THE USE OF ELECTRONIC PORTFOLIOS IN THE EFL WRITING CLASS : EFFECTS AND STUDENT ATTITUDES

Authors

  • Raveewan Wanchid Department of Languages King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok

Keywords:

electronic portfolios, writing instruction, writing achievement

Abstract

The objectives of the study were 1) to investigate the effect of the use of electronic portfolios on the students’ writing achievement, 2) to compare the effect of levels of general English proficiency (high, moderate, and low) in the use of electronic portfolios on the students’ writing achievement, and 3) to survey the students’ attitudes toward the use of electronic portfolios in the writing class. The study was conducted by using a single group, pretestposttest design. The use of electronic portfolios and levels of general English proficiency were the independent variables, whereas the students’ writing achievement score was the dependent variable. In total, 30 second-year engineering students at King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok (KMUTNB) were randomly selected and assigned. Google’s free weblog website (located at www.blogger.com) was used as a tool for creating and developing the students’ personal electronic portfolios. The concept of electronic portfolios, the purposes, the contents, and the criteria used for assessment were discussed with the students at the beginning of the course. A writing achievement test and a close-ended questionnaire were used for the quantitative data collection, while the qualitative data were gathered from the open-ended questions and interview. Descriptive statistics, t-test, and one-way ANOVA were employed for the data analysis. The findings were as follows: 1) on average, the students’ writing score after the use of electronic portfolios was significantly higher than their pre-test score (p=0.05); 2) on average, the levels of general English proficiency had a significant effect on the students’ writing achievement; and 3) the students had highly positive attitudes toward the use of electronic portfolios in the writing course.

References

Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ekbatani, G. and Pierson, H. (2000). Learner-directed assessment in ESL. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Tuksinvarajarn, A. and Watson, Todd, R. (2009). The e-pet: Enhancing motivation in e-portfolios. English Teaching Forum. 1, 22-31.

Love, D., McKean, G. and Gathercoalm, P. (2004). Portfolios to webfolios and beyond: Levels of maturation. Educause Quarterly. 27 (2), 24–37.

Saad, R. and Noor, A. (2007). Malaysian university students’ perceptions on the use of portfolio as an alternative tool in an ESL writing classroom. Masalah Pendidikan. 30(2), 49-64.

Barrett, H. (2006). Using electronic portfolios for classroom assessment. Connected Newsletter. 14(2), 4- 6.

Tillema, H. H. (1998). Design and validity of a portfolio instrument for professional training. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 24(3), 263-278.

Blake, I. I. Bachman, M.K. Frys, P. Holbert, T., Ivan, and P. Sellitto. 1995. A portfolio-based assessment model for teachers: Encouraging professional growth. NASSP Bulletin. 79(573), 37-46.

Paulson, F.L., Paulson, P.R.& Meyer, C.A. (1991) “What Makes a Portfolio a Portfolio?” Educational Leadership. 58(5),60-63.

Valeri-Gold, M., I. R. Olson and M.P. Deming. 1991. Portfolios: Collaborative authentic assessment opportunities for college developmental learners. Journal of Reading. 35(4), 298-305.

Winograd, P. (1995). Putting authentic assessment to work in your classroom. Torrance, CA: The Education Centre.

Wanchid, R. (2009). “How to Implement the E-portfolios in a Writing Class” The Journal of Faculty of Applied Arts, King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, 2 (2), 2–13.

Goodson, Todd F. (2007). Electronic portfolio. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 50 (6), 432-96.

Liu, J., and Sadler, R.W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. English for Academic Purposes. 2, 193-227.

Tuzi, F. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computer and Composition. 21, 217-235.

Al, Kahtani, S. (1999). Electronic portfolios in ESL writing: An alternative approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 12(3), 261-68.

Plough, C.(2008). Web 2.0 Tools Motivate Student Creativity [online]. Retrieved March, 2008. Available at http://www.techlearning.com/showArticle.php?articleID=196605050

Panitchapakdi, S. (1998). "Keynote Speech." The 1998 International Symposium on "The Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court as a Model for IPRs Enforcement for the 21st Century" in Bangkok on 22 January 1998.

Prapphal, K. (2003). English proficiency of Thai learners and directions of English teaching and learning in Thailand. Journal of English Studies. 1(1), 6-12.

Jerdan, C.C. (1993). Characteristics of low and high achieving students in a selective academic setting. [online]. Abstract from: ProQuest File:Dissertation Abstracts Item : 9327437.

Swatevacharkul, R. (2006). The effects of degrees of learner independence through Web-based instruction and levels of general English proficiency on English reading comprehension ability of second year undergraduate learners. Doctoral Dissertation, English as an International Language, Chulalongkorn University.

Archibald, A. (2004). Writing in a second language [On-line]. Retrieved November, 2006. Available at http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/goodpractice.aspx?resourceid=2175

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1995). A narrative perspective on the development of the tense/aspect system in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 17( 2), 263-91.

Sasaki, M. and Hirose, K. (1996). Explanatory variables for EFL students’ expository writing. Language Learning. 46, 74-137.

Wongtip, W. (1998). Relationship among English language knowledge, Thai language expository writing knowledge and English language expository writing ability of English major students in higher education institution, Bangkok Metropolis. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Pennington, M. C. & So. S.(1993). Comparing writing process and product across two languages: A study of 6 Singaporean university student writers. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2(1), 41-63.

Jansom, S. (2006). The effects of error treatments and students’ language abilities on the usage of English tenses through the use of computer-assisted language learning. Doctoral Dissertation, English as an International Language, Chulalongkorn University.

Thongrin, S. (2002). E-mail peer response in collectivist Thai culture: Task, social and cultural dimensions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Wanchid R. (2007). The effects of types of peer feedback ad levels of general English proficiency on writing achievement of KMITNB students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Fraenkel, J.R. and Wallen, E.N. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw Hill.

Downloads

Published

2020-08-11

How to Cite

Wanchid, R. (2020). THE USE OF ELECTRONIC PORTFOLIOS IN THE EFL WRITING CLASS : EFFECTS AND STUDENT ATTITUDES. SUTHIPARITHAT JOURNAL, 25(76), 167–186. retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/DPUSuthiparithatJournal/article/view/245815

Issue

Section

Research Articles