اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 347 |
| تعداد مقالات | 2,870 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 3,258,766 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 2,394,426 |
EFL Learners’ Attitudes Toward Flipped Teaching and Its Effect on Their Oral Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency | ||
| Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 8، شماره 4، دی 2021، صفحه 51-21 اصل مقاله (1.02 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: research paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jmrels.2020.13594.1670 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Anahita Sheikhipour1؛ Mahmood Hashemian* 2؛ Ali Roohani1 | ||
| 1English Department, Faculty of Letters & Humanities, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran | ||
| 2English Department, Faculty Of Letters and Humanities, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 10 تیر 1399، تاریخ بازنگری: 12 شهریور 1399، تاریخ پذیرش: 05 مهر 1399 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| The flipped teaching has nowadays become a new movement in teaching and is getting pervasive in the educational system. The goal of this study was to explore if there was any significant difference between L2 learners’ oral complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) in flipped and traditional classes. To do so, both traditional and filpped classes were resorted to in order to see which class matched the students’ needs. Moreover, this study was done to find out if it had any significant effect on the learners’ motivation, self-efficacy, engagement, self-confidence, and autonomy. Via an OPT, 40 homogenous, lower-intermediate students were chosen from a language school in Isfahan, Iran. Then, they were randomly assigned to experimental 1 and 1 control groups. Initially, all the students attended an interview session and their responses were audio-recorded; then, 2 teachers scored their responses to make certain the interviews enjoyed reliability. Afterward, the students took a pretest with 2 questions relevant to their actual life and the grammar they would acquire in the course of the treatment. After taking 4 treatment sessions, the students received a posttest to see how much they had progressed during the 4 treatment sessions. Also, a questionnaire was adapted from another study to figure out the students’ satisfaction regarding this type of teaching. The results revealed that the flipped class increased the students’ motivation, self-efficacy, engagement, self-confidence, and autonomy. However, no significant difference was seen between the learners in the flipped class and those in the traditional class, as far as oral CAF was concerend. Based on the students’ answers to the questionnaire, most were satisfied with the flipped model. To conclude, materials developers and syllabus designers should modify instructional materials and books taught in language schools and add some parts to them in line witth technology to satisfy digital natives. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Complexity؛ Accuracy؛ and Fluency (CAF)؛ Digital Natives؛ Flipped vs. Traditional Classrooms | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| نگرش فراگیران زبان انگلیسی درباره آموزش معکوس و تاثیر آن بر پیچیدگی، صحت و روانی گفتار ایشان | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| آناهیتا شیخی پور1؛ محمود هاشمیان2؛ علی روحانی1 | ||
| 1دانشگاه شهرکرد | ||
| 2دانشگاه شهرکرد | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| آموزش معکوس روندی مشهور در حوزه ی آموزش زبان انگلیسی می باشد. تکنولوژی های جدید نقش موثری در موفقیت این مدل دارند. فراگیران زبان انگلیسی می توانند با به کارگیری مواد آموزشی در منزل و استفاده از وسایل الکترونیکی شخصی، زبان انگلیسی را فرا گیرند. در این مدل، افراد زاده ی تکنولوژی بیشتر بهره می برند. هدف تحقیق اخیر، بررسی و مشاهده ی تفاوت معنادار بین صحت، روانی و پیچیدگی گفتار فراگیران زبان انگیسی در کلاس های سنتی و معکوس می بود. دو کلاس سنتی و معکوس برگزار گردید تا مشخص گردد کدام یک از کلاس ها مناسب نیازهای فراگیران زبان انگلیسی می بود. تعداد 40 زبان آموز در یک موسسه از طریق آزمون تعیین سطح انتخاب گردیدند. افراد گروه بصورت تصادفی به 2 دسته ی مساوی تقسیم شدند. گروه نخست شامل فراگیران گروه تجربی و گروه دوم شامل گروه شاهد بودند. به منظور اطمینان از قابل اعتماد بودن مصاحبه از فراگیران خواسته شد تا در 1 جلسه ی مصاحبه شرکت و صدای آنها ضبط گردید. صاحبه های ایشان توسط 2 مدرس زبان انگلیسی تصحیح شد. از همه ی فراگیران خواسته شد تا در آزمون مقدماتی شرکت کنند. پس از شرکت در 4 جلسه ی آموزشی، 1 پس آزمون طراحی شد. یافته ها نشان داد آموزش معکوس باعث افزایش خودکارآمدی، انگیزه، استقلال، درگیر شدن در آموزش و اعتماد به نفس می شود. اما هیچ تفاوت معناداری بین فراگیران کلاس های سنتی و معکوس از لحاظ صحت، روانی و پیچیدگی گفتار آنها مشاهده نشد. بر اساس پاسخ فراگیران به پرسشنامه، اکثرا" واکنش مثبت به این مدل آموزشی نشان دادند و باور داشتند که این مدل به آنها امکان آمادگی پیش از حضور در کلاس را می دهد. در نتیجه، برای جلب رضایت افراد زاده ی تکنولوژی، کتاب هایی موسسات نیاز به تجدید نظر و افزودن بخش هایی بر اساس تکنولوژی دارند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| پیچیدگی, روانی, صحت, کلاس سنتی, کلاس معکوس | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahmed, M. (2016). The effect of a flipping classroom on writing skill in English as a foreign language and students’ attitude towards flipping. US-China Foreign Language, 14(2), 98-114.
Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2015). From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through Social learning platforms on higher education students' creative thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1133-1148.
Baker, J. W. (2000). The classroom flip: Using Web course management tools to become the guide by the side. In the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, Cedarville, Communication Faculty Publications.
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching: Autonomy in language learning. Routledge.
Bergman, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology Education.
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, A. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87-122.
Bhagat, K. K., Chang, C.-N., & Chang, C.-Y. (2016). The impact of the flipped classroom on mathematics concept learning in high school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 134-142.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE National Conference Proceedings, 30(9), 1-18.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. McKay.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.
Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2012). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. Pfeiffer Publishing.
Crouch, C. H., Jessica, W., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Peer Research-Based Reform of University Physics, 1(1), 40-95.
Danker, B. (2015). Using flipped classroom approach to explore deep learning in large classrooms. IAFOR Journal of Education, 3(1), 171-186.
Findlay-Thompson, S., & Mombourquette, P. (2014). Evaluation of a flipped classroom in an undergraduate business course. Business Education & Accreditation, 6(1), 63-71.
Garrison, R. D., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., & Drysdale, J. S. (2012). An analysis of high impact scholarship and publication trends in blended learning. Distance Education, 33(3), 381-413.
Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013). The flipped learning model: A white paper based on the literature review titled a review of flipped learning. Flipped Learning Network/Pearson/George Mason University.
Han, Y. J. (2015). Successfully flipping the ESL classroom for learner autonomy. NYS TESOL Journal, 2(1), 98-109.
Harris, J. C. (2016). Flipping the undergraduate economics classroom: Using online videos to enhance teaching and learning. Southern Economic Journal, 83(1), 31-331.
Höst, A. K. (2011). Stray: Touchstone: Part 1. Cambridge University Press.
Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
Jinlei, Z., Ying, W., & Baohui, Z. (2012). Introducing a new teaching model: Flipped classroom. Journal of Distance Education, 4(8), 46-51.
Johnson, G. B. (2013). Student perceptions of the flipped classroom. University of British Columbia.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30-35.
Köse, U. (2010). A blended learning model supported with Web 2.0 technologies. Procedia ─ Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2794-2802.
Marlowe, C. A. (2012). The effect of the flipped classroom on student achievement and stress. Unpublished master’s thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, United States.
Mayer, R. E. (1984). Aids to text comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 19(1), 30-42.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer insttruction: Getting students to think in class. In AIP Conference Proceedings. Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Center for Technology in Learning, U.S. Department of Education.
Neumeier, P. (2005). A closer look at blended learning—Parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL, 46(6), 163-178.
Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(1), 109-148.
Ouzts, D. T., & Palombo, M. J. (2004). Technology in higher education: A study of perceptions of college professors. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 48(5), 19-24.
Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2011). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1967). Language and thought from the genetic point of view. In D. Elkind (Ed.), Six psychological studies (pp.143-158). Random House.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants (part 1). On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Reidsema, C., Kavanagh, L., Hadgraft, R., & Smith, N. (Eds.). (2017). The flipped classroom: Practice and practices in higher education. Springer.
Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity To Engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 105(2) 44-49.
Simon, B., & Cutts, Q. I (2012). Peer instruction: A teaching method to foster deep understanding. Communications of the ACM, 55(2), 27-29.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2005). Strategic and online planning: The influence of surprise information and task time on second language performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 193-216). Benjamins.
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. D., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-426). Cambridge University Press.
Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute.
Stone, B. B. (2012). Flip your classroom to increase active learning and student engagement. Inproceedings from the 28th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison.
Talley, C. P., & Scherer, S. (2013). The enhanced flipped classroom: Increasing academic performance with student-recorded lectures and practice testing in a "flipped" STEM course. The Journal of Negro Education, 82(3), 339-347.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher-order psychological. Harvard University Press. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 699 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 559 |
||