-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS * VOL. 35, NO. 6 669
Effectiveness of CALL Writing Instruction: The Voices of Korean
EFL Learners Jae-Suk Suh Keimyung University
Abstract: In spite of the widespread use of computer-assisted
language learning (CALL) and its perceivedfacilitative role in
second language (L2) learning, there is little data on how learn-
ers feel, experience, or think about CALL in the L2 learning
context. This study investigated the reactions of Korean students
studying English as a Foreign Language (EFL) to computer-medi- ated
writing instruction. Students participated in a CALL program framed
on the process approach to teaching writing. Students selected a
writing topic, navigated the Internet tofind rel- evant
information, wrote drafts, evaluated peers essays via e-mail, and
revised their work. Students were also asked to write down
everything that thgrfelt, thought about, or experienced during
classes in a journal. Analysis of these journals indicated that
CALL was a helpful tool for learning writing despite some
limitations. Some suggestions for creating better CALL-based
instruction in L2 education are given.
Introduction The development of computer and information
technologies has given rise to the use of Computer-Assisted
Instruction (CAI) in the educational disciplines. In the field of
second lan- guage (L2) education, Computer-Assisted Language
Learning (CALL) has been proposed as an alternative to traditional
teaching methods and techniques in the hopes that it will
revolution- ize the way students learn a second or foreign
language. Such hopes are presumably based on the assumption that
CALL will facilitate language learning and become an important
instruc- tional medium (Singhal, 1998).
In some respects, CALLS contribution to language learning is
already apparent (Lee, 2000). Through a variety of software and
Internet resources, CALL gives the L2 learner opportunities to
practice language skills, for both linguistic and communicative
purposes. CALL on the Internet enables learners to overcome spatial
and temporal limitations by allowing them to log onto remote sites
whenever they choose to. A large amount of information becomes
readily avail- able to them within a short period of time. CALL has
also been popular when used with e-mail because it offers learners
rarely exposed to natural face-to-face interactions in everyday
life a valuable chance to communicate with target language speakers
or nonnative speakers with dif- ferent first language (Ll)
backgrounds (Cunningham, 2000; Gonglewski, Meloni, & Brant,
2001; Jung, 1999; Oxford, 1990).
Another advantage of CALL is that it can develop learners
pragmatic competence - the ability to use a language in a way
appropriate to the social and cultural norms of the target
community - presently considered the ultimate goal of L2 learning
(Mitchell & Myles, 1998). CALL gives the learner fast and easy
access to a target society and the opportunity to gain rich
Jae-Suk Suh (PhD, Indiana University) is Fulltime Instructol;
Department ofEnglish and English Literature, Keimyung University,
Daegu, Korea.
-
670 NOVEMBEWDECEMBER 2002
and authentic information. This experience may be espe- cially
conducive to learning the sociocultural aspects of a target
community, which in turn enhances the learners understanding and
awareness of the differences between the cultural patterns of
language use in the L1 and the L2 (Kasper, 1997).
For these reasons, it has been assumed that CALL will take a
central position as a tool in L2 learning. In Korea, where L2 input
resources are limited and where the teacher plays a major role in
providing input by selecting textbooks and the type of classroom
interaction used (i.e., student- centered or teacher-centered),
CALL is expected to make a great contribution to the development of
learner proficien- cy in English as a Foreign Language (EFL)
classes.
Although a cursory glance at literature on computer- mediated
language learning provides abundant evidence for the facilitative
role of information technology in L2 learning, CALL is not
problem-free (Singhal, 1998). Some researchers argue strongly that
the use of the computer does not always guarantee effective,
successful language learning - casting doubts on the value and
usefulness of CALL. Pennington (19911, Chen (19961, Lee (20001, and
Busbee (2001) are among those opposed to computer- mediated
language learning.
In a critique of the computerization of the classroom, Busbee
(2001) cogently addressed several reasons for the general lack of
acceptance of CALL. The expense of the software, the inconvenience
of installing and the immo- bility of the computers, and the high
amount of skill, time, and energy required from the teacher all
seriously impair the effectiveness of CALL. In the same vein,
according to Lee (20001, financial considerations, lack of
high-quality software, and reluctance to accept innova- tion and
new technology are barriers to the effective prac- tice of
CALL.
Chen (1996) took a cautious attitude toward the use of CALL in
educational institutions, saying CALL approach- es will not, and
should not, spread until measurable bene- fits can be seen not only
for students but also for teachers. More research into actual
results of CAI application must be performed (p. 3) . A similar
concern was expressed by Pennington (19911, who warned against a
blind preference for CALL in L2 teaching without clear empirical
evidence of its strengths.
Furthermore, Van Aacken (1996) provided evidence as to CALI3
ineffectiveness in a study that investigated the relationship
between computer use and language proficien- cy It was reported
that Australian subjects who studied Japanese without the computer
achieved a higher profi- ciency than those who used computers in
their studies.
These test results and views of computer-mediated language
learning are contradictory, reflecting a lack of consensus among
researchers about the effectiveness and
usefulness of CALL. In other words, the fundamental question,
How effective and beneficial is CALL for L2 learning? remains
unanswered (Busbee, 2001; Han, 1998; Ryu, 1998).
In Korea, the Seventh National Curriculum for Education was
initiated in 2002. This program has the pri- mary aim of helping
students develop the knowledge and skills necessary to lead a
creative, self-regulating life in the upcoming age of information
and technology (Ministry of Education and Human Resources, 2002).
The Korean gov- ernment has invested heavily in nationwide
high-speed broadband communication, creating a classroom environ-
ment that enables students to use Internet resources (e.g.,
Internet search, e-mail, listsery and computer conferenc- ing) as a
significant part of their elementary and secondary education. Using
a variety of Internet resources, CALL- based instruction will thus
be readily available to students and teachers, most of whom seem
eager to employ it in their EFL classrooms.
Given the doubts about the value of CALL on one hand, and the
ready availability of CALL for the learning of English in Korean
educational institutions on the other, this study investigates how
Korean students of English reacted to CALL instruction designed to
promote EFL writ- ing. It focuses on determining the effectiveness
of comput- er-mediated writing instruction on the basis of students
feelings, experiences, or thoughts about the instruction, and on
providing suggestions for designing better CALL- based instruction
in EFL classes.
Previous Studies Existing research on computer-mediated writing
can be classified roughly into two groups. The first group focus-
es on the effects that specific software (e.g., word pro- cessing
or CD-ROM) has on writing skill. Common find- ings among this group
of studies indicate that CALL soft- ware had a positive effect on
the development of L2 writ- ing proficiency (Neu & Scarcella,
1987). Lee (2000) found a considerable increase in the writing
fluency of Korean EFL students in a study in which students used
Bulletin Board System (BBS) software on the Internet. Similarly,
Cunningham (2000) asked EFL Japanese stu- dents to use word
processing software in their writing class for one semester.
Cunninghamb findings show that students strongly prefer
computer-based writing and made greater improvement using a word
processor than with other tools.
Using software called Quick Business Letters (QBL) TOOLS, Chen
(1997) examined how computer-generated feedback from QBL TOOLS
influenced the writing behav- iors of Taiwanese EFL writers. Using
the software increased the subjects awareness of editing, resulting
in fewer text errors. Kim (2000) reached a similar conclusion in a
study
-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS . VOL. 35, NO. 6 671
of Korean EFL learners using CD courseware, in which the
software had positive effects on learners writing skill.
A second group of studies examined the effect of Internet
resource use on L2 writing, and overall demon- strated that these
resources improved learners writing pro- ficiency. Cho (2001)
reported that his subjects showed sig- nificant development in EFL
writing after using Web-based instruction for a year. The
advantages of Web-based instruction were also demonstrated by Kim
(2001), whose study results suggested that Web-based English
education increased students interest in a course, promoted
learning efficiency, and provided opportunities to discuss and
write about a given topic.
Cononelos and Oliva (1993) and Ho (2000) demon- strated that
e-mail is an effective tool in L2 writing class- rooms. According
to Cononelos and Oliva, e-mail exchange among a class of students
resulted in improve- ment of writing skill and facilitation of
target culture learn- ing. Similarly, in an international
information technology- based collaborative project, Ho (2000)
reported various positive effects of e-mail. Through a electronic
exchange of information with British students, Singaporean students
were found to develop a positive attitude towards writing and
become sensitized to the intercultural concerns and differences
between the two societies.
As stated earlier, although there are numerous reports of CALlls
positive effects, this technology does not neces- sarily bring
about successful learning or use of the L2. Specifically, little
information about the effectiveness of CALL in an EFL context is
available. It would be helpful to examine learners reactions to
CALL writing instruction, that is, their experiences, feelings, and
thoughts about this form of study. Thus the author conducted a
study in which Korean EFL students participated in CALL instruction
framed on the process approach to writing. Data were col- lected by
means of students journal writing.
CALL with Internet resources was believed to be an appropriate
medium to promote the writing skill of Korean students, who have
usually been described as reticent or shy in class, or nervous in
face-to-face interactions. A rea- son for this perceived Korean
learner characteristic may be that nearly all the students come
from teacher-fronted classrooms and are given few opportunities
during class to practice what they learn for communicative
purposes. However, in the Internet context, students are likely to
actively participate in communicative interaction. For example,
because e-mail does not pressure students to pro- vide an immediate
response to an interlocutor, students may feel a sense of security
absent from face-to-face class- room interactions. They also have
the luxury of writing at their own pace and are thus able to convey
meaning to their full capacities (Belisle, 1996; Gonglewski,
Meloni, & Brant, 2001).
Methods Participants The subjects of the study were 19
undergraduate Korean students learning English as a foreign
language at a univer- sity in southern Korea. They majored in a
variety of fields, and their age range was 18 to 27 years. Among
the 19 stu- dents, 9 were female. All the students had been
learning English for more than seven years. According to an English
test similar to the TOEIC (Test of English for International
Communication) administered at the beginning of the semester, their
proficiency ranged from the intermediate- low to intermediate-high
level. Though most students had not had any experience with CALL in
high school, nearly all of them had a basic working knowledge of
computers.
Instruments and Procedure Rationale for using the process
approach to writing. Among a variety of approaches to writing (for
a full dis- cussion, see Omaggio-Hadley, 2001, and Raimes, 19831,
this study used the process approach as a guiding frame- work in
designing a computer-mediated writing program. Compared with
traditional approaches concerned with producing a final product - a
perfect piece of text - the process approach, as its name implies,
highlights the process of how a writer goes about writing, from the
very beginning (getting started with writing) to the end (editing
and submitting a final version or draft) (Carter, Bishop &
Kravits, 1998).
Students in process-oriented writing classes go through several
stages in a cyclical fashion, during which they preplan what to
write, make drafts, give and take feed- back through peer editing,
make revisions, and realize a final version of text. Such a
process-oriented writing task is likely to be conducive to
increasing writing motivation and building accountability for and a
critical stance towards both ones own work and the works of peers
(McDonough & Shaw, 1993). This in turn should enhance students
self- monitoring capability and lead them to reflect on the process
involved in a writing task - in this case, writing with the aid of
CALL instruction. Hence, it was expected that the students would be
able to describe their experi- ences with, and their thoughts and
feelings about, partici- pation in the CALL writing program.
CALL instruction. The CALL program for this study was designed
in such a way that students met once a week, for a total of three
classes, with each class 50 minutes in length.
On the first day of class, the students selected travel- ing
abroad as the writing topic, and they were asked to think about
what location they would like to visit and what they would like to
do there. Time was allotted for Web surf- ing to obtain information
about traveling to the chosen
-
672 NOVEMBE WDECEMBE R 2002
country (e.g., hotels, foods, museums, historical sites, etc.).
Students were instructed to log onto either English or
Korean search engines such as Lycos, Yahoo, AOL, Daum, or
Hanmir. During navigation, students were asked to jot down or print
out information that they would later use in discussion with their
partners (they would talk about what they had found and try to
persuade their partners to trav- el with them). Once students in
each pair reached an agreement about where to go and what to do,
they returned to the Internet to search for detailed information
about their trips.
During the second class period, based on the informa- tion they
had gathered, the pairs of students were given time to think about
what they would include in their essays and how they could organize
it to best express their ideas. They were instructed to consider
the intended audience for their essays, since writing with an
audience in mind is like- ly to make the essay more lively and more
meaningful than writing without consideration of the reader (Elbow,
1981).
Then student pairs worked cooperatively to produce a first
draft. Students were told that during the following class, they
would have the opportunity to read the drafts of other pairs for
peer editing. In an effort to have a pro- ductive feedback session,
students was strongly encour- aged to exchange their drafts with
another pair via e-mail; read the peers essays carefully, focusing
on meaning (i.e., clarity of message, effective transitions between
sentences and paragraphs, and appropriate vocabulary selection);
and prepare comments or suggestions for the draft in advance (Shrum
& Glisan, 2000). In this way, students were asked to work hard
to make their essays attractive, interesting, and easy to read.
During the third class, students were given time for peer
editing, with pairs of students working with other pairs to help
each other revise drafts. They were advised to give constructive,
positive feedback that would encourage revision of peers essays.
Many pairs had offered feedback via e-mail before the class. The
before-class preparation and hard work performed during peer
editing was evidence that the students took the writing task
seriously, and they appeared to be satisfied with the peer editing
session.
Based on feedback, each pair of students prepared a second
draft. Later, since the feedback session focused pri- marily on the
meaning of the essays, individual pairs were instructed to visit
Web sites related to English composition or consult writing books
to check grammatical errors, punctuation, and spelling. At the end
of class, students were told that a final version of the essay
should be turned in by the next class period.
Journal writing a5 a data collection method. To investi- gate
how subjects experience CALL writing instruction, and what they
feel and think about it, students were asked
to write down their reactions to the instructional task in
journals. Journal writing is arguably a type of retrospection, and
restrospection is often used as a research tool, with informants
instructed to report what they did, felt, or thought either
immediately after or at a given time after the completion of a
task.
It is obvious that the gap between the actual time of
experiencing, feeling, or thinking during a given task and the time
of reporting about it can greatly influence the validity and
reliability of data gathered (Ericsson & Simon, 1980, 1993). A
useful strategy to enhance the quality of ret- rospective data is
to reduce the length of this gap. This study employed immediate
retrospection by asking the subjects to write down their reactions
immediately before the end of each class.
An immediate retrospective technique provides rich information,
because it allows subjects to edit or analyze what they experienced
during the instructional period (Cohen, 1996). Moreover, according
to Faerch and Kasper (1987), in immediate retrospection, subjects
retain traces of relevant information in their short-term memories,
so the accuracy and reliability of the information obtained is
likely to be higher than that produced by delayed retro- spection
(e.g., questionnaires or interviews).
In light of the advantages of the immediate retrospec- tive
technique, it was assumed that journal writing is an appropriate
means of eliciting personal reactions or responses to learning
activities or teaching events (Richards & Lockhart, 1994). In
this study, journals were written in Korean and submitted on the
last day of class for later analysis.
Data Analysis The first step in analyzing subjects written data
was to translate it into English. To make sure that everything the
subjects had written in their journals was included in the English
transcript, an original, Korean version of the tran- script was
compared with the English version by an assis- tant researcher.
Then, following coding procedures sug- gested by Lincoln and Guba
(1985) and Merriam (1988), the English transcript was
content-analyzed.
First, the transcript was unitized so that its content could be
quantified. This procedure ylelded units of infor- mation, each
taking the form of a sentence or a paragraph and revealing a
comprehensible, whole meaning relevant to the study Second, the
units of information were grouped according to similarity of ideas
or concepts; thus, categories began to gradually reveal themselves.
Third, individual cat- egories were reviewed and compared to
determine whether they overlapped or were linked to one another.
Fourth, each category was given an appropriate name.
Finally, to attain intercoder reliability, an assistant
researcher was instructed in how to conduct content analy-
-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS * VOL. 35. N O . 6 673
sis. This second coder developed his own categories, which were
compared with the categories developed by the researcher. On the
whole, the two coders reached a rela- tively high degree of
agreement. In cases of disagreement, a consensus was achieved by
discussion.
Results Analysis of the data yielded four distinct categories
that characterized Korean students experiences, feelings, or
thoughts regarding CALL instruction in the EFL writing classroom:
(1) the multimedia classroom as an environ- ment that facilitates
writing ( 2 ) CALL as an effective tool for learning writing, (3)
advantages of the process approach to writing, and (4) undesirable
aspects of writing instruction. Since the focus of the study was
primarily on discovering students personal reactions to CALL
instruc- tion, student writing samples and writing fluency are not
examined here.
The Multimedia Classroom as an Environment that Facilitates
Writing It has been acknowledged that the learning environment
plays a major role in the development of language. In par- ticular,
classroom environment or atmosphere in foreign language learning
situations is an important factor influ- encing an individual
learners motivation, anxiety, self-con- fidence, inhibition, and
other affective states. As many researchers (e.g., Ellis, 1994;
Lee, 1996) have suggested, for language learners to fully focus on
a given learning task, they need a classroom environment or
atmosphere in which they feel comfortable, secure, and
stress-free.
In the same vein, through his innovative teaching method,
Suggestopedia, Lozanov argues that learners must be mentally
focused, but relaxed at the same time, for lan- guage learning to
take place. He also strongly recommends that teachers provide an
optimal learning environment reinforced by the decoration,
furniture and the arrange- ment of the classroom, the use of
music.. . (Richards & Rodgers, 1986, p. 142), to create and
maintain such a men- tal state.
In this category, students mentioned the atmosphere of the
multimedia room where the CALL classes were held; they considered
it conducive to the learning of writing. One student said, I felt
at ease when I entered a multime- dia room because it was nicely
decorated and organized, and was equipped with brand-new computers
that I had wanted to use long before. Sitting on my chair, I was
com- fortable and cozy, and realized I was eager to study.
Several students remarked that the atmosphere of the multimedia
room was friendly and comfortable, thus con- ducive to learning
because it helped them concentrate on what they were doing.
The learning-conducive, friendly, comfortable atmos-
phere of the classroom appeared to reduce anxiety and increase
students motivation to participate in the learning task. Here are
some examples of their journal writings:
On the first day of class, I thought 1 had done the right thing
to take this course. I got the impression that people in the class
were nice and helpful, and had strong motivation for studymg. The
classroom atmosphere cheered me up and encouraged me to positively
take part in class activities.
The atmosphere of this class is to my liking. It is friendly,
gives me peace of mind, and helps me a lot in many ways. So I feel
inclined to work hard in the class. Everyone including me here in
the class appears to be well-motivated.
I like studying in this room, but I dont know exact- ly why. I
am able to understand and follow what is said during the class. I
remember what I did in the class clearly Probably, for all this, I
think its because the atmosphere of the room is collaborative and
autonomous, and thus makes me feel at ease and comfortable.
Accordingly, I can follow the instruc- tions well and work with my
partner actively and energetically.
One student reported that she usually felt ill at ease when
asked questions in other courses and was anxious about whether her
answers were right or wrong. However, because of the friendly,
encouraging atmosphere of the multimedia classroom, she did not
feel anxiety, was more confident, and was more able to participate
in class.
CALL as an Effective Too2 for Learning Writing As with other
studies of CALL, the results in this category reveal that CALL
played a facilitative role in the learning of writing. According to
the students, CALL stimulated inter- est, allowed for easy and
convenient gathering of informa- tion, and provided exposure to
various types of English text. Several students noted that, in
contrast to classroom lectures, their interest has been stimulated
by the CALL- specific features of colorful images, animations, and
mov- ing images, as well as the overall attractive designs of Web
sites. One student said:
I was fascinated by colorful images and graphics on sites, which
kept me concentrated. So I could focus on what I was doing without
tedium and fatigue. 11 think] those high-quality colorful images
and pic- tures drew my attention, and helped increase my interest
in this class.
Another student reported: My partner and I became interested in
using the com-
-
674 N OVEMREWDECEMBER 2002
puter and navigating to gain information at our plea- sure. In
my opinion, this is because most sites we vis- ited are nicely
designed, look good, and offer infor- mation in audio-visually
convenient ways.
In contrast to the low-quality and monotonous black- board of a
teacher-fronted class, CALL-specific features appeared to draw the
attention of students, increase their interest, and promote
effective learning (Ryu, 1998; Lee, 2000).
As stated earlier, one great advantage of CALL on the Internet
is speedy, convenient access to information. Many students talked
about the Internet; as a whole, many thought of it as a useful
learning resource. Most students expressed surprise at the huge
amount of information that was available at their fingertips. They
said that the use of the Internet was helpful in learning English,
particularly in reading and writing, and felt that the Internet
should be used much more frequently in English class. One student
expressed his excitement about navigating the Internet,
remarking:
When we were in English class in high school, the teachers
explanation of grammar and vocabulary and reading activities in a
textbook were all the major things we could have. It [English
class] made us become bored and distracted within ten minutes after
the start of class. I remembered vividly when I hap- pened to visit
a PC (Personal Computer) room in town with my friend. There, we
discovered that another, completely new world was on the monitor,
with numerous sites on information, games, and chatting. Since
then, Ive enjoyed logging into the Internet whenever I have time. I
hope that it can give me a lot of help, leading to success in my
[English] learning.
Likeyise, other students mentioned the advantages of using the
Internet to help them learn English. Here are a few examples:
If you want to improve [English] reading skill, I strongly
suggest that you turn to a variety of English sites on numerous
topics on the Internet. There, you can not only get all the
information you need, but practice your reading comprehension
skill. You can do it either on the spot or later by printing out a
given text. Its just good for you.
To me, one great advantage of using the Internet is that it
helps my composition a great deal. When writ- ing my drafts in the
class, I experience considerable difficulty finding appropriate
structures and vocabu- lary expressing specific ideas. When this
happens, it strikes me sometimes that a few English sites I
visit-
ed before include texts using similar structures and vocabulary
which I want to use. Then I immediately go back to those sites, and
check them out to see if I can use the structures and words in them
to express meaning in my draft. In this way, I can solve some
problems.
On the other hand, some students talked about the dif- ficulty
of finding sites containing the information they were looking for
and determining the most relevant site among many similar ones. One
student said:
The Internet is easy to use, and is very convenient for getting
information. But often I experience difficulty in searching for
exactly what I want, feel frustrated, and even stop searching
because there are so many similar sites out there, and because a
considerable amount of time is needed to check out each of the
sites. As a result, I dont know what to do with similar sites and
which one to choose.
As some scholars (e.g., Busbee, 2001; Singhal, 1998) have
pointed out, one of the drawbacks of the Internet is the vastness
and randomness of available information. While browsing, Internet
users are highly likely to be over- loaded with information and
have difficulty determining what information is most relevant
(Busbee, 2001). Hence being able to select the right information
from the right place in a speedy manner on the Internet is a
prerequisite for efficient learning during CALL-based
instruction.
In addition, several students mentioned the value of electronic
mail. One said:
I dont know how an e-mail system works. Anyway, its so
mysteriously fast and convenient that I dont have to meet
classmates to exchange drafts and feed- back. It saves us a lot of
time and money during our writing task, and is a wonderful medium
all of US need to make the best use of in our studying.
Others saw e-mail as a communication tool capable of promoting
their English writing skill. One student sug- gested:
I hope that we can communicate with each other in English by
sending messages via e-mail on a regular basis. Since [I believe
that] we are at differing levels of [English] proficiency, we can
help each other learn more about how to make ourselves understood
in writing.
Another merit of CALL instruction involves the con- stant
exposure of students to various types of English text. According to
some students, they had seldom read books, magazines, or newspapers
written in English. They were
-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - VOL. 35, N O . 6 675
glad that the CALL writing class exposed them to various types
of English text while they were surfing the Web for information.
One student remarked that even though English texts on the Internet
contained new words and somewhat long sentences, he tried to
comprehend as much as he could because he believed that such
experiences would increase his reading power.
Advantages of the Process Approach to Writing Unlike traditional
methods, the approach used in this study stressed the process of
writing. In this category, stu- dents reported that this approach
had several features that helped them learn writing.
The first advantage involved topic selection. Compared with
traditional classrooms where the writing topic is determined by the
teacher, process writing classes allow students to write about
whatever they want or decide a topic by voting. A student said:
This is my first time in this kind of class in which we can
select a topic by ourselves. In high school, we were forced to
write about a topic chosen unilateral- ly by the teacher. It was
kind of unfair, and quite hard to write about something you are not
familiar with, or never think about.
Another student added, Usually in writing classes in which I had
to write about something that I didnt know much about, I felt
frustrated and helpless, and didnt feel like writ- ing at all. In
this class, however, such is not the case. I have a freedom to
compose what I want, so that I feel full of ideas and thoughts to
put together, and above all, Im confident of what Im supposed to do
in the class.
The second advantage students mentioned was the benefit of
working in pairs. Students regarded partner work as helpful and
useful for writing, especially when dis- cussing and working
together to gain information and to write and revise drafts. Here
are some examples:
Since this is the first time that I have taken a course in
writing, I see that without working together with my partner, I
would have much difficulty in this class. I guess two heads are
definitely better than one. Partner work makes the composition much
easier than I thought it would be, even though both of us cant
express our meaning clearly in many cases.
I usually had a hard time getting started in writing because I
didnt have any idea of what to include. But this class reduces this
burden to a great extent. Through discussion and cooperation with a
partner, I am guided in brainstorming about a topic, and am
able to overcome my bad experiences. I feel much better about
writing.
I hated writing class in high school because it was I who had to
take care of everything, i.e., getting start- ed, finding errors,
correcting them, and receiving poor scores. I didnt have any fun,
and instead, lost interest in writing. However, in this class,
getting together, my partner and I help each other, and make every
effort to produce grammatically correct sen- tences and to connect
one sentence [or paragraph] with another semantically and logically
correct.
The third advantage of the process approach reported by the
students was peer evaluation. Many subjects con- sidered peer
evaluation conducive to a positive attitude toward writing, making
them feel more responsible for their own and peers work. One
student said:
I dont like the way I was corrected in the past. A teacher was
the only person I could turn to for feed- back, and to make matters
worse, I sometimes could- nt figure out what was said on a sheet of
paper. In contrast, it has been a pleasure to be in this course,
because I have several chances to learn where I am wrong, get
feedback, and correct errors - not by myself alone, but with
partners and others, including the teacher. I think my attitude
toward writing in English has changed positively since I took this
class.
Similarly, another student became interested in peer editing
because during the editing session she could satis- fy her
curiosity about what others wrote and how they developed their
essays. However, one student expressed some discomfort with peer
editing, commenting, Basically I agree with the idea of getting
feedback from classmates since 1 can get criticism or advice about
my essay. But it still makes me a little uncomfortable to have my
essay read and criticized by others.
Another student described a sense of responsibility to perform
peer editing well, saylng Since we have to read drafts from other
pairs, I feel obliged and nervous. I have to read them very
carefully, and jot down constructive, informative feedback to give
to my fellows.
Still other subjects mentioned a two-way system of being
corrected in the class, and talked about getting feed- back on
grammatical aspects of the essay:
I enjoy the way that we correct drafts [i.e., we focused on
meaning first and grammar later]. Whenever I do a composition, I am
busy searching for grammatical structures that I need to use to
make sentences, and retrieving appropriate vocabulary, rather than
making conveying ideas and thoughts and putting them together in
logical, intelligent
-
676 NOVEMBEWDECEMRER 2002
ways. As a result, I often feel nervous and tired, and even give
up the task in the long run. In contrast, this class is nice and
suits me well because grammar is treated mostly by Web sites later,
not by me.
Finding out grammatical errors is one of the difficult things
for me in English composition. In many cases, though we were able
to spot grammatical errors, we didnt know how to correct them
because we were not confident about how a given grammar rule was
used in a specific context, or we were confused with other grammar
rules. For this reason, we wanted the professor to help us with
grammatical errors, giving full explanations of the rules
involved,
The last advantage mentioned by subjects involved the cyclic
nature of process writing stages. A student com- mented:
From my experience, once I get started, I tend to go forward
without looking back to produce a final ver- sion, whereas in this
class I can move back and forth among stages of writing [i.e.,
prewriting, writing, sharing and revising], talk about a problem
with a partner, and correct errors again and again whenever I want,
or when I have difficulty.
Another student wrote: To me, English composition has been a
difficult task. Approaching writing in this way [i.e., thinking
about the topic, writing drafts, getting feedback from class-
mates, and revising accordingly] is new to me, and makes the
composition an easy, simple task.
Undesirable Aspects of Writing Instruction Despite favorable
comments and responses regarding CALL writing instruction, students
also noted some limitations and disadvantages. Several students
addressed problems with pair work, remarking:
I think pair work is problematic when a student of higher
proficiency is paired with a partner of lower proficiency. In this
case, a student of higher profi- ciency is highly likely to do most
of the work includ- ing writing drafts by himselmerself while
hidher partner with lower proficiency is engaged mostly in Web
searching, or other simple, trivial things.
While working together with my partner, I have felt that pair
work is not the best way to perform our task, because my partner
and I seem to differ considerably from each other in the way we
think and work. Most of the time, it was hard to reach an agreement
as to what to do.
Other students expressed their hope for more assis- tance from
the teacher during the task, or complained about the unavailability
of various L2 writing software:
I wish that the teacher gave us more help and assis- tance
during the class, so that we could work more efficiently, for
instance, by understanding the English text as fully as possible
and selecting appropriate websites relevant to our task. Also,
before submitting the essay, I had hoped that 1 would be able to
get feed- back from the teacher.
I learned a lot in this course, and have developed an interest
in writing in English, but I think we need to have a variety of
software that we can refer to indi- vidually for the study of
writing.
Still, others expressed concern over the difficulty of giving
feedback to fellow students. One student wrote, I am not sure that
I can do a good job in offering helpful, valuable feedback to
classmates because I am worried that I might be wrong, or hurt them
unwillingly. Likewise, another subject, who had a hard time
following the teachers advice to concentrate on the meaning of
sentences rather than on grammar during the feedback session,
wrote:
When I read classmates drafts, I tend to pay attention to
grammar unconsciously, and try to look for gram- matical errors. I
know it is not the right thing to do in this class, but it just
happens. The reason for this is that I was taught English by
focusing mainly on grammar, vocabulary, and reading comprehension.
Its very hard to avoid this kind of behavior even though I work
hard to.
Discussion Classroom Environment It was clear that the students
considered the atmosphere of the multimedia room, where the
instruction took place, to be an important factor in their success
in learning English writing. The findings suggest that even small,
trivial things influencing classroom circumstances might have a
signifi- cant effect on learning. For instance, the novelty and
avail- ability of educational materials and tools, the amount of
light, and the decoration and organization of the classroom can
directly affect learning efficiency, by increasing or decreasing
student motivation (Lee, 1996).
Moreover, classroom environment in an EFL context, where
students rarely have the opportunity to get input in a natural
setting, may play a more significant role in L2 learning than it
does in the English as a Second Language (ESL) context. Hence
careful consideration should be given to the environment classroom
environment, to create a
-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNAI,S * VOL. 35, N O . 6 677
comfortable, friendly, encouraging atmosphere that is con-
ducive to conducting CALL-related programs.
Advantages and Disadvantages of CALL Writing Instruction Many
students described the advantages of using the com- puter and the
Internet to learn EFL writing. Most students had a positive
attitude towards CALL on the Internet, stat- ing that it promoted
their interests on both the instruction and learning sides. Thus
there is good reason to believe that CALL assumed a facilitative
role in teaching writing in an EFL context.
Despite these good points, it should be noted again that the
mere use of CALL does not necessarily result in better learning.
Besides the availability of well-designed software, an important
factor that affects the efficacy and success of CALL is the teacher
(Shin, 1999; Singhal, 1998). Teachers need to be sufficiently
skilled in the use of computers and must be able to develop
curriculum that reflects student needs and proficiency, and
stimulates stu- dents interest at the same time.
One way for teachers to prepare themselves for teach- ing with
CALL is to regularly take part in in-service teacher training
programs, workshops, or conferences that involve this technology.
At these meetings, teachers can obtain up- to-date information on
the application of newly introduced CALL software and programs.
Teachers who keep current with the field will be better able to
design programs that reflect student needs and proclivities, and
that are work- able for themselves as well (Lee, 2000).
A significant problem with CALL, mentioned by the students in
this study involves the vastness of information on the Internet.
Although a great strength of the Internet lies in the amount and
variety of information it contains, this vast quantity of data is
likely to burden many users, who struggle to extract what they
actually need (Busbee, 2001). Students who are unfamiliar with
searching the Internet, or who lack guidance, are more likely to
run into this type of difficulty.
Another problem with the Internet, frequently addressed in
literature, is related to the appropriateness of English texts to
learners at various levels of proficiency (Busbee, 2001). Texts on
most Web sites are written for native English speakers. They are
not edited or adapted for nonnative speakers, particularly language
learners at the beginning or low-intermediate proficiency levels.
It is not surprising that learners at the low level of proficiency
can- not fully understand the texts and become frustrated when
visiting English language sites.
Although the Internet is a valuable source of authentic material
that can play a central role in L2 learning, authen- ticity is just
one of the many factors influencing L2 learn- ing and use. One way
for teachers to solve the above-men-
tioned problems is to select in advance several Web sites that
are appropriate to a given task, taking into account the
proficiency levels of the students.
Advantages of the Process Approach to Writing In general, the
students enjoyed the process writing approach used in this study.
In particular, they favored pair work and peer evaluation, and
liked working on their essays in a cyclic manner, moving back and
forth among writing stages. These features of the process approach
con- tributed considerably to increasing students motivation and
fostered better attitudes toward writing in English (Kastra,
1987).
One of the difficulties that Korean students had during peer
editing involved giving feedback to their classmates. Students were
concerned about providing meaningful and constructive feedback and
felt that they were under pres- sure to do a good job when editing
their peers drafts. Students were more accustomed to the
grammar-oriented instruction that they received in middle and high
school, and some of them found it difficult to focus on the mean-
ings of the writings.
To make peer evaluation sessions more productive and less
stressful, teachers should provide their students with worksheets
or checklists to refer to during peer editing, and conduct a
practice session in which students learn how to peer edit properly.
This is exactly what many researchers (e.g., Allaei Q Connor, 1990;
Leky, 1990; Stanley, 1996) suggest for productive peer evaluations.
A practice session is likely to be useful for learners like EFL
Korean students, who have received form-focused instruction in
teacher- centered classes, and as a result may not work well in a
cooperative learning context. When conducting practice sessions,
teachers should be careful not to counterproduc- tively impose
anxiety or stress on students.
Journal Writing us a Means of Gathering Data In this study, in
light of the rich information gained, jour- nal writing was found
to be a useful tool for documenting learners personal reactions to
classroom events and learn- ing activities. The data produced by
journal writing may be of a somewhat lower quality that that
elicited by concur- rent verbal techniques such as think-aloud
procedures; however, truthfulness, accuracy, and reliability of
data were enhanced in this study because subjects were asked to
write in their journals immediately prior to the dismissal of each
class.
As mentioned earlier, immediate retrospection enables subjects
to retrieve pertinent information still present in their short-term
memories, and thus produces a higher quality of data than does
delayed retrospection, whereby data are collected some time after
the completion of the classroom activity (Ericsson & Simon,
1980, 1993).
-
678 NOVEMBEWDECEMBER 2002
Conclusion This study investigated the reactions of Korean EFL
learn- ers to computer-mediated writing instruction. Overall, the
study showed that computer-based instruction can facili- tate the
learning of writing. This study supports the exist- ing evidence
that CALL serves a useful role in L2 learning (Choi, 1999;
Cunningham, 2000; Lee, 2000; Neu & Scarcella, 1987).
As discussed earlier, doubts about CALL by some researchers
linger on. One of the most unfavorable aspects of CALL is that it
requires a constant investment of time, money, and effort by
teachers and schools. For optimal learning to occur, teachers must
select software that suits their students in terms of proficiency
levels, interests, and learning styles. Ultimately, teachers could
develop unique CALL-based instruction tailored to their specific
require- ments, leading to greater gain for learners.
This study has several weaknesses. First, among many approaches
to writing, the researcher used the process approach as the
framework for instruction. The process approach may have influenced
the way Korean subjects perceived or reacted to the CALL
instruction. In other words, it is not clear whether the same
results would be obtained if other approaches to writing (e.g.,
controlled-to- free approach, free-writing approach, or
paragraph-pattern approach) were used to frame the
computer-mediated instruction. Further research is needed to
examine how learners react to CALL built on other approaches to
writ- ing. Such research could provide infomation about which
writing approach is most effective in the context of CALL writing
instruction. Second, it is not clear whether Korean students
affective states (positive attitude towards writing; increased
motivation and interest) resulted from the use of CALL or from the
specific writing approach (process approach), or from a combination
of both. Though it is likely that a combination of CALL with the
process approach influenced the students affective states, it would
be helpful to determine the relative contributions of these
aspects. Such information would be useful not only in fully
understanding Korean students behaviors related to CALL activities,
but also in designing CALL programs that devel- op other language
skills, such as listening, reading, and speaking.
Finally, due to the small number of subjects, all of whom had
the same L1 background (Korean), the findings of the study cannot
be generalized to other groups.
Despite these limitations, the study has some pedagog- ical
implications for EFL writing classrooms. Most impor- tantly,
because CALL writing instruction was shown to increase students
motivation and interest in writing, EFL teachers are encouraged to
use CALL in the teaching of writing - if they are prepared in terms
of computer skills and knowledge of CALL technology.
In light of the students many favorable comments, the process
approach to writing is highly likely to suit Korean students well.
The process approach is expected to con- tribute much to the
promotion of students writing fluency, since it allows students to
discover the best way of express- ing their meanings, increases
reader awareness through col- laborative work with peers, and
ultimately positions writ- ing as a tool of communication (Carter,
Bishop, & Kravits, 1998; Rooks, 1999). The finding that
subjects had difficul- ty in obtaining pertinent information on the
Internet implies that certain reading skills such as skimming and
scanning would be of benefit to them. This in turn indi- cates the
need for the incorporation of reading strategy training into CALL
instruction (Singhal, 1998). Through strategy training sessions,
teachers could enable students to read through a text more quickly
and accurately, and help them to more readily obtain desired
materials from the sea of information on the Internet.
References Allaei, S., Q Connor, U. (1990). Exploring the
dynamics of cross-cultural collaboration. The Writing Instructol:
10, 19-28. Belisle, R. (1996). E-mail activities in the ESL writing
class [online]. The Internet TESL journal, 2, 12. Available:
http:// www.aitech.ac.jp/ iteslj/articles/belisle-email.htm1.
Busbee, E. (2001). The computer and the Internet: Are they really
destined to play a major role in English Teaching? English
Teaching, 56, 1, 201-225. Carter, C., Bishop, J., Q Kravits, S.
(1998). Keys to effective learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall. Chen, J. F: (1996). CALL is not a hammer and not
every teach- ing problem is a nail [online]. The Internet TESL
Journal. Available: http:// www.aitech.ac.jp/
iteslj/articles/chen-call. html. Chen, J. E (1997). Computer
generated error feedback and writing process: A link [online].
TESL-EJ, 2,3. Available: http:// www.writing.
berkeley.edu/tesl-ej/ej07/al .html. Cho, D. W. (2001). A study on a
web-based English composi- tion class. English Teaching, 56, 2,
287-307. Choi, S. Y. (1999). Teaching writing of English in high
school. Unpublished manuscript. Cohen, A. (1996). Verbal reports as
a source of insights into second language learner strategies.
Applied Language Learning,
Cononelos, T., & Oliva, M. (1993). Using computer networks
to enhance foreign languagekulture education. Foreign Language
Annals, 26(4), 527-34. Cunningham, K. (2000). Integrating CALL into
the writing cumculum [online]. The Internet TESLjournal, 4, 5.
Available: http://www.aitech.ac.jp/-
teslj/articles/cunningham-allwriting. Elbow, P. (1981). Writing
with powet: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of
second language acquisition.
7, 5-24.
-
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS * VOL. 3 5 , N O . 6 679
Oxford University Press. Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1980).
Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-51. Ericsson,
K., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as
data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G.
(1987). From product to process: Introspective methods in second
language research. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.),
Introspection in second language research (pp. 5-23). Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters. Gonglewski, M., Meloni, C., & Brant, J.
(2001). Using E-mail in foreign language teaching: Rationale and
suggestions exchange [online]. The Internet TESL Journal, 7, 3.
Available: http://iteslj.org/tech-niquedmeloni-email. html. Han, J.
I. (1998). The effects of learning strategy instruction on the
performance of CALL tasks. English Teaching, 53(4), 155- 73. Ho, M.
L. (2000). Developing intercultural awareness and writing skills
through email exchange [online]. The Internet TESL Journal, 6, 12.
Available: http://iteslj.org/articles/ho- email.htm1.
Jung, Y. (1999). How to use Internet resources for EFL Teaching.
English Teaching, 54(3), 213-38. Kasper, G. (1997). The role of
pragmatics in language teacher education. In K. Bardovi-Harlig
& B. Hartford (Eds.), Beyond methods: Components of second
language teacher education (pp. 113-136). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kastra, J. (1987). Effects of evaluation on attitude towards
writing fluency of ninth graders. Journal of Educational Research,
80, 168-72. Kim, Y. S. (2000). Experimental study on ESL learning
with technology English Teaching, 55(4), 315-43. Kim. D. B. (2001).
Web-based education for Dractical business
ELT: A teacher's guide. Oxford: Blackwell. Merriam, S. (1988).
Case study research in education: A qualita- tive approach. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ministry of Education and Human
Resources (2002). About the 7th national curriculum for education
[online]. Available: http://www.moe.go. kr.
Mitchell, R., & Myles, E (1998). Second language learning
the- ories. London: Arnold. Neu, J., & Scarcella, R. (1987).
Word processing in the ESL writing classroom: A survey of student
attitude. In P Dunkel (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning
and testing; Research issues and practice (pp. 169-83). New York:
Harper Collins. Omaggio-Hadley, A. (2001). Teaching language in
context, 3rd ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Oxford, R. (1990).
Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know
Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Pennington, M. (1991). An assessment
of the use and effective- ness of computer-based text analysis of
non proficient writers [Research Report No. 41. City University of
Hong Kong, Department of English.
Raimes, A (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford
University Press.
Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in
sec- ond language classrooms. Cambridge University Press. Richards,
J., & Rodgers, T. (1986). Approaches and methods in language
teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Rooks, G. (1999). Share your paragraph: An interactive approach to
writing. Prentice Hall Regents. Ryu, S. H. (1998). Language
teaching through multimedia. In K. Park (Ed.), Introduction to
English education (pp. 483-5091, Seoul: Hankook Publisher. Shin, H.
J. (1999). English education through the Internet. The Journal of
Teaching English Literature, 3, 273-93. Shrum, J., & Glisan, E.
(2000). Teacherk handbook: Contextualized language instruction, 2nd
ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Singhal, M. (1998). The Internet and foreign language educa-
tion: Making the most of the information superhighway Language
Education, 26(2), 125-39. Stanley, J. (1996). Coaching student
writers to be effective peer evaluators. In B. Leeds (Ed.), Writing
in a second language: Insightsfromfirst and second language
teaching and research (pp. 81-94). Longman. Van Aacken, S. (1996).
The efficacy of CALL in Kanji learning [online]. On-CALL, 10, 2.
Available: http://www.cltr.uq.oz/ oncalVaacken 102.html.
English. Korean journal of English Languag'e and Linguistics,
1(2), 227-42. Lee, K. W. (2000). English teachers' barriers to the
use of com- puter-assisted language learning [online]. The Internet
TESL Journal, 6, 12. Available:
http://iteslj.org/articles/lee-callbarri- ers.htm1. Lee, S. Y.
(2000). Teaching writing using a bulletin board on the 1nternet:'A
preliminary study English Teaching, 55(3), 171- 91. Lee, W. K.
(1996). English education in elementary school. Seoul:
Moonjinmedia. Leky, I. (1990). Potential problems with peer
responding in ESL writing classes. CATESOLJournal, 3, 5-17.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage. McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (1993).
Materials and methods in