Exploring EFL Learners’ Attitudes toward the Application of a Model of Writing E-portfolio

Aliasghar Yousefi Azarfam, Arshad Abd. Samad, Nooreen Noordin

Abstract


This study aimed to explore the attitudes of two groups of EFL learners toward the application of a model of writing e-portfolio in developing their writing skill. It was a follow-up study to an experiment on the effectiveness of this model on the writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. One group had used certain strategies based on the analytic traits of writing, while the other group had not used such strategies in the writing process. Four class members from each writing e-portfolio group were selected purposively for conducting the semi-structured interviews in this research. The findings showed that members of the group that used strategies based on analytic traits of writing had acquired a sort of awareness towards the different qualities of writing, claiming that knowing about the analytic traits of writing caused them to understand the necessity of paying attention to all aspects of writing and not just the usage and mechanical correctness of it. They referred to the role of Peer Checklist in reminding them of the writing qualities to be considered in their self- and peer-assessment. The results of the learners’ feedback in both e-portfolio groups further revealed that the electronic environment of e-portfolios can play a significant role in facilitating the writing task performance of the learners and consequently improving their writing skill in both e-portfolio groups.  On the whole, the student self-reports indicated that the use of strategies based on analytical traits was able to heighten awareness regarding important aspects of writing.

 


Keywords


Writing e-portfolio, analytic traits, attitude, LMS, peer-assessment

Full Text:

PDF

References


Amiran, E. and Mann, J. (1982). Written composition, grades K-12: literature synthesis and report. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. [ED 213 034]

Atai, M. R. and Dashtestani, R. (2013). Iranian English for academic purposes (EAP) stakeholders' attitudes toward using the Internet in EAP courses for civil engineering students: promises and challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol.26, no.1, pp. 21-38, DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2011.627872

Bacha, N. (2001). Writing evaluation: What can analytic versus holistic essay scoring tell us, System, vol.29, no.4, pp. 371 – 383.

Barrett, H. C. (2005). Researching Electronic Portfolios and Learner Engagement. The REFLECT Initiative, White Paper. Available: http://electronicportfolios.org

Bernauer, J. A. (2015). Opening the Ears that Science Closed: Transforming Qualitative Data Using Oral Coding. The Qualitative Report, vol.20, no.4, pp. 406-415.

Bernauer, J. A., Lichtman, M., Jacobs, C., & Robinson, S. (2013). Blending the old and the new: Qualitative data analysis as critical thinking and using Nvivo with a generic approach. The Qualitative Report, vol.18, no.31, pp. 1-10.

Cohen, L. Manion. L. and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. Routledge.

Corbetta, P. (2003). Social Research Theory, Methods and Techniques. London: SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Enquiry and research Design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W., and Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications, Inc.

Edelsky, C., and Smith, K. (1989). Is that writing - or are those marks just a figment of your curriculum. In G. Manning & M. Manning (Eds.), Whole language: Beliefs and practices, K-8 (pp. 183-193). Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Erice, D. and A. Ertaş, (2011). The impact of e-portfolio on foreign language writing skills, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, vol.44, no.2, pp. 73-94.

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.

Galloway, J. P. (2007). Classroom integration of technology: Are teachers understanding. Journal on School Educational Technology. vol.2, no.4, pp. 26-30.

Gerbic, P., L. Lewis, and N. M. Amin (2011). Student perspectives of e-portfolios: Change over four semesters. In G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown, and B. Cleland (Eds.), Changing demands, changing directions (pp. 423-436). Proceedings Ascilite Hobart.

Graves, D. H. (1984). A researcher learns to write. In M. Rose (Ed.), When a writer can't write, p.1-18. New York: Guilford Press.

Hahn, C. (2008). Doing qualitative research using your computer: A practical guide. Sage.

Lam, R., and Lee, I. (2010). Balancing the dual functions of Portfolio Assessment. ELT Journal, vol.64, no.1, pp. 54-65.

Lipstein, R., and Renninger, K. A. (2007). “Putting things into words”: 12–15- year-old students’ interest for writing. In P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Eds.), Motivation and writing: Research and school practice (pp. 113–140) New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press.

Lorenzo, G. and Ittelson, J. (2005). An overview of ePortfolios. Educause Learning Initiative Paper 1, 2005.

Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (pp. 169-186). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster. Chicago

Samad, A. A. (2012). The Use of Portfolio as an Assessment Tool in the Malaysian L2 Classroom. International Journal of English Language Education, vol.1, no.1, pp. 94 – 108.

Shin, S. (2013). Developing a framework for using E-portfolios as a research and assessment tool, ReCALL, June, 2013, 1-14. Available: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0958344013000189

Thanaraj, A. (2012). Student engagement with e-portfolios: purpose, benefits and problems. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, vol.6, no.2, pp. 25-40.

Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American journal of evaluation, vol.27, no.2, pp. 237-246.

Tzeng, J. Y., and Chen, S. H. (2012). College students' intentions to use e‐portfolios: From the perspectives of career‐commitment status and weblog‐publication behaviours. British Journal of Educational Technology, vol.43, no.1, pp. 163-176.

Wetzel, K. and Strudler, N. (2006). Costs and benefits of electronic portfolios in teacher education: student voices. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, vol.22, no.3, pp. 99–108.

Yusuf, J., and Tuisawau, P. (2010). Student attitudes towards the use of ePortfolios: Experiences from the University of the South Pacific. In ePortfolios Australia Conference 2011 (p. 142).

Zhang, Y., and Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science, 308-319.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.5n.3p.57

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




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

2012-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.