以學習者為中心與合作學習法運用電子白板：國中英語教學之個案研究 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士在職專班論文指導教授: 招靜琪博士 Advisor: Dr. Chin-Chi Chao. 以學習者為中心與合作學習法運用電子白板：國中英語教學之個案研究 Using the Interactive Whiteboard for Learner-centered and Cooperative Language Learning: A Case Study on English Instruction in Junior High School. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. 研究生: 周瑄妍撰 Name: Chou, Hsuan-Yen 中華民國 102 年 5 月 May, 2013. v.

(2) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v.

(3) Acknowledgments. First, I would like to express my appreciation to my advisor, Dr. Chin-Chi Chao, for the professional guidance and constant inspiration she has given me. Without her,. 政治大. I would not complete my research for this work. My heartfelt gratitude is also. 立. extended to the committee members, Dr. Chen-kuan Chen and Dr. Chieh-yue Yeh,. ‧ 國. 學. who offered many valuable comments and suggestions to make this thesis. ‧. acceptable. Moreover, I would like to thank my colleagues, Huang, Jia-Li, and Yang,. Nat. sit er. io. whole research.. y. Chau-Kai, for their wholehearted supports and helpful comments throughout the. al. n. v i n Finally, I am grateful toCmy my parents. They gave me hfamily, e n gespecially chi U. supports and encouragements. Also, my elder sister, Kang-yun, who did me a great favor comforting me whenever I felt depressed. Their companionship is priceless to me. I am glad I can finally share the honor with them.. iii.

(4) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. iv. i n U. v.

(5) Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iii Chinese Abstract ........................................................................................................ viii English Abstract ............................................................................................................. x Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................. 1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1 Purpose and research questions of the study.......................................................... 2 Significance of the study........................................................................................ 3 Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................... 5 Research on CALL ................................................................................................ 5 Research on IWB ................................................................................................... 6 The effectiveness of IWB ...................................................................................... 7 The need for qualitative studies of IWB ................................................................ 8 Case studies on IWB .............................................................................................. 9. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Comparison of previous IWB studies .................................................................. 10 Learner-centered and cooperative learning .......................................................... 11 Chapter Three: Methodology ....................................................................................... 15. ‧. Research paradigm ............................................................................................... 15 Context and participants ...................................................................................... 15 The context................................................................................................... 15 The teacher/researcher ................................................................................. 15 Participants ................................................................................................... 16 Data collection ..................................................................................................... 18 Teacher’s logs .............................................................................................. 18 Classroom interaction video data ................................................................. 18 Interview with the two observers ................................................................. 18. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Semi-structured group interview.................................................................. 19 Procedure ............................................................................................................. 20 Data analysis ........................................................................................................ 23 The framework and the timeline of the study ...................................................... 24 Overview of what are to be presented below ....................................................... 24 Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................ 27 Overview of Class A ............................................................................................ 27 Overview of Class B ............................................................................................ 31 Class A Group A................................................................................................... 36 Overview of Group A........................................................................................... 36 v.

(6) Presentation style of Group A .............................................................................. 37 Tina .............................................................................................................. 39 Tim ............................................................................................................... 41 Zoe ............................................................................................................... 45 Jean .............................................................................................................. 47 Summary of Group A ........................................................................................... 49 Group B ................................................................................................................ 50 Overview of Group B........................................................................................... 50 Presentation style of Group B .............................................................................. 51 Edward ......................................................................................................... 53 York .............................................................................................................. 56 Yvonne ......................................................................................................... 59 Serena ........................................................................................................... 61 Summary of Group B ........................................................................................... 63 Class B Group C .................................................................................................. 64. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Overview of Group C........................................................................................... 64 Presentation style of Group C .............................................................................. 65 Gary.............................................................................................................. 66. ‧. Dave ............................................................................................................. 69 Molly ............................................................................................................ 71 Penny............................................................................................................ 74 Summary of Group C ........................................................................................... 76 Group D ............................................................................................................... 78 Overview of Group D .......................................................................................... 78 Presentation style of Group D .............................................................................. 78 Tracy ............................................................................................................ 80 Chad ............................................................................................................. 82. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Howard ......................................................................................................... 85 Grace ............................................................................................................ 87 Summary of Group D........................................................................................... 90 The comparison of four groups ............................................................................ 91 Teacher/Researcher’s viewpoint toward the four groups ..................................... 97 Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................. 99 Addressing research question 1 ........................................................................... 99 Positive interdependence ............................................................................. 99 Face-to-face promotive interaction ............................................................ 100 Individual accountability ........................................................................... 100 vi.

(7) Social skills ................................................................................................ 101 Group processing ....................................................................................... 102 Some practical issues about the present educational environment ............ 103 Students accept the norm of exam-oriented and teacher-fronted learning environment which was against teacher/researcher’s belief in the research .................................................................................................................... 105 Addressing research question 2 ......................................................................... 106 The change of teacher’s role from a teacher-centered classroom to learner-centered instruction........................................................................ 106 Students’ reactions from the grammar teaching approach to learner-centered instruction .................................................................................................. 109 Interactions between the teacher and students in the plan ......................... 111 Addressing research question 3 ......................................................................... 112 The teacher’s reflection after implementing the IWB plan........................ 112 Limitation of the existing educational environment .................................. 119. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. Influence on colleagues to have different thoughts on IWB instruction.... 121 The IWB instruction in some schools ........................................................ 122 Summary of the chapter ..................................................................................... 123. ‧. Chapter Six: Conclusions........................................................................................... 125 Summary of the findings .................................................................................... 125 Pedagogical implications ................................................................................... 128 Limitations of the study ..................................................................................... 130 Suggestions for the further studies ..................................................................... 130 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 131 References .................................................................................................................. 133 Appendixes ................................................................................................................ 147. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. vii. i n U. v.

(8) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. viii. i n U. v.

(9) 國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士在職專班碩士論文題要論文名稱：以學習者為中心與合作學習法運用電子白板：國中英語教學之個案研究指導教授：招靜琪教授研究生：周瑄妍論文提要內容：. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 本研究旨在觀察了解利用電子白板融入英文教學，輔以學習者為中心的教學理念讓國中九年級的學生利用合作學習的機會來完成演示任務的過程。本研. ‧. 究方法採質性研究，採用兩班共選四組十六名九年級學生做為觀察對象，利用. sit. y. Nat. io. n. al. er. 課堂觀察，訪談，及教師反思日誌，著重在觀察老師、學生與電子白板三者之. i n U. v. 間的互動過程，學生學習態度以及老師對於自己教學方式的省思。. Ch. engchi. 經由本研究發現學生能接受新的電子白板教學方式，電子白板的多媒體教材能吸引較低成就學生的學習興趣，進而增加其跟電子白板互動的意願。學生剛開始不能適應學習者為中心的教學法，在團隊合作方面通常都以組長為中心擔負過多工作，有責任分配不均的問題。部分學生只被動地接受組長分派工作，甚至有學生完全沒有參與。進一步分析後發現學生因缺乏相關合作經驗、指導與長期競爭的升學壓力下，在過程中對於此計畫有諸多抱怨，認為本計畫壓縮 ix.

(10) 他們學習時間進而影響之後的升學考試；但是在經過幾次成功完成演示任務後，學生開始產生信心而改變對此教學法的態度。因此雖然電子白板有其缺點，但學生仍對於電子白板融入教學活動保持正面態度。以研究者同時為教學者的角度而言，有了電子白板教師能方便提供貼近生活的補充教材，設計文法互動遊戲，刺激學生學習意願。然而電子白板也有其缺點，包括尺寸限制、反光、燈光昏暗導致學生上課精神不佳等問題。更重要的是，實. 政治大. 施學習者為中心的電子白板教學為身為教師的一大挑戰，教師要轉換身分為學生. 立. 學習的輔助者、適應並開發電子白板的教學軟體、承受學生們質疑此項計畫的聲. ‧ 國. 學. 音並且在不拖累教學進度下實行本研究，這些在在都成為教師的壓力來源。然而. ‧. 在看到學生的進步及態度的轉變，再加上觀察者的鼓勵及其對於電子白板的教學. Nat. io. sit. y. 也產生興趣後，教師也發現電子白板所帶來的改變及其效益而有所改觀。透過本. er. 研究同時也發現教師需要更多的資源與協助來完成電子白板的教學。最後，研究. n. al. i n C 者提出相關的建議以作為未來電子白板教學研究的參考。 hengchi U. x. v.

(11) Abstract The purpose of the study was to investigate the process of utilizing the Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) and the learner-centered instruction and having four groups of sixteen 9th graders, who belonged to two classes, cooperated to. 政治大. accomplish presentation tasks. Grounded in qualitative inquiry, the study used. 立. classroom observation, group interviews, and the teacher’s log as the data for. ‧ 國. 學. analysis. Focusing on the process of interaction between the students and the IWB,. io. sit. y. Nat. plan.. ‧. the students’ attitudes, and the teachers’ own reflections after implementing the IWB. er. It was found that the students accepted the new IWB instructional plan because. al. n. v i n C h which facilitated of its multimedia teaching material, e n g c h i U some low achievers’ interests. making them willing to interact with the IWB. As for the students’ performances, the researcher found that the students were not used to the learner-centered instruction. The group leaders were usually responsible for the majority of works and caused an unfair share of works among group members. Some students stayed passive and only received the work from their group leaders, and some did not involve in the group activities and presentations at all. After further investigation, it was found that xi.

(12) the students were lack of experience and teacher’s guidance. Furthermore, they were long under the competitive educational culture. They thought that doing such cooperative tasks would take up their study time and further affect the effort they make for the high school entrance examination, so they had a lot of complaints during the plan. However, after several times of accomplishing the presentation tasks together, the students started to gain confidence and change their attitudes. Although there were some drawbacks, the students eventually held positive attitudes toward the IWB instructional plan. From the teacher/researcher’s point of view, with the IWB, the teacher could also. 治政大some grammar games provide the students with some authentic materials and design 立 for the students to learn. However, there were still some disadvantages of the tool,. ‧ 國. 學. including size limitation, sun reflection, and the dark light which made the students. ‧. feel sleepy. Most importantly, it was a great challenge for the teacher/researcher to. sit. y. Nat. implement the plan. The teacher had to first change her role from a dominator to a. io. er. facilitator, adjust the program and develop some games from the IWB, implement the plan under the pressure of the students’ complaints while following the. al. n. v i n Ctheh meantime. SeeingUthe progress of the school-required teaching schedule in engchi. students’ performances and their change of attitudes, together with the encouragement of two observers and the other English teachers’ interests in the plan, the teacher/researcher changed her attitudes toward the plan as well. The results of the study suggest that more resources and supports are needed for teachers to achieve the IWB plan. Finally, other suggestions for the IWB instructional plan are provided for further studies.. xii.

(13) Chapter One Introduction Background According to the Ministry of Education in Taiwan (MOE) in its Information Education White Paper 2008-2011, teachers should learn and teach with information and communications technology (ICT). One of the ICT tools that has been strongly. 治政 promoted recently by the MOE is Interactive Whiteboards 大 (IWB), which according to 立 Bennett and Lockyer (2008, p. 289), are “ …large touch-sensitive boards that allow ‧ 國. 學. teachers and students to view, manipulate, create and distribute electronic teaching. ‧. and learning resources using familiar computer applications.” Since the use of an IWB is an important trend in education, the MOE has encouraged schools to integrate. y. Nat. er. io. sit. it into the teaching of every school subject, including English. Many workshops are being held with the hope that teachers will be able to use IWBs to enhance students’. n. al. learning.. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. However, using workshops as a way to engage teachers in the presentation of theory, observation, and demonstrations and to develop necessary skills in using a teaching tool has been under much criticism in recent years, as Fullan and Stiegelbauer (1991, p.315) put it, “Nothing has promised so much and has been so frustratingly wasteful as the thousands of workshops and conferences that led to no significant change in practice when teachers returned to their classrooms.” One of the reasons is that most workshops do not take the teaching contexts into consideration. 1.

(14) In order to make sure that IWBs can be properly integrated into the existing instructional routine of a junior high school English curriculum, this researcher feels the need to review existing teaching routines and develop an innovated way of integrating the tool in the classroom. Research shows that best use of computer tools in the classroom often involves a change of teaching philosophy, including more learner-centered perspective and taking into account the unique learning and teaching culture (Leavy, 2002). This study developed a learner-centered instructional plan, implemented it, and documented and analyzed the nuanced use of IWBs in a classroom with groups of junior high students. The students’ reactions to the. 治政 IWB-supported instruction help to understand what it takes大 to actually get the most 立 benefits from having an IWB in the junior high school English classroom.. ‧ 國. 學. Purpose and research questions of the study. ‧. The purpose of this study was to investigate the process of implementing an. Nat. sit. y. IWB-supported instructional plan which aimed to encourage learner involvement and. n. al. er. io. learner-centeredness under the unique culture of the third year of junior high school,. i n U. v. which normally is under a lot of pressure from the Basic Competence Test (BC Test).. Ch. The research questions are listed below: 1.. engchi. To what extent did the students accept the learner-centered requirement in the instructional plan?. 2.. How did an English teacher and her junior high students collaboratively implement an IWB-supported instructional plan?. 3.. After three cycles of implementation, what insights did the teacher/researcher derive from the experience which helped her think [differently] about her existing teaching practice? 2.

(15) Significance of the study With the tremendous enthusiasm associated with IWB, the concern is that mistakes might be repeated (Dunkel, 1991; Garrett, 1991). The emphasis of effectiveness should be shifted to, as Dunkel (1991) suggested, “…illuminate the mental process activated and even cultivated as a result of Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) instruction” (p.21). In other words, the computer should only be considered as an assisted tool, not an approach. With the concept that a computer is a tool, what is really important is to investigate the changing nature of teachers’ and students’ thinking process, attitude, and overall experience and of their. 治政 interaction through certain pedagogical innovations大 while utilizing the computer tool, 立. such as using learner-centeredness and cooperative learning with the IWB, in a. ‧ 國. 學. real-world context. The present study focused on students’ learning processes and. ‧. their attitudes toward the new instruction; meanwhile the teacher’s attitude and the. sit. y. Nat. change of her viewpoints were also included. The results derived from the study will. io. n. al. er. provide useful insights and suggestions for further IWB studies.. Ch. engchi. 3. i n U. v.

(16) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 4. i n U. v.

(17) Chapter Two Literature Review In this chapter, research on the effectiveness of CALL and Interactive Whiteboards was reviews and explored. Moreover, learner-centeredness and cooperative learning are introduced as a way to integrate IWB instruction into the conventional English classrooms in junior high schools in Taiwan.. 政治大 Numerous studies have reported that CALL, when used properly, tends to have 立. Research on CALL. ‧ 國. 學. positive impacts on language learning (Chapelle, 2001; Crystal 2001; Hanson-Smith, 2000; Levy ,1997; Levy & Debski, 1999; Warschauer & Kern, 2000; Warschauer,. ‧. Shetzer, & Meloni,2000; Yoshii, 2006). Analyzing many studies on CALL, Fotos and. sit. y. Nat. Browne (2004) divided CALL activities into seven types, including writing,. n. al. er. io. communicating, media usage, Internet, concordance, distance learning, and test taking.. v. Some researchers (Fotos & Browne, 2004; Lee & Noh et al., 2011; Wang, 2011) have. Ch. engchi. i n U. put these activities into studies and experiments and found that CALL could enhance students’ motivation, autonomy, and self-confidence. Among the studies, many also explored how CALL enhanced students’ achievement on writing (Chikamatsu, 2003; Jafarian &Soori, et al., 2012), vocabulary acquisition (Bowles, 2004; Tozcu & Coady,2004; Yoshii, 2006), speaking through computer-mediated communication(CMC) technology (Barr, Leakey, & Ranchoux, 2005; Jepson, 2005), and listening ability (Gorsuch, 2004; O'Brien & Hegelheimer 2007; Weinberg, 2002). In addition, students had positive attitudes to CALL (Hashemi &Najafi, 2011; Lan, 5.

(18) Hsiao, & Chiang, 2010; Mohsen & Balakumar, 2011; Sagarra & Zapata, 2008). Such cases with efficacy on CALL have made many educators interested in integrating the technology into classrooms and hoped that their students will benefit from computer-assisted instruction. Research on IWB In recent years, a new technology, IWB, has appeared and attracted much interest. A great number of researchers (Beauchamp, 2004; BECTA, 2004; Beeland, 2002; Derek et al., 2005; Glover & Miller, 2001; Hall & Higgins, 2005; Higgins,. 治政 2006; Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005) started to investigate大 IWBs to see if it has 立. Beauchamp, & Miller, 2007; Kennewell et al, 2008; Smith, Hardman, & Higgins,. influence on student learning. There have been sizable recent studies of IWB. ‧ 國. 學. (Beauchamp, 2004; BECTA, 2004; Beeland, 2002; Derek et al., 2005; Glover &. ‧. Miller, 2001; Hall & Higgins, 2005; Higgins, Beauchamp, & Miller, 2007; Kennewell. sit. y. Nat. et al, 2008; Smith, Hardman, & Higgins, 2006; Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005). io. er. published in a lot of educational journals showing that many researchers have paid. al. attention to IWB. Among these studies, most of them were investigations in British. n. v i n C hthe UK governmentUbudgeted almost￡50 schools. The reason lies in the fact that engchi. million in 2003 to purchase IWBs for primary and secondary schools. The interests in this new tool have attracted researchers’ attention for the past decade and they put much emphasis on the study of students and teachers and to test the effectiveness and usefulness of the IWB. Numerous studies in Taiwan have investigated students’ performances and attitudes after utilizing IWB for English instruction (e.g., Chang, 2010; Fang, 2012; Gong, 2011; Hsu, 2010; Ke, 2012; Li, 2012). The participants in these studies showed 6.

(19) significant improvement after the IWB instruction. The effectiveness of integrating IWB into English as Foreign Language teaching environment in Taiwan will be discussed more completely in the section below. The effectiveness of IWB A large number of studies pointed out that integrating IWB into the class did have benefits for students with different levels (Beauchamp, 2004; BECTA, 2003; Bell, 2002; Cogill, 2002; Leavy, 2002; Smith et al., 2005). The positive effects for students, including improvement of their grades on different subjects, increase in. 治政大 & Anderson, 2007; Quashie, of thinking skill (Beauchamp, 2004; Cogill, 2002; Hodge 立 motivation, interactivity and collaboration, engagement in the task, and development. 2009; Smith et al., 2005; Türel & Johnson, 2012). The participants of these studies. ‧ 國. 學. ranged from primary to higher education students as well as students with special. ‧. needs (Smith et al., 2005). The studies conducted with different research designs such. sit. y. Nat. as quasi-experimental, observations and case studies have pointed out the advantages. io. er. and disadvantages of IWB for both teachers and students. From teachers’ point of. al. view, the advantages of IWB are fancy multimedia display, easy access to develop. n. v i n C h materials, timeUsaving (e.g., without the need to sources of supplementary teaching engchi erase the board after use) and more interaction with students (Bennett & Lockyer, 2008; Cogill, 2002; Gray et al., 2005; Hodge & Anderson, 2007; Quashie, 2009; Smith et al., 2005). However, there are also complaints, including being too time-consuming at preparation, lack of resource supplement and training, hardware problems, and students’ brief period of enthusiasm when using IWB (Cogill, 2002; Glover &Miller, 2001; Gray et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2005). Nevertheless, Quashie (2009) and Smith et al. (2005) pointed out that some students had some negative 7.

(20) perceptions of IWB when it was used in the classroom. The problems include sun reflection which can blind their vision, and that the problem-solving procedure cannot be seen step by step on the board. Though these findings indicate some benefits of IWB on students’ learning and teachers’ teaching methods, there are still many aspects that did not take into consideration by the previous studies, such as teachers’ pedagogical approaches and students’ thinking processes associated with the IWB. Hence, qualitative inquiries are needed to search for more dimensions of the learning experiences, instead of focusing. 政治大. solely on products and effectiveness in language classrooms (Garrett, 2008; Motteram, 1999).. 立. The need for qualitative studies of IWB. ‧ 國. 學. There are already plenty of quantitative studies providing evidences to support. ‧. the possible benefits of IWBs, but only a few studies focused on the learning process. sit. y. Nat. of the learner. As Garrett (2009) claimed that “ a great deal of research is needed, not. io. er. only on carefully defined questions of pedagogical efficacy, but also on details of the learning experience and the nature of learners’ idiosyncratic language processing”. al. n. v i n C h and Motteram (1999), (p.715-716). Two authors, Garrett (2008) e n g c h i U continued to urge for integrating research, practice and theory. Also, Debski’s (2003), argued that though quantitative research about CALL have declined in recent years, most qualitative studies still took the nonparticipants method, which is the situation when the researcher takes the position as an observer while the participants did not know they are being investigated. Most studies on CALL take an observation form; that is, a teacher is an observer not to manipulate the computer during the instruction (Amstrong et al., 2005; Beauchamp, 2004; Cogill, 2002; Schmid, 2006). To bridge the 8.

(21) gap between academic research and classroom practice, teachers’ engaging in classroom research is the best solution to fill the gap between the research and practice; meanwhile, deriving insights from both positions as teachers and researchers. Case studies on IWB According to Yin (2003, p.13), case study is “...an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life contest.” Also, Burton (2000) points out that a case study is “…an event such as some aspect of organizational change, or implementing a new programme” (p.177). Through case. 治政大 and gain insights for studies, teachers can personally involve in the research 立. integrating the interactive whiteboard technology to the context. They could also. ‧ 國. 學. investigate the process of personal pedagogical change and students’ individual. ‧. learning process to provide a real-life perspective in a complex classroom. sit. y. Nat. environment (Amstrong et al., 2005).. io. er. Two studies conducted by teachers as researchers have generated reflections on. al. the impact of IWB instruction (Hodge & Anderson, 2007; Mohon, 2008). Hodge and. n. v i n Anderson’s research was in C a primary whereas Mohon’s was in a secondary h e nschool, gchi U school. During the studies, both teachers used journals to record their pedagogical changes, and they found that with the longer time training and using IWB, more. interaction and benefits could happen in class. In conclusion, they both had a positive view on integrating IWB in the classroom. However, as Mohon (2008) stated, “The complexity of the classroom environment means that how one teacher uses the IWB cannot be applied to every situation” (p.310). Extending her idea, integrating IWB in the EFL context requires investigation. 9.

(22) Comparison of previous IWB studies IWB teaching has now been a popular issue in Taiwan. To date, the MOE of Taiwan has been optimistically promoting IWB instruction at schools, and many researchers have done studies on the impacts of using IWB in the language classrooms. So far, there are twenty-three theses about using IWB for English instruction and its effectiveness in the Taiwanese classrooms (Chang, 2010; Chang, 2011; Chen, 2002; Cheng, 2009; Fang, 2012; Gong, 2011; Hsu, 2010; Ke, 2012; Kuo, 2012; Li, 2012; Lin,Y. S. , 2010; Lin, H. Y., 2010; Lin, H.Y.,2012; Lin, W.W., 2012;. 治政大of them investigated Yang, 2012; Yu, 2009; Yu, 2011). Among the studies, twenty 立. Liau, 2010; Su, 2012; Wang, H. H., 2011; Wang, S. H., 2012; Wen, 2009; Wen, 2010;. elementary students while only three studies investigated junior high students. All of. ‧ 國. 學. the authors found that the participants enjoyed better learning achievements and held. ‧. positive attitudes toward the IWB instruction. All of the studies also emphasized the. io. er. the experience, which is a great lack of these studies.. sit. y. Nat. ‘effectiveness’ of IWB instruction. However, all of them neglected the processes and. al. The crucial findings from the prior studies reported are that IWB instruction was. n. v i n C h with the multimedia beneficial in terms of the students’ interaction sources and rapid engchi U transformation of lessons, yet there was no promise for the change of pedagogy by teachers (Gillen et al., 2007; Glover et al., 2007; Wall, Higgins, & Smith, 2005). Nevertheless, teachers are the key to how IWB may be used since they are the ones. who make adaption to fit their classroom practices in order to take most advantage of the technology (Glover & Miller, 2002; Kennewell & Beauchamp, 2007; Schuck & Kearney, 2007). Although much efficacy can be seen of the IWB instruction in the previous studies, the overuse of teacher-controlled teaching could reduce students’ 10.

(23) motivation toward the assisted tool. Therefore, when integrating IWB into the language classrooms, the essential factor is that teachers need to change their roles from dominators to facilitators using learner-centered approaches. Learner-centered and cooperative learning Türel and Johnson (2012) pointed out, after analyzing related studies, that students had effective learning if IWB instruction was learn-centered. McCombs and Whisler (1997) defined learner-centeredness as following: The perspective that couples a focus on individual learners (their. 治政大(the best available capacities, and needs) with a focus on learning 立. heredity, experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, talents, interests,. knowledge about learning and how it occurs and about teaching. ‧ 國. 學. practices that are most effective in promoting the highest levels of. ‧. motivation, learning, and achievement for all learners).(p.9). sit. y. Nat. The 12 principles for the concept of learner-centeredness were first composed by the. io. er. APA Task Force on Psychology in Education (1993) and later developed to 14 by the. al. APA Work Group of the Board of Educational Affairs (1997). The model of. n. v i n Cfour learner-centeredness includes cognitive and metacognitive factors, h efactors: ngchi U motivation and affective factors, developmental and social factors, and individual differences factors. Followings are features of these four models: 1. Cognitive and metacognitive factors that relate to the constructive nature of the learning process and the value of helping learners to become more aware of their thinking and learning. 2. Motivational and affective factors that relate to the influence of emotions and the interest of the student in learning. 11.

(24) 3. Developmental and social factors that emphasize positive learning climates and relationships in establishing a social context that facilitates meaningful learning, and also focus on identifying developmental differences within and among learners. 4. Individual differences that relate to basic principles of learning and the identification of unique individual attributes that determine effective learning modes for different learners. (Salinas & Garr, 2009, p.2). 治政大 they implement learner-centered teaching approach. 立. These principles provide a framework that teachers could use as a guide as. Based on the idea of learner-centeredness, teachers should give students. ‧ 國. 學. more responsibility to learn, transferring the teachers’ own position from being. ‧. knowledge givers to facilitators in the classroom (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf,. sit. y. Nat. & Moni, 2006). If teachers could do so, sizable studies have showed that both. io. er. teachers and students tend to have positive views on leaner-centered. approaches and derive positive effects on learners’ autonomy (Anton, 1999;. al. n. v i n C h2003; Nonkukhetkhong, Huang, 2006; Kavanoz, 2006; Meece, e n g c h i U Baldauf, & Moni, 2006; Salinas & Garr, 2009; Yilmaz, 2008). Another approach based on learner-centered learning is cooperative. learning. Cooperative learning is that students work in a mix ability group to achieve the mutual goals together (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1998). There are five basic elements of cooperative learning, including positive interdependence, individual accountability, face-to face promotive interaction, social skills, and group processing. According to Johnson and Johnson (1994, 12.

(25) ¶ 6), the definitions of the five elements are as below: 1. Positive Interdependence: The first requirement for an effectively structured cooperative lesson is that students believe that they "sink or swim together." 2. Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction: Promotive interaction may be defined as individuals encouraging and facilitating each other's efforts to achieve, complete tasks, and produce in order to reach the group's goals.. 治政大to the individual and the students is assessed, the results are given back 立 3. Individual Accountability: When the performance of individual. group, and the student is held responsible by group mates for. ‧ 國. 學. contributing his or her fair share to the group’s success.. ‧. 4. Social Skills: In order to coordinate efforts to achieve mutual goals,. sit. y. Nat. students must: 1) get to know and trust each other, 2) communicate. io. er. accurately and unambiguously, 3) accept and support each other, and 4). al. resolve conflict constructively.. n. v i n may be defined as reflecting on 5. Group Processing:C Group h e processing ngchi U a group session to: 1) describe what member actions were helpful and unhelpful, and 2) make decisions about what actions to continue or change. Much efficacy of cooperative learning can be found in many studies, which show that cooperative learning could enhance students’ performance in learning, improve the students’ attitudes toward the subject and their self-esteem, increase students’ interactions and peer-related encouragement (Slavin, 1991; Erdem, 1993; Shin, 1993; 13.

(26) Johnson & Johnson, 1994, 1997; Liang, 1996). From the studies, cooperative learning can make the students work more effectively if the teachers integrate it into the class well. Furthermore, Littlewood (1992) pointed out that students could benefit more if they cooperate with one another and engage in the roles more actively. Some research findings also suggest that cooperative learning is beneficial to English learners and the students have positive attitudes toward it (Long& Porter, 1985; McManus& Gettinger, 1996; Gömleksi, 2007). Although many benefits could be derived from the IWB instruction and. 治政大Hence, a case that do not exclusively focus on the effectiveness of the IWB. 立. CALL, there was a lack of qualitative studies to provide detailed observation. study on IWB for English instruction is needed to explore interaction between. ‧ 國. 學. students and the teacher. This study investigated the interaction in the context. ‧. of a junior high school, during the intense learning environment of the 9th. sit. y. Nat. grade as students faced the high school entrance examination. Under this. io. er. special circumstance, a case study was conducted through careful data. al. n. collection, analysis and assistance with two observers to provide insights of. i n C the process through IWB teaching in anhEnglish classroom. engchi U. 14. v.

(27) Chapter Three Methodology Research paradigm The study was conducted as a case study. A case study is an appropriate mode of inquiry that has a qualitative orientation, and it is useful for small-scale research projects (Terreni, 2009, p.31). For the purpose of this study that aimed to understand. 政治大 classroom, a case study is considered most appropriate. 立. how an IWB-supported instructional plan could be implemented in a real-world. ‧ 國. 學. Context and participants The context. ‧. This study was conducted in a junior high school located in an urban district of. sit. y. Nat. the Taichung city. There were altogether about 1314 students in forty-six classes and. n. al. er. io. twelve English teachers, which constitute a medium-sized municipal school. Three. v. IWBs were installed in the three classrooms at the Administration Building about two. Ch. engchi. i n U. years define before the study. However, none of the IWBs had been used by any of the teachers in the school before this study. That IWBs were not used at all highlights the importance of the study. The teacher/researcher The teacher/researcher in the study had seven years of English teaching experience in this particular school and had already had one-year experience teaching the student participants. Thus, she had some understanding of the class and a certain degree of rapport with the students, which stood as a good foundation for this study. 15.

(28) On the other hand, the researcher also had some expertise in computer assisted language learning, having taken a course on Computer-Assisted Language Learning in a graduate program. In addition, she attended a three-hour IWB workshop in the previous school year. To gain more confidence and expertise in teaching with IWBs, the researcher also developed more skills in using and applying IWBs with the assistance of the school’s Section Chief of Information Technology at the beginning of the new semester before data collection. Furthermore, the researcher had asked for more advice about IWB teaching from an experienced English teacher who worked. 治政 so-called “Information and Technology Advance School”) 大 and who had used IWBs as 立 for another school in the city that is specialized in Educational technology (i.e., as a. an instructional tool to teach English for about one year. Also, both the Section Chief. ‧ 國. 學. of Information Technology and the experienced English teacher from the school. y. sit. io. er. Participants. Nat. full preparation in hand, the researcher was ready to start the study.. ‧. agreed to serve as observers to provide more objective insights after class. With the. al. Two classes were chosen for the IWB instructional plan. Class A consisted of 14. n. v i n C h of 16 boys and 16Ugirls. The students were boys and 17girls while Class B consisted engchi divided into four-student groups. That means there were eight groups in each of the two classes, and there were only three students in the eighth group in Class A. Also, these participants belonged to an intact 3rd-year class (9th graders), who were under great pressure of preparing for the high school entrance exam called the Basic Competence Test (BC Test) in May. The reasons why these students were chosen as the participants were as following. First, though most of the students were from lower income families and 16.

(29) had low achievement in English, most of them were still willing to engage in English learning. After teaching them for one year in their eighth grade, the researcher felt that they had some improvement. Among these students, some had very little or even no interest in English. However, some other students did have had high achievement in English. With the IWB as a motivating tool, the teacher/researcher expected that they would all become interested and achieved some learning gains. Second, of all three classes that the researcher taught, these two classes of students had relatively more even levels of performance and scores, rather than having some highly achieved. 治政大better during the process. Third, intermediate-level learners would engage in learning 立 learners or extremely low achievers as the other one. The researcher assumed that the. none of the students had been instructed with IWBs before. The study was a totally. ‧ 國. 學. new experience for them.. ‧. Four groups were chosen from the two classes to be the focus of the study. The. sit. y. Nat. reason why the four groups were chosen was on the basis that they represented. io. er. different aspects of junior high students. The sixteen members were consisting of. al. different characteristics, including being lazy, active, passive, and so on. The. n. v i n Cstudents’ researcher believed that these could represent most junior high h e n greactions chi U students when they encountered the learner-centered plan. Moreover, the four leaders had different leadership styles which could affect the groups’ performances. The leader of Group A was a teaching assistant who struggled to make her teammates share some work with her to achieve the tasks; while the leader of Group B was interested in and good at computer work; he tended to take the overall control of his group. The leader of Group C was active in class but had poor leadership skills in accomplishing the tasks; while the leader of Group D put much effort in making two 17.

(30) low achievers cooperate with her to complete the tasks. Analyzing their performances during the tasks, the researcher will have more in-depth discussion in the next chapter. Data collection The study used a variety of data collection methods. The data set was comprised of the teacher’s logs, classroom interaction video data, observers’ interviews, and a group interview with the participants at each cycle of the project. Teacher’s logs The teacher/researcher kept a log for each class to describe the teaching process. 治政大 and interaction among reflection was used to analyze the teaching method, procedure 立 of using IWB on the one hand and recorded her own reflection on the other. The. the teacher, the students and IWB in every class. The log was kept until the end of the. ‧ 國. 學. study, which is the end of the semester.. ‧. Classroom interaction video data. sit. y. Nat. In order to get more information about the interaction between the teacher and. io. er. students, between the teacher and IWB, as well as between students and IWB, a. al. digital video recorder was used to record the teaching process and interaction in every. n. v i n C hwas for a closer investigation class. The function of the digital video of the teaching engchi U procedure, facilitation of reflection by the teacher/researcher, and for observers to. examine and discuss issues and problems that might have emerged in the class. Every digital video recording was used to determine necessary modification for the teacher/researcher’s instruction throughout the whole IWB teaching project. Interview with the two observers During the course, the researcher invited two experienced teachers to observe the class and discussed the teaching process with the researcher afterwards. One was an 18.

(31) English teacher who had been teaching English for twenty years, and the other was the Section Chief of Information Technology of the school. Both of them were the researcher’s colleagues and were able to provide honest opinions about the instruction. The two observers also observed the class when the students did the presentation tasks. After the class, the teacher/researcher had a discussion with them to seek more suggestions for the following class and task. The English teacher observer provided her opinions about the teaching process and interaction between the researcher and. 治政大 tasks. students’ utilization of the IWB during their presentation 立. her students, while the Section Chief of Information Technology emphasized the. Semi-structured group interview. ‧ 國. 學. There were three cycles of tasks for students to do their review task. After each. sit. y. Nat. follows:. ‧. cycle, the teacher/researcher had an interview with each group. The questions were as. io. al. n. 2 How did they prepare for the review task?. Ch. 3. Ways to improve their task.. engchi. er. 1. The students’ reflection about the review task.. i n U. v. 4. Opinions and suggestions about the IWB instruction. Each of the interviews was conducted in Chinese and lasted for 45 minutes. Also, if the students had some suggestions about the teaching methods, they could point out their views at that time. The interview was audio recorded as one of the data set to be used for analysis. Through the interviewees’ viewpoints, the researcher discovered perceptions to address the research questions. Besides the interview sessions, the researcher also had some informal interviews with the participants after English class. 19.

(32) That is, in order to gain more opinions from the students, the researcher usually asked some students their thoughts about the IWB instruction on that day and the process or problems they faced when preparing for the coming presentation tasks. Procedure This study was conducted during the fall semester of 2010, with three cycles of implementation and data collection. A lesson plan (see Appendix I) based on the school-mandated textbook and task-based teaching method from Ellis (2003) was designed for the purpose of this study. The three cycles of data collection mainly. 治政 responsible for designing and conducting a review session 大 in class. In other words, the 立 occurred at the end of every three units of instruction when the student teams were. instruction for three units was completed before the monthly test, and in order to help. ‧ 國. 學. the students prepare for the test, three groups of students were responsible to lead the. ‧. review session and did the review task with the IWB under the teacher/researcher’s. sit. y. Nat. help. Although the three review sessions were the focus, the complete nine units of. io. er. instruction and classroom interaction were recorded in video and the. al. teacher/researcher kept a reflection log throughout the whole semester.. n. v i n C h in this section: At The complete procedure is presented e n g c h i U the first class, the. teacher/researcher announced to the two classes that all students were required to work in groups to design and conduct a fifteen-minute review session with the IWB before each of the monthly test. Before that, they were required to do a five-minute presentation based on the extension activity from unit 2 to 9. For example, the task of unit 2 was that each group chose the capital of a foreign country and did a weekly weather report. Furthermore, the teacher also announced that the presentation would be part of their final scores in order to make them become serious about the tasks. The 20.

(33) teacher chose eight higher achievers as group leaders. Each group leader had to choose three other students to form a group which had to be consisted of both genders. The class then decided the sequence of the review tasks (i.e., Group 1 was responsible for unit 1 as their review task). However, since there were only eight groups in each class, the teacher was responsible for reviewing unit 9. After the teacher explained all the rules of the presentation tasks and the sequence of group presentation determined, the teacher and the students then negotiated the format and the ways to use IWB in completing the tasks.. 治政 become familiar with the functions of the IWB and大 gained some experiences of doing 立 The purpose of the five-minute presentation tasks was to help the students. tasks. Before teaching a unit, the teacher and the students negotiated and decided the. ‧ 國. 學. topic for the presentation and then the students had to do the presentation task in the. ‧. next class after the unit was taught. However, the students did not need to do the. sit. y. Nat. presentation tasks for unit 1 and unit 6 for that the students had already finished unit 1. io. er. during the summer vacation and before the study began. Also, the schedule was too. al. tight for the second monthly test, so the teacher cancelled the task of unit 6. Therefore,. n. v i n C h tasks and 3 review there were altogether 7 presentation e n g c h i U tasks in the plan. The. complete plan for the presentation tasks of the IWB instruction is presented in Table 3.1. The three review sessions were taken as data sources for the current study. Table 3.1 The lesson plan of the presentation tasks Unit. Student Tasks. 1. (None). 2. Weather Report. 3. Classified Aids 21.

(34) Review. Review Task: Units 1-3 (Groups 1-3). (Data Source) 4. How to reject a boy/girl’s love confession. 5. Book Review. 6. None. Review. Review Task: Units 4-6 (Groups 4-6). (Data. 7. 9. Introduce a country and its characteristics Zodiac Signs. 學. 8. 政治大 Issues about arguing with parents and how to solve the problems 立. ‧ 國. Source). ‧. (Data. unit 9. sit. io. er. Source). y. Review Task: Units 7-9 (Groups 7-8) while the teacher reviewed. Nat. Review. al. v i n C h to the students U which also intended to be a demonstration e n g c h i as to how it is possible to n. During the subsequent teaching day, the teacher used IWB to teach the lessons,. enhance class interaction with IWB. The presentation tasks offered students the opportunity to gain more experience with the IWB interaction as well. In other words, each group did at least two presentation tasks during the instruction before they did the review task. Moreover, in order to make sure that the students really understand how to accomplish the required task and use the IWB, the teacher gave each group one class time for consulting, which was forty-five minutes, before their designated review session. This consulting meeting meant to have some discussions with the 22.

(35) students and give them necessary advice. A group interview was also held with the group immediately after the review session to understand the students’ attitude and perception toward the task. All the discussions and interviews were audio-recorded for analysis. Data analysis The data analysis was interpreted in nature. At each cycle of the implementation, the researcher transcribed and analyzed the data as soon as possible after data collection to identify important themes, which then helped the researcher understand. 治政大First one was that the study are two ways to guard the trustworthiness of the study. 立. how to make necessarily changes to the subsequent cycles of implementation. There. was a long term study and had triangulated data. The second one was that there were. ‧ 國. 學. two observers to help the researcher maintain a balanced view and exclude the. ‧. possibility of bias.. sit. y. Nat. To answer the Research Question One: To what extent did the students accept the. io. er. learner-centered requirement in the instructional plan? The teacher’ log, digital video, observers’ interviews, and group interviews provided the teacher/researcher’s and. n. al. i n C participants’ insight toward theh IWB instructional U e n g c h i plan.. v. As for Research Question Two: How did an English teacher and her junior high students collaboratively implement an IWB-supported instructional plan? The researcher compared and contrasted the data and themes derived from the teacher’s log, video data, and observers’ interviews to reconstruct the experience. For Research Question Three: After three cycles of implementation, what insights did the teacher/researcher derive from the experience which helped her think [differently] about her existing teaching practice? After one semester’s IWB 23.

(36) instruction, the teacher/researcher derived insights from the data collected from her logs, other teachers’ comments, and students’ views to address this question. The framework and the timeline of the study A lesson plan (See Appendix II) was developed for the task to be used for the first cycle. After teaching with IWB for a while, the teacher/researcher found some problems from analyzing her logs, videos, observers’ interviews and students’ opinions. Then some adjustment and revision were made into the lesson plan for the next cycle. The framework of the study is listed below (see Figure 3.1).. 政治大. Figure 3.1 The framework and the procedure of the study. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Overview of what are to be presented below In the next chapter, the researcher first gave an overview of the two classes and then an introduction to each of the four chosen groups and their presentation styles. The researcher also analyzed the learning styles, process to prepare for the presentations and the attitudes toward the IWB instructions of all the group members from four groups in sequence. Finally, the researcher summarized her viewpoints 24.

(37) derived from analyzing the performances of the participants during the IWB instruction.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 25. i n U. v.

(38) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 26. i n U. v.

(39) Chapter Four Findings In this chapter, the researcher first gives an overview of the two focus classes and then provides an analysis of the interviews with two groups of students from the two classes to obtain an understanding of their viewpoints and experiences with the IWB instruction.. 政治大 Since the original homeroom teacher of Class A left in their ninth grade, the 立. Overview of Class A. ‧ 國. 學. students lost their learning interests and the atmosphere worsened because of the conflicts among them. The researcher started teaching Class A when they were eighth. ‧. graders. In the seventh grade, their English teacher was a substitute teacher who was. sit. y. Nat. less experienced and did not have effective classroom management skills. Their. n. al. er. io. homeroom teacher was an experienced Chinese teacher and took very good control of. v. the class, which made them have the best performance on the subject of Chinese. Ch. engchi. i n U. among all other school subjects. Actually most of the students in Class A did not have interests in academic work; they often could not focus, chatting through most of the class time. At the eighth grade, the researcher started teaching them and cooperated with their homeroom teacher well in making them memorize vocabulary words and pushing them hard to study English. The researcher also put much effort on pushing them to study hard and gradually the students’ grades improved. However, there was a major problem－the students seemed not willing to give responses or answer questions in class; it always took them a lot of time to come up with responses to the 27.

(40) teacher’s questions. Their homeroom teacher said, “I asked the students to keep quiet in class; otherwise, they would be too noisy. And it would definitely drive you crazy”. That was probably why they tended to keep quiet and gave no responses at all in class. After the teacher taught Class A for a year, the students seemed to get used to her new instructional style and started to enjoy a positive relationship. Unfortunately, at the new semester of their ninth grade, the students had a new homeroom teacher. In fact, at the beginning of their ninth grade, almost all of their teachers of all subjects were changed except the teacher/researcher for various reasons. Since then, their learning. 治政大they thought the asking me about my impression of teaching this class because 立. environment and studying attitudes changed as well. Some subject teachers kept. students were noisy and inattentive. These teacher said to the teacher/researcher, “Do. ‧ 國. 學. you think that the students’ learning attitudes changed since the new teacher came?”.. ‧. They also said “We talked to the homeroom teacher many times to discipline his. sit. y. Nat. students during our instruction, but the situation stayed the same. The students were. io. er. still making a lot of noise in class.” They thought that it should be the homeroom teacher’s duty to control and set everything in order to let the subject teachers teach. n. al. the class more easily.. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Some other problems also arose in this class since then. The first problem and also the most serious one was conflicts among the students. In the ninth grade, the content of the English class that the students needed to study seemed too difficult for some of them, who then gave up on making any effort and started constantly engaging in small talks in class. The other students became annoyed being disturbed during class time. So the students divided themselves up into two opposing groups and had complete estrangement between each other ever since. The most obvious conflict 28.

(41) happened on the school anniversary sports day. Some students rejected to take part in the relay race because they thought most contestants belonged to the opposing group; they did not want to be in the same team with their opponents. This not only worsened the situation but also made the class atmosphere and most students’ grades became lower than those they obtained in the eighth grade. The second problem of Class A was that not all the students participated in this IWB plan. At the beginning of the new semester in the ninth grade, three students who belonged to the school basketball team were often absent from class because of some. 治政 much in preparing for the IWB presentations. In the大 first semester of the ninth grade, 立. basketball games which they had to be part of, and thus they did not join their groups. the teacher/researcher had all the students do five-minute presentation tasks as. ‧ 國. 學. practices for the review task. There was one theme in each unit, and the. ‧. teacher/researcher and the students thought of one topic to do the presentation task. sit. y. Nat. after that unit was finished. Besides the presentation task at the end of each unit,. io. er. groups were also assigned to do a fifteen-minute review task for their classmates at. al. the last class before each monthly test. There were nine units in the book and one. n. v i n review task, so there shouldC be h ten presentation tasks. e n g c h i U However, unit one was finished in the summer vacation when the teacher/researcher asked for a study leave and the project had not been executed. There was not enough time to do the presentation task of unit six, so it was cancelled. Therefore, there were eight presentation tasks including the review task. Among those three basketball players on the school team, only one was present at most of the presentations, while the other two were constantly absent from class during the semester. In the interview session, the students who belonged to the same group as those basketball players expressed that they would 29.

(42) rather do the presentations without the players. The players did not offer much help for the groups either, and thus it made no difference with or without their participation for their teammates. Also, because one of basketball players had serious conflicts with his teammates, he usually gave some excuses and not to show up on the presentations. Besides the two basketball players, there were two students who also started to be absent from the class. At the beginning of the new semester in their ninth grade, there were two students who would not show up in classes until ten to eleven o’clock in the morning, which was actually the third or fourth class of the day. Gradually, they. 治政大not interested in school semester. These students had some family problems and were 立 went to school much later and then eventually became dropouts in the middle of the. at all. One of these students still appeared at most of the presentations until December,. ‧ 國. 學. i.e., two thirds into the semester, while the other never appeared. At the interview after. ‧. the review task, I asked one group if they had told the student who was absent on the. sit. y. Nat. review task day. They said, “We saw him yesterday after school and told him that we. io. er. had a review task. But, he just gave us candies [as the reward to students who. al. answered the questions correctly], and then leave without responding whether he. n. v i n C h continued, “We would show up or not.” The group members e n g c h i U had become used to these members’ being absent. It did not make any difference whether or not they showed up in the group.” To sum up, Class A could be considered a dysfunctional class. The high. achievers in this class studied hard and did well no matter what happened, and while more and more students seemed to lose interest or even gave up on studying. Of course, their grades suffered. Luckily, students whom the teacher/researcher chose to be the leaders of the groups were hard-working and had strong leadership skills. 30.

(43) When the teacher/researcher started using the IWB instruction and asked all of the students to divide into groups, all leaders were able to make their group members work together and complete assigned tasks even though there were some really low achievers in the group. Below is the Timeline of Class A Grade 7th. Situation The class was with a substitute English teacher who was not effective in terms of classroom management. They became noisy,. 政治大 The researcher started teaching them English and cooperated with 立 lacked classroom discipline, and could not focus.. th. 8. their homeroom teacher to improve their performance in terms of. ‧ 國. 學. discipline and their studies. However, they did not have much. ‧. response during class time. Later, the researcher found that this. sit. y. Nat. was because of their homeroom teacher’s strict classroom. io. al. The school changed all of their teachers except me, including their. v i n homeroomC teacher. became noisy and inattentive, and h e nTheg students chi U n. 9th. er. management.. the situation became worse than that in the seventh grade because of conflicts between groups. Some students became dropouts. It was in this situation that the teacher/researcher conducted this IWB action research. Overview of Class B Lack of discipline and learning motivation were two major problems in Class B. The similarity between Class A and B was that they had the same substitute English 31.

(44) teacher in the seventh grade. The same problem arose in this class－the teacher had ineffective class management which made the class always in a state of chaos and the students were inattentive during class time. The researcher started teaching Class B in their eighth grade, which was the same time as Class A. However, the class atmosphere was completely different from Class A. The teacher in this class when they were 8th graders was very experienced, and the way she conducted her class was not strict. She was seldom in the classroom when homeroom teacher were supposed to be there, for example during self-study period or lunch break. Sometimes she was. 政治大 management made the students fool around and get themselves into trouble. They 立. absent from the individual study period in the morning. The rather loose way of class. ‧ 國. 學. would throw pieces of paper or trash to one another and have fun with water during break time. In class, the students were active but they were actually quite passive in. ‧. their studies. The number of students who did not finish their homework was always. sit. y. Nat. large and the average grade was lower than that for Class A. Yet, compared with Class. io. er. A, there were more high achievers in Class B who would respond to the. al. teacher/researcher’s questions and who liked to express their opinions, while some. n. v i n C U with those who sat low achievers might lose their attentionheasily e n and h i chatting g cended around them in class. When the teacher/researcher taught in this class, she usually spent less time talking about additional topics comparing with the other classes because students would immediately change the topics into something they could chat about and the classroom would be immediately became noisy and out of control. Students in Class B also did less well in their examinations because there were more students who did not pay attention to their study. English became more difficult since the eighth grade, more and more students in the class gave up on their learning and 32.

(45) gained lower grades than they could. The most obvious incident was that there were more students only willing to fill in numbers in the multiple choice section on the tests. In fact, they often wrote some random numbers and then fell asleep. For the high achievers in this class, though they still received good grades from tests, they did not have better performance than that of other high achievers in other classes. Also, the mean score in Class B was lower than that in Class A. The differences among students’ proficiency levels were too large that not only made the IWB instructional plan more difficult but also caused some problems when they did the task.. 治政大times for them. In addition, down her instruction and explained the content many 立. With more low achievers in this class, the teacher/researcher usually had to slow. since the students liked chatting in class, the teacher/researcher had to spend some. ‧ 國. 學. time disciplining them. The two focus classes had one thing in common －the. ‧. frequent absence of some students. There were three students in Class B who were. sit. y. Nat. usually absent from the class and did not join their groups much. One of them usually. io. er. came to school at noon or in the afternoon, while the other two came one day and. al. v i n C the group leaders often preparing for the presentations,h e n g c h i U excluded them from their n. were absent for two days. These students happened to be very low achievers. When. groups as if they were not part of the group. Like Class A, in the interview session, the group members said, “It did not matter if they [those absent students] appeared in the presentation or not.” In short, the main problems of Class B were the absence of three students and the existence of more low achievers compared with other classes. Another problem of Class B was that the two high achievers whom the researcher chose as the group leaders could not take control of their groups because of two reasons. First, the low achievers were not willing to learn English; they were not 33.

(46) willing to cooperate with the leaders to complete any tasks which they did not have any interests in. Second, some of the group leaders did not have good relationships with the other students, so group members did not want to cooperate with the leaders. This situation led to the failure of some presentation tasks. These two major problems: the absence of three students, more low achievers and poor leaderships of some group leaders made Class B difficult to implement the IWB instructional plan and complete the presentations. Below is the Timeline of Class B Grade 7th. Situation 政治大 The same substitute English teacher as Class A, who was not 立. effective in terms of classroom management. The students became. ‧ 國. 學. noisy, poor in classroom discipline, and could not focus in class. The researcher started teaching them English at the 8th grade as. ‧. 8th. sit. y. Nat. Class A. The researcher cooperated with the homeroom teacher to. io. er. improve their performance in English as well. However, because of the homeroom teacher’s loose way of conducting her class, the. al. n. v i n C hbetter grades compared students did not gain e n g c h i U with Class A. Yet, most of the students had better learning attitude, and they often responded to the teacher/researcher’s questions actively. 9th. More students gave up on their study and gained lower grades than they could than before. Thus, fewer students paid attention to the teacher/researcher’s instruction and only some who were active learners had responses in class. Among those students who were not interested in their studies, three of them gradually moved from 34.

(47) being late from class to completely drop out of school. The frequency of failure in doing the presentations was high in the class because the group leaders did not cooperate with their teammates well to prepare for tasks. Under the circumstance, the teacher/researcher started her IWB instructional plan.. The table below (Table 4.1) compares two focus classes, Class A and B. Table 4.1. The comparisons of the two focus classes. The atmosphere of the. 立. responded the teacher’s questions while others. ‧. engaged in their own. More high achievers. n. al. and better grades in. More low achievers and. er. io. sit. y. Nat. talks.. The difficulties in doing the IWB tasks. Some students. 學. no responses in class.. The description of the students. Class B. to be quiet and often gave. ‧ 國. class. Class A 政治大 The students were used. v ni. Ccomparison Class B h e n gwith chi U. The disagreements and. lower grades in comparison with Class A Some group leaders did. conflicts in the class. not have good leadership. caused four students to be. skills and their. absent purposely from the. relationships with the. class and the. other group members. presentations.. made some of the presentation tasks failed.. 35.