Upload
others
View
11
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Implementing ePortfolio Practice into English Speech Class
徐碧霙
Pi-Ying Hsu
Department of Applied Foreign Languages
Chaoyang University of Technology
Introduction
The use of electronic portfolios (ePortfolios) in higher education has begun to
receive increasing attention. Institutions such as the American Association of Colleges
and Universities have focused on ePortfolios in courses, programs, learning outcomes,
and student evaluation. The notable advantages of developing an ePotfolio include the
depth of students’ involvement in selection of contents (Wiedmer, 1998), and a great
amount of thinking that they apply to the contents (Holt, McAllister, & Ingram, 2001).
Additionally, researchers confirmed that the interconnectivity of artifacts across pages
in ePortfolio could promote a deeper understanding of the relationship between
standards and performance, enhancing a sense of professional efficacy (Holt, et al.,
2001; Pecheone, Pigg, Chung, & Souviney, 2005; Tucker, Stronge, & Gareis, 2003).
Electronic portfolios are applied in the educational settings for a variety of
purposes—for evaluation/assessment, for career development, and for demonstrating
1
students’ learning experience and growth over time. Some emerging research suggests
that ePortfolios can help students learn how to develop their identities as budding
professionals (Alvarez & Moxley, 2004; Schatz & Simon, 1999; Schatz, 2004). In
addition, teachers confirmed that the use of ePortfolio could help them increase their
confidence in their professional practice and an overall improved sense of personal
empowerment (Wiedmer, 1998). Yet less emphasis has been put on the implication of
ePortfolio in oral training courses.
Teaching English Speech in a university of technology has always been a
challenge. As an instructor of English Speech course, I found that many students
tended more towards a static lecture style rather than toward dynamic and active
participation. In addition, providing feedback and evaluation for a large-size class is
quite effort and time intensive. Therefore, there is a need for change in evaluation to
enhance students’ learning attitude and involve students in evaluating themselves.
This paper seeks to share the experience of implementing ePortfolio into an
English Speech class.
Literature Review
ePortfolios are widely used in today’s educational institutions to foster learning
and teaching (McGrath, 2005). Skiba (2005) defines ePortfollios as “virtal identity
2
collections (p. 246) and notes that through the collecting, reflection, and evaluating
one’s individual work, an identity emerges. According to Jafari (2004, p. 40),
ePortfolos act as “content-management system” that facilitates the process of
collecting, sharing, presenting, and reflecting learning results through a digital
medium. Yancey (2004) also indicated that an ePortfolio helps students “remediate”
themselves, allowing the them to use multimodal literacy to construct a relationship
between technology and identity. Students are able to develop into professionals “who
can make multiple connections and who create depth through multiplicity and
elaboration…who can work in visual and verbal and aural modalities…” (p. 751).
The use of ePortfolios in higher education has been helpful to career
development (Greenberg, 2004; Heath, 2002). Increasing research shows that the
application of ePortfolios is a successful way to enhance learning experiences
(Martin-Kniep, Cunningham, & Feige, 1998; Wolf & Dietz, 1998), and evaluate
student learning and curricular assessment (Ramey & Hay, 2003; Ring & Foti, 2003).
Specifically, ePortfolios are viewed as useful in promoting reflective practice among
pre-service teachers (Avraamidou & Zembal-Saul, 2003). The literature also indicates
that ePortfolios are valuable for developing teaching skills (Beck, Livne, & Bear,
2005; Hartmann, 2003; Klenowski, 2000). One of the participating teachers in
Wiedmer’s (1998) study commented on the role of ePortfolio as an integral and
3
reflective method to enhance her professional growth:
Because of the ePortfolio, I reflect upon everything I do in the classroom. I
frequently go in and change, update and add better examples. It makes me a
better teacher. My mentor is now starting to collect items for an ePortfolio. I can
see through my mentoring logs how much we talk about new materials and
strategies and how these tie to standards and, of course, how students learn. It
adds to my professionalism as a teacher. (p. 588)
ePortfolios are regarded as complementary approaches for reviewing students’
language development and academic progress. As reported in Barootchi and
Keshavarz (2002), the ePortfolio assessment was received positively by the EFL
learners in this study and contributed to students’ achievement. It is concluded that
ePortfolio assessment is a promising teaching tool for teachers in EFL classes and can
provide the ongoing evaluation of students’ growth needed for career development.
In conclusion, an ePortfolio is considered as a reflection of an individual’s work,
efforts, and progress. It might be the best means to collect a sampling of the depth of
students’ learning outcomes and express students’ learning attitudes, experiences, and
accomplishments.
Chaoyang University of Technology created ePortfolio--an interactive
4
environment where students' learning progress can be recorded electronically. The
goals for the introduction of ePortfolios and the implementation into the curriculum
are to support inquiry-based teaching and learning, aid critical study phases, and
enhance students’ employability (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. Chaoyang University of Technology LMS/My ePortfolio
Interface.
The purpose of this current study was to investigate whether ePortfoio practice
contributes to EFL college students’ feelings of responsibility for monitoring their
own learning progress in English Speech class.
5
Method
Fifty-six junior English majors enrolled in an English Speech courses were
recruited to participate in this study. The participants’ ages ranged from 19 to 23 years
old. None of the participants had received intensive English presentation training
before this study. In addition, these participants reported no experience of using
ePortfolio in learning activities.
The study was conducted in an English Speech classes offered in a university at
the central Taiwan. English Speech was a 3-credit required course and it met during
the junior year twice a week for 18 weeks in the semester.
Throughout the semester, students received instruction of delivering English
speech, and practiced four types of speech (informative, persuasive, entertainment,
and impromptu). These students were also trained in reflecting their own speech
performance based on the Toastmaster International English Speech contest
evaluation form (See Table 1). The criteria include speech development, effectiveness,
speech value, body languages, voice, manner, appropriateness, and correctness.
6
Table 1
Evaluation criteria for English Speech
Graded Items Description
Introduction
-Begin with effective attention-getter
-Preview body of speech
Content
-Main points clear, use appropriate
organizational pattern
-Organization of facts, examples
-Suitability of purpose
-Cite sources
-Grammar
-Vocabulary
Voice Quality
-Volume
-Range of voice (intonation)
-Pitch
7
-Rate
-Pronunciation/Enunciation
Body Language
-Gestures
-Posture
Eye Contact & Dealing with Visual
Aids
-Maintain eye contact with audience
-Use visual aids effectively
Conclusion
-Signal speech ending
-Summarize and reinforce thesis/main points
-Close with memorable statement
During the orientation session, the researcher explained her expectations and
criteria for being a successful speaker to students. The students realized that the
ePortfoio evaluation was integral part of the learning process in this class. In the fifth
week of the semester, for the first time, students were asked to deliver a 2-minute
short speech of introduction/welcome of a guest speaker (or a performer). Presenters
8
should (a) introduce the situation to which they are presenting the speaker; (b)
explicitly mention the speaker by name as well as his/her title and brief background,
mentioning how pleased they are that (s)he is here; (c) review briefly what the
audience is expected to gain from the forthcoming presentation; and (d) then present
the speaker. With this assignment, gestures and controlled movement to, from and on
the podium platform enter as performance requirements.
Students and the instructor listened to the presentation and evaluated the
presenter’s performance using the English Speech evaluation form. Following the
presentation, oral feedback and comments were provided during the discussion
session. The evaluation focused on the introduction, content, language use, voice
quality, and suggestions on visual aids, gestures/postures, eye contact, facial
expressions. The main purpose of the training sessions was to familiarize the students
with the criteria and procedures of self-reflection. Each of the training sessions was
videotaped and students could review the video clips on line (See Figure 2).
9
Figure 2. Students’ On-line Video Clips.
In addition to the first Welcome Speech as an orientation project, each participant
completed a group presentation, an informative speech, a persuasive speech, an
Entertainment speech, and an impromptu speech. Throughout the semester, the
instructor served as a guide/advisor, meeting with each individual student to discuss
the ePortfolio development progress.
At the end of the course, each student in English Speech completed the ePortfolio
of her or his work across the entire semester (See Figure 3). The following items were
included in the ePortfolio:
10
• Student’s picture
• Personal Data Form
• Precourse Self-Evaluation Form
• Grade Record Form
• Consultation Record Form
• Group Presentation Outline
• Individual Speech (final outline/ self-evaluation form/peer evaluation
form/instructor evaluation form/reflection paper)
• Speech #1—Introductory/Welcome Speech (instructor evaluation form)
• Speech #2--Informative Speech (final outline/self-evaluation form/instructor
evaluation form/reflection paper)
• Speech #3—Impromptu Speech (self-evaluation form/instructor evaluation
form)
• Speech #4--Persuasive Speech (final outline/self-evaluation form/instructor
evaluation form/reflection paper)
• PPT files of English speeches
• Video Clips of English speeches in class
11
Figure 3. ePortfolio Interface.
By the end of the semester, a learning questionnaire was applied to investigate
the students’ attitude towards their ePortfolio learning experiences in English Speech
class. The participants answered the question items based on which best described
their opinions related to learning in English Speech class.
Results
A t-test was conducted on the result of the questionnaire which was designed to
investigate the students’ attitude towards their learning process before and after the
ePortfolio practice in English Speech class. Table 1 showed that the mean for the
posttest (M=6.50, SD= 1.92) was significantly greater than the mean for the pretest
12
(M=4.67, SD= 1.38), t(55)=2.83, p=.008. The results indicate that the ePortfolio
practice enhances students’ sense of responsibility for monitoring their own learning
progress in English Speech class and they were aware of their progress in English
presentation skills (See Figure 4).
Table 1
t-test results for the students’ attitude toward their learning progress in English
Speech class
Mean N SD t p
Pretest 4.67 56 1.38
2.83 .008
Posttest 6.50 56 1.92
13
Figure 4. Self-reflection paper on ePortfolio.
Discussion
This study aimed to examine whether ePortfoio practice contributes to EFL
college students’ feelings of responsibility for monitoring their own learning progress
in English Speech class. This study provides preliminary evidence that the learning
assessment can be supplemented with ePortfolio practice in the classroom setting. It is
concluded that the ePortfoio practice, integrating into learning in class, offers the
students an opportunity to monitor the learning progress and reflect on their learning
experiences. Students have positive attitude towards their learning and great sense of
14
responsibility of being an active learner.
The researcher finds the other interesting conclusion concerning the educational
implication. When students are invited to get involved in ePortfolio development
progress, they are aware that they are in charge of their own learning progress and
become active and self-regulated learners in the learning process. Additionally,
students feel successful and highly-motivated when they receive on-line feedback
from peers because it helps them monitor their improvement on tasks.
In view of the narrow range of the participants, the results of this current study
need to be generalized with caution. Further studies can be conducted recruiting a
wide range of participants in a variety of levels of English ability.
15
References
Alvarez, A. R., & Moxley, D. P. (2004). The student portfolio in social work education.
Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 2 (1/2), 87-104.
Avraamidou, L., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Exploring the influence of Web-based
portfolio development on learning to teach elementary science. Journal of
Technology and Teacher Education, 11(3), 415-441.
Barootchi, N., & Keshavarz, M. H. (2002). Assessment of achievement through portfolios
and teacher-made tests. Educational Research, 44(3), 279-288.
Beck, R. J., Livne, N. L., & Bears, S. L. (2005). Teachers’ self-assessment of the effects
of formative and summative electronic portfolios on professional development.
European Journal of Teacher Education, 28(3), 221-244.
Greenberg, G. (2004). The digital convergence: Extending the portfolio model.
EDUCAUSE Review, 39 (4), 28.
Hartmann, C. (2003). Renditions of professional mathematics teaching; A study of
prospective mathematics teachers’ growth through the creation of professional
portfolios. Unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin—Madison, WI.
UMI Proquest Publication No. AAT 3101437.
Heath, M. (2002). Electronic portfolios for reflective self-assessment. Teacher Librarian,
16
30 (1), 19-23.
Jafari, A (2004). The “sticky” ePortfolios system: Tackling challenges and identifying
attributes. EDUCAUSE Review, 39(4), 38.
Klenowski, V. (2000). Portfolios: Promoting teaching. Assessment in Education, 7(2),
215-236.
Martin-Kniep, G. O., Cunningham, D., & Feige, D. M. (1998). Why am I doing this?
Purposeful teaching through portfolio assessment. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
McGrath, O. G. (2005). Gauging adoptability: A case study of e-portfolio template
development. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM SIGUCCS conference on User
services SIGUCCS.
Pecheone, R. L., Pigg, M. J., Chung, R. R., & Souviney, R. J. (2005). Performance
assessment and electronic portfolios: Their effects on teacher learning and
education. Clearing House, 78 (4), 164-176.
Ramey, S. L., & Hay, M. L. (2003). Using electronic portfolios to measure student
achievement and assess curricular integrity. Nurse Education, 28(1), 31-36.
Ring, G. L., & Foti, S. L. (2003). Addressing standards at the program level with
electronic portfolios. TechTrends, 47(2), 28.
Schatz, M. S. (2004). Using portfolios: Integrating learning and promoting for social
work students. Advances in Social Work, 5(1), 105-123.
17
18
Schatz, M. S., & Simon, S. (1999). The portfolio approach for generalist social work
practice: A successful tool for students in field education. Journal of
Baccalaureate Social Work, 5(1), 99-107.
Skiab, D. J. (2005). E-Portfolios, webfollio, and e-dentity: Promises and challenges.
Nursing Education Perspectives, 26(4), 246-247.
Tucker, P. D., Stronge, J. H., & Gareis, C. R. (2003). The efficacy of portfolios for
teacher evaluation and professional development: Do they make a difference?
Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(5), 572-602.
Wiedmer, T. L. (1998). Digital portfolios: Capturing and demonstrating skills and level of
performance. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 586-589.
Yancey, K. B. (2004). Postmodernism, palimpsest, and portfolios: Theoretical issues in
the presentation of student work. College Composition and Communication, 55(4),
738-761.