Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:21:16.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When technology speaks language: an evaluation of course management systems used in a language learning context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2010

Wen-Kai Yu ,
Yu-Chih Sun  and
Yu-Jung Chang
Wen-Kai Yu*
Affiliation:
National Chiao Tung University, Institute of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, 1001 University Rd., Hsinchu, Taiwan 300 (emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
Yu-Chih Sun*
Affiliation:
National Chiao Tung University, Institute of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, 1001 University Rd., Hsinchu, Taiwan 300 (emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
Yu-Jung Chang*
Affiliation:
National Chiao Tung University, Institute of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, 1001 University Rd., Hsinchu, Taiwan 300 (emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In light of the growing popularity of the use of computer management systems (CMSs) in higher education today, this study critically evaluates CMS adoption through a content-specific lens. By employing a mixed-method approach, the study examines college teachers’ and students’ experiences and perceptions of CMS adoption for language learning and teaching purposes. The findings show that despite the users’ perceived advantages of using CMSs in language courses, the systems’ lack of content-area specificity undermines many of the potential benefits. The study calls for better-rounded professional training to assist language teachers in integrating CMS functions strategically into their disciplinary pedagogy and incorporating multimedia language resources selectively to maximize the benefit of CMSs. Furthermore, the findings demonstrate the importance of developing content-specific CMSs with functions tailored toward pedagogical needs in different contexts.

Keywords

Application in subject areaspost-secondary educationcomputer management systemscomputer mediated communicationprofessional developmentlanguage learning/teaching
Type
Research Article
Information
ReCALL , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 332 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Auyeung, L. H. (2004) Building a collaborative online learning community: a case study in Hong Kong. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(2): 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongey, S. B., Cizadlo, G.Kalnbach, L. (2005) Using a course management system (CMS) to meet the challenges of large lecture classes. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 22(5): 252–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandl, K. (2005) Are you ready to Moodle? Language Learning & Technology, 9(2): 16–23.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2001) Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cappel, J. J.Hayen, R. L. (2004) Evaluating e-learning: A Case Study. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44(4): 49–56.Google Scholar
Chan, C. H.Robbins, L. I. (2006) E-learning systems: promises and pitfalls. Academic Psychiatry, 30(6): 491–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, J., Belkada, S.Okamoto, T. (2004) How a Web-based Course Facilitates Acquisition of English for Academic Purposes. Language Learning & Technology, 8(2): 33–49.Google Scholar
Cloete, E. (2001) Electronic education system model. Computers & Education, 36(2): 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compeau, D. R., Higgins, C. A.Huff, S. (1999) Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: a longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly, 23(2): 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtin, C. O.Shinall, S. L. (1987) Teacher training for CALL and its implications. In: Smith, W. F. (ed.), Modern technology in foreign language education: applications and projects. National Textbook Company: Lincolnwood, 255–285.Google Scholar
Decoo, W.Colpaert, J. (1999) User-driven development and content-driven research. In: Cameron, K. (ed.), Computer assisted language learning (CALL): media, design and applications. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers, 165–181.Google Scholar
Driscoll, M. (2008) Hype versus reality in the boardroom: why e-learning hasn’t lived up to its initial projections for penetrating the corporate environment. In: Carliner, S. and Shank, P. (eds.), The e-learning handbook: past promises, present challenges. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer, 29–54.Google Scholar
Felix, U. (2005) Analysing recent CALL effectiveness research – towards a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(1–2): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grace, C. (1998) Personality Type, Lexical Ambiguity, and Vocabulary Retention in CALL. CALICO Journal, 15: 19–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, P. (2005) A review of subject characteristics in CALL research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5): 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. B.Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7): 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahy, C. (2004) Researching language learning processes in open CALL settings for advanced learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(3–4): 289–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liao, H.-L.Lu, H.-P. (2008) The role of experience and innovation characteristics in the adoption and continued use of e-learning websites. Computers & Education, 51(4): 1405–1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liaw, S.-S. (2007) Sex differences and learners’ autonomy toward e-learning based on surveys in UK and Taiwan. Psychological Reports, 100(3): 949–954.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liaw, S.-S. (2008) Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: a case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & Education, 51(2): 864–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liaw, S. S.Huang, H. M. (2003) An investigation of users’ attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6): 751–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L.Lee, S. (2003) A look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from 1990–2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3): 250–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malikowski, S. R., Thompson, M. E.Theis, J. G. (2006) External factors associated with adopting a CMS in resident college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3): 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meunier, L. E. (2006) Human Factors in a computer assisted foreign language environment: The effects of gender, personality and keyboard control. CALICO Journal, 13(2 & 3): 47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moodle Forum (2009) New Proposals for Development. http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=121996&mode=1Google Scholar
Moodle Statistics (2010) Moodle Statistics. http://moodle.org/stats/Google Scholar
Moon, J. W.Kim, Y. G. (2001) Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information and Management, 38: 217–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nijhuis, G. G.Collis, B. (2003) Using a web-based course-management system: an evaluation of management tasks and time implications for the instructor. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(2): 193–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nunan, D. (1992) Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Perkins, M.Pfaffman, J. (2006) Using a course management system to improve classroom communication. Science Teacher, 73(7): 33–37.Google Scholar
Priyanto, A. D. (2010) Facilitating Language Learning with LMS: (A Brief Review on Blackboard and Moodle). http://agusdepe.staff.uns.ac.id/2009/04/06/facilitating-language-learning-with-lms-a-brief-review-on-blackboard-and-moodle/Google Scholar
Robb, T. N. (2004) Moodle: A Virtual Learning Environment for the Rest of Us. TESL-EJ, 8(2). http://tesl-ej.org/ej30/m2.htmlGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, M. J. (2001) E-learning: strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sivo, S. A.Pan, C. C. (2005) Undergraduate engineering and psychology students’ use of a course management system: a factorial invariance study of user characteristics and attitudes. Journal of Technology Studies, 31(2): 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, C. (2006) Moodle for teachers. The proceedings of 2006 International Conference and Workshop on TEFL & Applied Linguistics, 321–330. http://www.opensource.idv.tw/paper/Moodle/Moodle-for-English-Teachers.docGoogle Scholar
Sun, P.-C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y.-Y.Yeh, D. (2008) What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4): 1183–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szajna, B. (1996) Empirical evaluation of the revised Technology Acceptance Model. Management Science, 42(1): 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, S.Todd, P. A. (1995) Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2): 144–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Olphen, M. (2007) Perspectives of foreign language pre-service teachers on the use of a web-based instructional environment in a methods course. CALICO Journal, 25(1): 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, R. E., Waddoups, G.Graham, C. R. (2007) Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. (2003) Implementation of a course management system: experiences and students’ thoughts. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 3(2): 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, R., Baker, J. D.Hopper, D. (2004) Hybrid structures: faculty use and perception of Web-based courseware as a supplement to face-to-face instruction. Internet and Higher Education, 7(4): 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar