The Language Teacher
04 - 2003
Value-Adding with a Class Mailing List
Fiona Webster
Nagoya University
The integration of technology into the language classroom is an ongoing challenge for educators, not least because of the dazzling array of options available. EFL learners can now find themselves keypals, use interactive multimedia for private and classroom learning and learn online--to name just a few options. This study was undertaken to assess the value of a class mailing list (ML) established for tertiary engineering students at a public university. An ML comprises a group of people who registered with a central ML address, administered by the teacher in this instance. Any emails sent to the ML are automatically sent to all registered participants.
This ML was established in order to add value to a regular 90 minute per week English communication class. The small amount of time allotted to language study, in addition to the large class size, meant the researcher felt it necessary to provide extra opportunities for learners to communicate in and increase their exposure to English. In addition, because the focus of the class was business English and effective emailing skills are essential for modern international business, it was thought an ML might provide learners opportunities for guided practice.
The project endeavoured to measure the success of this ML as evidenced by learner participation and feedback. An action research approach was adopted, as defined by Nunan (1992): a descriptive study of a particular group of learners, supported by data and interpretation, carried out by a practitioner investigating aspects of his/her own context and situation. The desired outcome was to assess and improve the current system (as further defined by Kemmis and McTaggart, in Nunan, 1992). The research question was:
Did the mailing list increase the learners' motivation in and satisfaction with their English studies?
Research on Learner Motivation
Motivation is undoubtedly an extremely important factor in language acquisition, and a complex one requiring special attention in EFL contexts where learners do not have plentiful exposure to the target language (Dornyei, 1998). An excellent study on motivation in the Japanese context (Kimura, Nakata, & Okumura, 2001) stresses the importance of identifying what type of motivation is being investigated. According to Deci and Ryan, intrinsic motivation is "the desire to engage in activities in anticipation of internally rewarding consequences such as feelings of competence and self-determination" (Deci & Ryan, in Kimura, et al., 2001, p.49). At the other end of the continuum is extrinsic motivation, or a person's desire to learn a language in order to receive a reward from external sources (ibid.). Because the Japanese EFL context is largely teacher-centred, teacher-specific motivation is another important domain in the Japanese context, as are activity-specific and anxiety-specific domains of motivation, identified by Kimura (1999).
Research on Email and Mailing Lists
There is much support in the literature for the use of email to facilitate language learning (Belisle, 1996; Rankin, 1997; Warschauer, 1995). Benefits range from providing learners with an additional context for discussion about topics from class (Gonglewski, Melon & Brant, 2001), to allowing for better class participation and encouraging shyer students to participate in the electronic context (in Gonglewski et al., 2001). All these benefits should, however, be tempered with the reminder that email and MLs are only as good as the technology which supports them, and that one of the primary obligations of the e-teacher is to ensure learners have adequate access (Bauman, 1998).
This study was initially inspired by a report on the success of using eGroups for Japanese university classes (Shibuya, 2002), which explained the various features of Yahoo eGroups. Further research claims that MLs can attend to the need in email exchange for a facilitator to be present (i.e. the teacher) in order to coordinate discussion threads and provide motivation for learners to continue to use the ML: "While email is a very stimulating and dynamic means of communication you have to ensure that you keep your students highly motivated throughout" (Nagel, 1999, p.6).
In addition, MLs can provide opportunities for authentic communication in the target language with familiar interlocutors, providing a first step to assist learners with preparing for face-to-face classroom discussions. It offers the dual benefits of decelerated conversation, as well as the opportunity for learners to formulate their thoughts, edit and re-draft, much like the writing process (Van Handle & Corl, 1998, in Gonglewski et al., 2001). A further benefit is related to gender --something not discernible with email communication. MLs can thus provide a forum for free and uninhibited communication where users may remain anonymous and gender-free if they so choose (Rossetti, 1998).
Methodology
Subjects
Data for this study was collected at Nagoya University over the spring semester, 2002. Table 1 gives an overview of the subjects and setting. When asked to self-assess their English proficiency, 65% of subjects claimed to be elementary, and 35% considered themselves intermediate learners--none identified themselves as advanced learners. 82% of the learners had spent either no time or less than a week in an English-speaking country, five students had spent between one week and one month, and two learners had spent up to two and more than three months respectively.
Table 1: ML class participants and context
No. of learners | Av. age (yrs) | Major | Nationality | Length of English study (yrs) | Lesson duration and frequency | Course objective |
38 (5F/ 33M) | 18.51 | Engineering | 35 Japanese 1 Thai 1 Korean | Av: 6.7 Min: 6 Max: 12 | 90 mins. weekly | Business English |
Research instrument
A survey (see Appendix A) was designed to measure motivation associated with the use of the ML in class. Similar to the study by Kimura et al. (2001), the following motivational components were addressed: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, situation specific motivation, teacher specific motivation and activity specific motivation.
In addition, subjects also completed the University's student evaluation form, which is administered across the campus to measure student satisfaction with academic programs. This questionnaire is given at the end of every semester to all students, and results are forwarded to teachers for program evaluation purposes. An English translation of survey items is provided at Appendix B. The ML survey was designed in English then translated into Japanese. Both surveys have a 5-point Likert scale of responses ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5), while the ML survey also provides space for comments.
Procedure
The ML was set up by University administration early in the spring semester of 2002. Learners were given written instructions in English on how to register from their PCs or mobile phones. A record was kept of when each student joined and messages to the ML were filed in an Outlook folder. Each lesson the researcher urged learners to join, and a discussion question linked in some way to the previous lesson was posted onto the ML each week. For example, after completing a topic on corporate sponsorship in class, the following question was posted to the ML:
"What do you think about tobacco and alcohol companies sponsoring the World Cup Soccer?"
Since responses were slow at first, the researcher urged learners to contribute, suggesting they choose a "net-name" if they felt shy about posting their own opinions. The surveys were completed in the final class of semester (one learner was absent), just prior to summer break. The results were then entered onto an Excel worksheet and analysed for summary statistics. End of term results were compared with a control group of first year engineering students, a class to which the researcher had attempted to teach the same material in the same way as the ML group. The main difference was the control group did not participate in an ML.
Results and Discussion
Table 2 illustrates the learners' registration to the ML. Initial comments to the ML included enthusiasm for this new mode of communication ("I'm NOT good at speaking English. But I want to be able to use this language [email] as a communication method. I'll do my best!"). Four students did not opt to join the ML, and some of the survey feedback indicated difficulty with technological aspects, or inability to follow the instructions given in English about how to join. By the end of semester, 58 learner messages had been sent to the ML in reply to 10 discussion questions posted by the researcher.
Table 2: Learners' sign-up rate
Mailing list began | # May registrations | # June registrations | # July registrations |
15 May 2002 | 25 | 11 | 2 |
The results for each ML survey item are shown in Tables 3-7 (strongly agree is 1, strongly disagree is 5). Within the tables, where appropriate, the survey items are ranked in ascending order from those which respondents agreed with most to those they agreed with least.
Table 3 shows learners felt topics were generally interesting and well-linked to classroom material, but there is room for improvement. Topics which raised the most number of responses included a discussion on study conditions at this university, which tied in with a unit of work covered in class on employment conditions in various countries. Living abroad was also a discussion topic which worked well--several learners emailed their country preferences and reasons why should they be transferred overseas in a future job. Thirdly, because the World Cup was in full swing, some interest was generated around the topics of sport sponsorship and idolization of sports stars (e.g. Ichiro and Nakata).
Table 3: Learners' responses to intrinsic motivation survey items
Mean | ||
H | The topics were interesting. | 2.703 |
I | The topics linked well to our English classes. | 2.784 |
F | I enjoyed reading the mailing list messages. | 3.108 |
J | The mailing list helped me improve English. | 3.378 |
G | I enjoyed sending messages to the mailing list. | 3.514 |
L | The mailing list encouraged me to study English harder. | 3.703 |
Overall, however, the response to weekly discussion questions was lower than expected. As suggested in Gonglewski et al. (2001) perhaps the discussion question could tie in with the following week's class rather than reflecting on the previous week's topic, to act more as a first step for ensuing classroom discussions. There is a need for the instructor to raise learners' awareness about how use of the ML may improve their emailing, and therefore writing and conversation skills--and to focus on the important distinction that emails in this context are a medium of real communication in the target language. Item G's skew towards the "disagree" end of the continuum could be explained by the concern raised by some learners that they felt shy about posting their replies to the ML under their own name. Again, when setting up the ML, teachers can encourage learners to use "net-names" to avoid this problem. Alternatively, since negative responses to Items F and G are not explained by anxiety factors (see Table 6), there may be other explanations such as the comment "I didn't have enough time to send messages". The use of mobile phones to receive and send messages may have had a detrimental effect on the learners' participation rate--perhaps some messages sent by the researcher were physically too long to be seen on the screen at one time, making them all the more difficult to understand. Further investigation into this area would be beneficial.
The two items in Table 4 scored quite negatively and the motivation for joining the ML was not brought to light. Perhaps an item such as "I joined the ML because I wanted to practice emailing skills", or an open-ended question, may have shed more light on learners' extrinsic motivation.
Table 4: Learners' responses to extrinsic motivation survey items
Mean | ||
N | I joined the mailing list because I wanted to get to know my teacher and classmates better. | 3.622 |
K | The mailing list made me feel friendlier towards my classmates. | 4.216 |
It is pleasing to see in Table 5 that learners responded negatively to item M--their joining the ML was therefore more of a voluntary nature, as stressed when introducing the concept to the group.
Table 5: Learners' responses to the teacher specific motivation survey item
Mean | ||
M | I joined the mailing list because I thought the teacher would give me a better mark. | 3.729 |
Table 6 shows anxiety does not appear a major problem hampering language learning with this particular experimental group. This may point to a nurturing and accepting environment within the group--a positive context for language learning.
Table 6: Situation specific motivation (anxiety)
Mean | ||
O | I felt nervous about writing my opinions on the mailing list. | 3.513 |
P | I felt nervous that my classmates would think I was not good at English. | 3.622 |
Q | I felt nervous that my teacher would think my English was poor. | 3.649 |
The results in the final survey item (Table 7) indicate a willingness to participate in another ML--unfortunately class groups rarely remain the same from one semester to another, however it has given this researcher the impetus to set up new MLs for current classes. Comments from learners, such as "I think mailing is a good idea. Because we have no chance to use English", and a request to keep the ML open during the summer vacation, also provided fuel for offering MLs to future classes. When illustrated graphically (see Figure 1) there remains the challenge to construct this activity to satisfy the learning preferences for the large group of "neutral" to "strongly disagree" responses. Some suggestions are to amend the registration process, improve discussion topics, emphasise that email can be anonymous, and offer trouble-shooting for learners finding difficulty accessing the ML. Further, rather than retrospective discussion topics, questions concerning the following week's theme could be introduced by way of preparation for the next lesson. This may also encourage pre-reading by learners, another useful strategy for improving language proficiency.
Table 7: Activity specific motivation
Mean | ||
R | In my next semester's English class I would like to join a mailing list again. | 2.568 |
Comparison to control group
The University course evaluation data for the ML (Tuesday) group compared to the control group (n=36) are illustrated in Figure 2. There are no noticeable trends in the data--some items scored more positively with the ML group, while others scored more positively with the non-ML (Thursday) group. For example, the ML class responded positively to the item regarding the teacher's enthusiasm (mean 1.5, with 1=strongly agree, 5=strongly disagree) and also the usefulness of the class for the learners' future (mean 2.3), when compared to the non-ML group. However, the non-ML group recorded almost the same satisfaction with the course (2.5) as the ML group (2.52). The question then arises: Would learner satisfaction have been the same for the Tuesday ML group even if the learners had not participated in the ML?
Conclusion
The results, while not overwhelmingly in favour of mailing lists as a means of increasing learners' motivation and success in their English studies and satisfaction with this particular program, do provide sufficient impetus to continue with amendments and further refinements for use with future classes. There are various limitations to this study, including the relatively small sample size, and some problems with the survey instrument. Item N, for example, should really have been split into two items, as wanting to get to know one's teacher as opposed to one's classmates may have elicited rather different responses. Once split, the teacher-based item should then have been grouped under the "Teacher-specific motivation" category. Further, there is arguably a Catch-22 situation regarding the effectiveness of ML with large classes, since their very size limits interactivity of in-class tasks, so it follows that without that classroom bonding and familiarity amongst peers, learners may be less inclined to take that extra step of emailing to the class ML because of the fear of loss of face. Hardware is also an issue--several students read their email via their mobile phones. Length of message should therefore be strictly limited to the appropriate numbers of characters so that the English message makes sense on a mobile phone display panel. More investigation of user interface at the set-up stage of the project may have improved learner accessibility to the ML.
As the underlying outcome of action research is using data-driven critical reflection to bring about change in the classroom (Farrell, 2001), data from this project suggest the following changes to use of a class ML in the educational program.
Areas requiring most attention appear to relate to the actual nuts and bolts of introducing the ML idea to a group of learners. Firstly, the registration procedure requires simple and easily-- understood instructions, preferably with Japanese language assistance if necessary. This may explain the more favourable outcomes reported by Shibuya (2002) with a similar group of learners.
Secondly, learners should be made aware of the importance of effective email skills in the current world. The particular genre of email English is a dynamic field, so by participating in a class ML such skills can be honed and the register used in messages by the class teacher can provide suitable modeling for navigating this genre. Learners also need regular encouragement and feedback from the teacher (Zamel, in Lee, 1998).
Thirdly, in large classes where there is very little opportunity for authentic exchange of ideas in English, the ML can provide extra time and (cyber)space for learners to express their opinions--they should be encouraged to participate anonymously if necessary. This is an important feature for those classes which only meet once or twice a week--a class ML can provide learners with more exposure to authentic communicative texts.
Finally the ML can provide a teacher with extra contact with individual learners--something often difficult to achieve with a large class. The depth and breadth of ML discussion on various topics can be analysed and used to gauge learners' interests and better plan lesson activities and material. Email can supply the teacher with information, contact and stimulation, thus providing for "more effective and enjoyable teaching situations" (Lee, 1998, p2). Possible areas for further investigation include analysis of the linguistic structure of learner messages and comparisons of different email systems--for example keypals versus in-class mailing lists. It would also be interesting to analyse gender differences in emailing patterns.
The genre of email is a text-type that is already gaining attention from educators and materials publishers alike. Having learners hone their skills in this area will undoubtedly improve their prospects for employment in the future. Mailing lists, if introduced and used wisely, are one possible way to practise and improve learners' email skills, along with providing an opportunity for extra out-of-class time and space to communicate in English and increase overall learner motivation.
Acknowledgements
I would not have been able to carry out this research without the generous assistance of two colleagues--Tsutomu Ohna and Naohiro Takizawa--who organized the initial setting up of the mailing list and associated administrative details. I also owe my gratitude to Miki Watanabe for assistance with translations, and to the two TLT reviewers for their helpful advice at the editing stage.
References
Bauman, J. (1998). Using email with your students. The Language Teacher 22(2): 1-5. [Online]. Available: langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/old_tlt/98/feb/bauman.html.
Belisle, R. (1996). Email activities in the ESL writing class. The Internet TESL Journal, II(12), 1-5.[Online] Available: iteslj.org/Articles/belisle-Email.html.
Dornyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31(3), 117-135.
Farrell, T. (2001). Exploring teaching in the PAC Journal. PAC Journal, 1(1): 1-5.
Gonglewski, M., Meloni, C., & Brant, J. (2001). "Using email in foreign language teaching: Rationale and suggestions." The Internet TESL Journal, VII(3), 1-7. [Online]. Available: iteslj.org/Techniques/Meloni-Email.html.
Kimura, Y. (1999). Gaikokugo gakusyuu ni okeru doukizuke [Foreign language learning motivation]. Naruto English Studies, 12 & 13, 1-12.
Kimura, Y., Nakata, Y., & Okumura, T. (2001). Language learning motivation of EFL learners in Japan: A cross-sectional analysis of various learning milieus. JALT Journal, 23(1), 47-68.
Lee, E. (1998). Using email in EFL writing classes. The Internet TESL Journal, IV(11), 1-4. [Online]. Available: iteslj.org/Techniques/Meloni-Email.html.
Nagel, P. (1999). Email in the virtual ESL/EFL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, V(7), 1-8. [Online]. Available: iteslj.org/Articles/Nagel-Email.html.
Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rankin, W. (1997). Increasing the communicative competence of foreign language students through the FL chatroom. Foreign Language Annals, 30(4), 542-546.
Shibuya, A. (2002). Utilising eGroup for Japanese students. The Language Teacher, 26(3), 21-22.
Rossetti, P. (1998). Gender differences in Email communication. The Internet TESL Journal, IV(7), 1-5. [Online]. Available: iteslj.org/Articles/Rossetti-GenderDif.html.
Warschauer, M. (1995). Email for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Appendices A & B
Viewable in PDF form:
Click this file link to download [webster_app.pdf]
All materials on this site are copyright © by JALT and their respective authors.
For more information on JALT, visit the JALT National Website