Local Area Networks: Online Communication in the Japanese EFL Classroom

Writer(s): 
Phillip Markley and John Herbert, Ritsumeikan University

Over the past twenty years, computers have been used with ESL/EFL students in a number of ways, mostly involving reading, grammar, or word processing software. Since the early 1990s, networks have been used to access the Internet in the form of electronic mail, discussion lists, and multiple object oriented interfaces (MOOs), a system by which Internet users converse and move around a virtual world (Davies, Shield, & Weininger, 1998). More recently, local area networks (LANs) have been used to link all the computers in a classroom without accessing the World Wide Web (WWW). With LANs, students are able to take part in real-time conferences, in which all participants are logged onto a closed network at the same time. The purpose of this paper is to discuss four pedagogic advantages of using LANs in Japanese EFL classrooms: (1) students can actively take part in discussions at their own pace; (2) large numbers of students can communicate at the same time; (3) students use language in meaningful ways; and (4) LANs can be used flexibly in a number of different configurations.

Overview

Computer-assisted classroom communication (CACC) has been used in foreign language programs in the United States for several years now. A widely used software program is the Interchange application of the Daedalus Integrated Writing Environment, which runs on Macintoshes or PC-compatibles connected to a LAN (Slatin, 1998). Details on cost, memory requirements, and installation procedures are available at the Daedalus website: <http://www.daedalus.com/info/diwe/techspec.html>.

At our university, 40 computers have been linked together to form a network using the Daedalus software. Interchange has been used in first-year English writing-related classes at our university since April 1997 with high level students (with TOEFL scores from 480-530), low-level classes (with TOEFL scores between 400 and 450), and returnee students who have spent time overseas (with TOEFL scores between 480 and 640). Students do not need extensive computer skills. They simply need to know how to type, and how to use a scroll bar and a mouse.

The CACC in the Classroom

How does Interchange work? Students in the computer laboratory log onto the Daedalus program by typing in their names and a password and choosing the Interchange application in the "message" menu. The procedure for both receiving and sending messages is simple: The screen is split horizontally into two windows, a bottom window and a top window. Students type their contributions in the bottom window and click the "send" button. Messages appear in the top window in the order they were sent, with the sender's name at the head of each message. Students can use the scroll bar to read all the messages in a session at their own pace. Table 1 is an example of what appears in the top window of the screen, here a response to a reading passage entitled "Private Space" (Hall, 1991), which compares the American and German sense of space. These five sample entries by advanced students (their names have been abbreviated) and the instructor's prompt are replicated here exactly as written.

 


Table 1: Five sample entries

 

Teacher: Describe the basic differences between the German and American concepts of space.

  1. KK: German tend to like more spaces as communicating with people. On the other hand, Americans like closer spaces.
  2. RN: Space means more important to the German than to American. For example, for most of times the German keep their doors closing whereas American keep thier doos opening.
  3. KN: German tend to secure private space. American are more open about space.
  4. YY: Private space is more important for Americans than for Germans
  5. YU: In America, privacy is granted whether it is actually present or not. They think that the space should be shared. On the other hand, in German, people are highly respect others privacy, and they sense their own space an extension of the ego.

 

Four Advantages of Using LANs

Working pace

First, all students can work at their own pace: they can read what others have written, formulate an answer in the editing window, and send it when they feel confident to do so. While computer conferencing is not the same as oral discussions, the system allows even reticent students to participate, and encourages across-class participation. In a survey conducted by Bump (1990) about the use of the Interchange application in his American CACC classes, 81% of the graduate students, 84% of the seniors, and 50% of the freshmen felt that its primary advantage was that it allowed all members of the class to participate. This supports findings by Ortega (1997) that CACC tends to produce a more equally distributed discussion among the participants than a traditional oral classroom discussion (see also Beauvois, 1992; Kelm, 1992; Kern, 1995; Sullivan & Pratt, 1996; Warschauer, 1996).

Large classes

Second, the CACC using a LAN allows the whole class to take part in a computer conference at the same time. Since the entire class participates, students have a much wider audience for their views than in a face to face discussion class. A greater exchange of information and opinions results, which is particularly valuable for pre-composition writing. The implications of increased student output are great when we note Stevick's assertion (in Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1994) that productive practice in the target language promotes the transfer from second language learning to second language acquisition. Moreover, as Ortega (1997) notes, Swain's (1985) comprehensible output hypothesis predicts that language production plays a vital role in second language development.

Completed discussions which took place during the class are stored on disk so that the teacher can check to see whether all the students have participated. The teacher can then direct specific questions in the next Interchange to those did not participate. In addition, the teacher can review the discussion and see what kinds of language problems students are experiencing and address them in the next session.

Meaningful communication

The quality of thought that goes into producing meaningful communication improves, since students have a wider audience and less pressure to produce a response quickly. Therefore, they can spend more time constructing expressive sentences and monitoring their own work. Once their thoughts are organised, they communicate them to the class. Linn (in Streibel, 1986, p. 157) suggests that forcing students to restructure information into precise, systematic, logical units enhances the learning process. Furthermore, Slatin (in Markley, 1992, p. 8) stresses the importance of self-monitoring as a key component in both thinking and communicating. We have observed that students have delved deeper into issues in the CACC format than would have been possible in face-to-face discussion groups.

Table 2 presents two authentic, uncorrected examples from each of the three different levels we teach. The first excerpt is from a CACC discussion by a high level first-year English class about an assigned reading of Hair, (Malcolm X, 1991).

The second example is taken from the low-level first year English class that used the CACC approximately once every six classes, or once every three weeks. While no specific reading article had been assigned prior to this session, students had spent two previous classes completing both listening and speaking exercises on the topic of living conditions.

The third example is taken from the first-year returnees English class that used the CACC every week for one semester in a reading and writing course. The CACC was about the circumstances surrounding the death of Princess Diana, which was a current news item at the time. The question posed to the class was whether laws against paparazzi should be enacted or not and who they thought was to blame for the Princess' death. No background reading material was assigned for this discussion.

 


Table 2: Three levels of first-year English students (two examples for each level)

 

Example 1: High level

Teacher: Malcolm X believed that by straightening their hair, Black people were trying to look white. Therefore he was against any action or human mutilation which changed his appearance. So what about piercing the ears or about operations to make one's eyes look rounder?

  1. YU: I don't think Japanese who pierce the ears trying to look white. Although piercing the ears have brought from America or European countries, we are just to make ourselves pretty or good looking.
  2. MT: I think Malcom X was basicaly against changing the appearance. However, it is only myself who can decide if I change my appearrence or not. Noone has right to tell me to have an operation or not to. And the purpose of changing one's appearance is not always to look like the white.

Example 2: Low level

Teacher: What are the good and bad points about life in Japan? Think about population, land area and housing, education, employment, general way of life, etc. You can compare Japan with another country if you want to.

  1. YS: I think that good points about life in Japan is security of life compared with other countries such as America because Japan has low rate of accidents about guns and bad points is most Japanese people do not enjoy their life and they have stress about business, education system and school etc.
  2. ST: I think Japanese education system don't make children who are rich in personality. In scool, they have to act similarly wearing the same uniform. If they against the rule, they are pressed by teatures. I think their personality ought to be more respected.

Example 3: Returnees

  1. M.S.: Conclusion. I guess many people in this class are against paparazzi. Well, I don't know if I should blame paparazzi only, because the driver was drunk, too. It is easy to blame paparazzi but we should think about we could cause Lady Diana's death by our curiosity to her life. We don't need her picture when she was killed by the accident!!
  2. K.M.: I changed my mind. Now I think that the death of Princess Diana can not be blamed on the paparazzi. They were just doing their job and the Diana's death was just an accident. The paparazzi has been working to fill our curiosity. If there's a law to protect celebrities privacy, the paparazzi will not be able to make thier living.

 

Flexibility

Interchange is extremely flexible for a number of reasons. We have already seen how large numbers of students can take part in computer conferences simultaneously. However, at a certain stage, the amount of written material in the discussions can become too much for students to keep up with. This problem is easily solved by dividing students into groups and creating separate discussion forums. Alternatively, the instructor can give students a choice of two or more related topics and set up separate forums for conferencing using the subconference facility. This allows one section of the class to concentrate on one issue and another section of the class to discuss a separate or related issue. Students can move freely between the two. In addition to offering choices for discussion, subconferencing allows slower students to work at their own pace on one topic and lets faster students take part in two conferences during the same class. Students who join a subconference in progress can use the scroll bar to read the earlier entries.

Conclusion

The CACC is a flexible tool for use in the foreign language classroom which can provide an excellent learning environment for Japanese students. It allows large groups of students to have time-efficient communication in a non-threatening atmosphere, even when the class is composed of students of mixed levels. Students have the opportunity to think carefully before giving their opinions and produce meaningful language, thereby enhancing communication in the language classroom.

 

References

Beauvois, M. H. (1992). Computer-assisted classroom discussion in the foreign language classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5), 455-464.

Bump, J. (1988). Radical changes in class discussion using networked computers. Computers and the Humanities, 24, 49-65.

Davies, L. B., Shield, L., & Weininger, M. J. (1998). Godzilla can MOO, can you? MOOs for construction, collaboration and community and research. The Language Teacher, 22(2), 16-21.

Hall, E. T. (1991). Private space. In H. Knepler & M. Knepler (Eds.), Crossing cultures (pp. 402-407). New York: Macmillan.

Kelm, O. R. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second language instruction: A preliminary report. Foreign Language Annals, 25, 441-545.

Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with network computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1994). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London & New York: Longman.

Markley, P. (1992). Creating independent ESL writers & thinkers: Computer networking for composition. CAELL Journal,3(2), 6-12.

Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning and Technology,1(1), 82-93.

Slatin, J. (1998). The computer writing and research lab: A brief institutional history. In J. Swaffar, S. Romano, P. Markley & K. Arens (Eds.), Language learning online: Theory and practice in the ESL and L2 computer classroom (pp. 19-38). Austin, TX: Labyrinth.

Streibel, M. J. (1986). A critical analysis of the use of computers in education. Educational Communications and Technology, 34(3), 137-161.

Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29, 491-501.