Quality standard and the new technologies (NT) in higher education foreign language instruction.

Pop, Anisoara

1. INTRODUCTION

Universities are the main knowledge producers and distributors in modern society in so far as economic, institutional and cultural development depends on knowledge. Improving the quality of education is a challenge for every higher education institution concerned with customer gratification regarding the quality of their services.

Twenty-first century universities are in the midst of tranformative changes as education witnesses a shift from the book-based paradigm to the Web-based paradigm (Treadwell, 2005), with Web 2.0 representing a technological as well as a social revolution where connectivism and communicative learning gain ground in favor of constructivism (Siemens & Tittenberger, 2009).

Technology represents a growing and rapidly evolving practice with potential benefits on students. Firstly, one of the most obvious advantages of the Web 2.0 is its power to help create and spawn communication channels on the web--an opportunity that our students can exploit and carry into their future professional life after graduation.

Moreover, implementation of Web 2.0 tools in business organizations enables the formation of communities of practice (Wenger, 2006) that share information and turn small and medium-sized enterprises into learning organizations where partnership is supported by learning platforms and connections among employees (Hamburg & Hall, 2008: 9).

In ESP, exploitation of Web 2.0 technologies opens the classroom walls to real world experiences. "If language learning happens in different contexts, with different people at different times, educators should not confine it to the classroom alone. The world outside does not speak the language of the classroom so we must venture outside its walls. Guiding learners into uncharted territory (learning situations over which neither teachers nor students have complete control) gives them exposure. Letting them interact with whoever they choose according to their interests and needs will allow them to own the words through which they express their identity and voice their thoughts, thus relating the language to their individual selves" (Dieu et al., 2006).

Nevertheless, employment of the NT-based learning in foreign language education is slow and faced with resistance by many teachers of ESP (English for engineering, business, technology) due to lack of awareness, more comfort with text environment, limited computer literacy and shared assumption that "technology alone does not deliver educational success" (Virkus, 2008).

2. ASSESSING STUDENT GRATIFICATION IN TECHNOLOGY-BASED VS CLASSICAL ESP INSTRUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the superiority of employing Web 2.0-based learning versus classical learning through the former's increased levels of satisfaction and motivation that enhance the effectiveness of foreign language instruction and contribute to quality standard optimization in higher education.

In 2008 one-year project was conducted with 122 second year students of Economic Sciences at "Dimitrie Cantemir" University of Targu Mures, Romania, studying professional English. 70 students (Finances and Banks) representing the control group (C) learned in the classical text-book based environment whereas 52 students (Tourism Economy Section) representing the experimental group (E) learnt with the New Web 2.0 technologies. The same material was adapted to asynchronous Web 2.0 tools that included: educational blog, personal blogs, and collaborative Wiki projects, voice tools (VoxOPop, Voice Thread, moviemakers), with availability and cooperation outside the face-to-face encounters as strong points.

The teaching method in C was based on simulations, role-play, group and pair work, discussions and projects. Both groups had the same teacher, mixed ability levels, and were taught the same basic business communication skills for 2 hours a week in face-to-face L2 environment. Course evaluation was performed by students at the end of the school year during their last class through questionnaire.

The students' degree of gratification was assessed as function of two variables: a) "the material was well structured and attractively presented"; b) "the methods stimulated the students' interest and motivation for learning". Questionnaire items were presented in the form of statement with agreement and disagreement on a five-itemed Likert scale: 1. Strongly disagree; 2. Disagree; 3. Neuter; 4. Agree; 5. Strongly agree. Motivation was also measured as the degree of student involvement (Time, Quantity, Quality) in class and asynchronously.

3. RESULTS

The questionnaire results reveal strong neutrality (42.7%) in C regarding the students' degree of gratification as far as the "Material" variable is concerned, whereas in E neutrality was extremely low (7.6%) (see table 1).

Even if the material quality was perceived by a great majority in C as well structured and attractive ( 32.8% + 21.4% %), it may lose its impact towards neutral quality unless novel packages are constantly introduced. More students in E than in C strongly agree with the material quality and attractiveness due to its diversity of presentation and accessibility. Having outside commitments (full or part-time jobs) adult students appreciate to find available materials for practising at their own pace, at their most convenient time, and in safe environments.

The number of E students who strongly agree in case of the second variable "methods stimulated the students' interest and motivation for learning" is illustrative of the strong impact and interest that Web 2.0 technology-based strategies and tools had, compared to the agreement bias in C (see table 2 below).

Gratification items referred to availability of resources, flexibility in time and space, novelty of approach, multiple modes of interaction, real goal and life-semblance tasks, challenging activities, and memorability of experiences.

As expected, NT-based learning can have ardent supporters eager to embrace novelty whereas it can be met with reticence by others, especially more senior learners (9.6%) who were either unfamiliar with technology or did not have digital environment affinity.

The study also focused on motivation as lever for increased production in ESP. Motivation is defined (Keller, 1979) as an issue of choice, the student's choice to get involved or not and it goes hand in hand with the learner's willingness to communicate orally or in written form. Student motivation was measured in our survey as the degree of involvement in class and out of class practice according to the amount of time (T= exposure time), quantity of production/use (Q1), and quality of production (i.e. correctness = Q2).

Unlike classical methods, Web 2.0 tools offer the HE teacher the advantage of syndicating the students' production and thus monitoring their engagement. Difficult though it may be to compute the actual amount of time students devoted to out-of-class practice in E, the average E-written/spoken production was almost double compared to C-class-work and handed-in projects. Moreover, asynchronous voice tools offered the E group the opportunity to contribute communicatively at diverse hours and from diverse settings while developing their learning autonomy and reflective thinking skills.

C-students had to write for an in vitro audience and produced more mechanical essays than the E-students who were involved in authentic tasks writing for potential professionals. Writing quality significantly improved in E due to transparency of tasks, awareness of going public, instant multiple feedback, as well as ability to re-edit and reflect. The number of students who engaged in Internet-based projects as optional part of the final examination versus those who produced paper projects was significantly higher in E (82% created their own blogs on Tourism advertising) than in C (23%).

It is evident that under the variable motivation (T [Q.sub.1] [Q.sub.2]) and therefore production and exposure/use, Web 2.0 technology-based learning paradigm was superior to classical learning in ESP.

4. CONCLUSION

The results of this case study demonstrate that integrating new tools into existing teaching activities appears as a formidable challenge likely to increase the degree of student gratification under its aspects of material and method attractiveness, construed as: availability, flexibility in time and space, novelty of approach, multiple modes of interaction, real goal and life-semblance tasks, memorability of experiences, attractiveness and accessibility of materials. Motivation measured as the degree of student involvement in class and out of class practice is also superior when switching from classical to Web 2.0-based ESP learning.

Integrated reading/writing/speaking/listening Web 2.0 activities provide adult students the opportunity to experience real-world communication and authentic interactions, to expand language learning use and exposure (T, Q1) and to enhance correctness and involvement (Q2) while promoting student-centred autonomous learning.

These empirical results entitle the conclusion that if teaching to future engineers and businessmen is to comply with the customer gratification requirement and to empower them to face the real world challenges, educators should explore and exploit technology, which is synonymous with acquisition of skills needed to exist in a highly technological knowledge-based society.

Universities as well as top and human resources managers who seek to bridge tradition with emerging new technologies will be well positioned to respond creatively to developing change pressure while optimizing the quality standard of their educational processes.

5. REFERENCES

Dieu B.; Campbell A.P. & Ammann R. (2006). P2P Learning Ecologies in EFL/ESL, Teaching English with Technology. A Journal for Teachers of English, vol. 6/3, Available from : http://www.iatefl.org.pl/call/j_article25.htm Accessed 2009-09-02

Hamburg I. & Hall, T. (2008). Informal learning and the use of Web 2.0 within SME training strategies, eLearning Papers, no.11, November, ISSN 1887-1542, 12pp Available from: http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=doc& doc_id=12791&doclng=6 Accessed 2009-09-05

Keller, J.M (1979). Motivation and Instructional design: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Instructional Development, 2(4), pp 26-34

Siemens G. & Tittenberger P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for learning. University of Manitoba. Retrieved 2 September 2009, Available from http://www.umanitoba.ca/learning_technologies/ cetl/HETL.pdf Accessed 2009-07-25

Treadwell, M. (2005). The Emergent 21st Century Teacher. Retrieved July 11, 2006, Available from: http://www.ilearnt.com/Paradigm%20home.html Accessed 2009-07-25

Virkus, S. (2008). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in LIS education: Experiences at Tallin University, Estonia in Tedd, L (Ed.), Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, vol 42 no.3, pp 262- 274

Wenger, E. (2006). Communities of practice: A brief introduction, Available from: http://www.ewenger.com/theory/, Accessed 2006.07.11

Tab. 1. Material well structured, clearly and attractively
presented

 1 2 3 4 5

C 0 2.8% 42.7 % 32.8% 21.4%
E 0 0 7.6% 19.2% 73%

Tab. 2. Methods stimulated interest and motivation for learning

 1 2 3 4 5

C 0 0 28.5% 54.2% 17.1%
E 0 9.6% 0 13.4% 76.9%