004578
  • Hadjiconstantinou, S., & Yerou, C. (2012). Blending it in English for Specific Purposes courses: University technology students’ responses. Paper presentation at the 5th Information and Communication Technologies international conference. Florence, Italy.
  • Hovhannisyan, G. R. (2016). Acquisition of language meanings via smart technologies. The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 4(1), 23-37. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://espeap.junis.ni.ac.rs/index.php/espeap/article/view/317/206
  • Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kalaycı, Ş. (2010) SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, 5. Baskı [Applied SPSS Multivariate Statistical Techniques, 5th Edition.]. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Kavaliauskienė, G. (2011). Blended learning in ESP Listening. English for Specific Purposes World, 31(10), 1-9. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://www.esp-world.info/Articles_31/BLENDED_LEARNING_IN_ESP.pdf
  • Kay, R. H., & LeSage, A. (2009). A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 235-249. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.1152
  • Kusluvan, S., & Kusluvan, Z. (2000). Perceptions and attitudes of undergraduate tourism students towards working in the tourism industry in Turkey. Tourism Management, 21, 251-269. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/tourism-management/vol/21/issue/3
  • Laxman, K. (2011). A study on the adoption of clickers in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(8), 1291-1303. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.894
  • Lesiak-Bielawska, E. D. (2015). Technology in English for specific purposes pedagogy. English for Specific Purposes World, 48(16), 1-23. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://www.esp-world.info/Articles_48/Lesiak_Bielawska_E.pdf
  • Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second Language Research Methodology and Design. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Parsons, C. V. (2005). Decision making in the process of differentiation. Learning & Leading with Technology, 33(1), 8-10. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ719941.pdf
  • Prieto, J. P. R. (2014). The use of clickers to assess knowledge in foreign language classes and their failure to increase reading compliance. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 9, 88-96. DOI: 10.4995/rlyla.2013.1611
  • Schmid, C. E. (2008). Using a voting system in conjunction with interactive whiteboard technology to enhance learning in the English language classroom. Computers & Education, 50(1), 338-356. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1296517
  • Schmid, C. E. (2007). Enhancing performance knowledge and self-esteem in classroom language learning: The potential of the ACTIVote component of interactive whiteboard technology. System, 35(2), 119-133. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0346251X0700019X
  • Siau, K., Sheng, H., & Nah, F. F. (2006). Use of a classroom response system to enhance classroom interactivity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49(3), 397-403. DOI: 10.1109/TE.2006.879802
  • Simpson, V., & Oliver, M. (2006). Using electronic voting systems for lectures then and now: A comparison of research and practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 187-208. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.1264
  • Stav, J, Nielsen, K, Hansen-Nygård, G., & Thorseth, T. (2010). Experiences obtained with integration of student response systems for iPod touch and iPhone into e-learning environments. Electronic Journal of e- Learning, 8(2), 179-190. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/academic-conferences.org/docs/ejel-volume8-issue2-article129?mode=a_p
  • Tailor, G. R. (2005). Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Research, 2nd edition. Oxford: University Press of America.
  • Trees, A. R. & Jackson, M. H. (2007). The learning environment in clicker classrooms: Student processes of learning and involvement in large university‐level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 21-40. DOI: 10.1080/17439880601141179
  • Vukićević-Đorđević, L. (2015). Emerging technologies: Does it feel like learning? The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 3(3), 483-497. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from http://espeap.junis.ni.ac.rs/index.php/espeap/article/view/263/196
  • Warschauer, M. & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444800012970
  • Yourstone, S. A., Kraye, H. S. & Albaum, G. (2008). Classroom questioning with immediate electronic response: Do clickers improve learning? Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 6(1), 75-87. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4609.2007.00166.x

Document Type

Publication order reference

Identifiers

YADDA identifier

bwmeta1.element.desklight-6315754f-50fd-44a8-9d4d-02300665d4d7
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.