Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
To cite this article: Wu-Yuin Hwang , Holly S.L. Chen , Rustam Shadiev , Ray Yueh-Min Huang &
Chia-Yu Chen (2014) Improving English as a foreign language writing in elementary schools using
mobile devices in familiar situational contexts, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27:5,
359-378, DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2012.733711
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.733711
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Wu-Yuin Hwanga, Holly S.L. Chena, Rustam Shadievb*, Ray Yueh-Min Huangb
and Chia-Yu Chenc
a
Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National Central University, Jhongli City,
Taoyuan County, Taiwan (R.O.C.); bDepartment of Engineering Science, National Cheng Kung
University, Tainan City, Taiwan (R.O.C.); cInstitute for Information Industry, Taipei, Taiwan
(R.O.C.)
Introduction
In todays world, interaction in English as a foreign language (EFL) is becoming
increasingly frequent. English is one of the worlds primary languages; the default
language of activities such as international conferences is English. In the Asia-Pacic
region, governments of countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, Japan,
and Taiwan emphasize the importance of English prociency (Nunan, 2003).
Guilherme (2007) pointed out that the ability to be procient in the English language
is crucial for sustaining a competitive edge on an international scale.
Over the last 10 years, the Taiwanese Ministry of Education has established
English-learning environments for situated learning such as the English Village
360
(Kelch, 2010, pp. 3739). The goal of the English Village is to improve language
skills for elementary school students, especially to enhance English communication
skills such as listening and speaking. However, solely focusing on these two skills is
not enough because language achievement depends on the well-balanced development of listening, speaking, reading, and writing abilities (Lerstrom, 1990). In order
to balance English learning goals, students must become adept at language skills
such as constructing sentences, writing tasks (Chuang, 2006), reading aloud
(Grimshaw, Dungworth, McKnight, & Morris, 2007), and reading peers writing
and correcting any identied errors (Yeh & Lo, 2009).
Most language writing programs are implemented in junior high school (Tsui &
Ng, 2000) or high school (Ferris, Pezone, Tade, & Tinti, 1997). However, researchers
have found that elementary school students are at a suitable developmental stage for
learning a second language (Butler & Hakuta, 2008). Furthermore, writing plays a
prominent role in second language acquisition (Harklau, 2002). The literature
suggests it is not easy to design writing tasks for EFL novice learners as elementary
school students have to work hard to complete writing tasks, even if tasks are
conducted in their mother language. Thus, how to make EFL writing tasks
interesting and engaging for novice learners is a challenge for any instructor. In this
study we tried to enhance the basic writing skills of EFL elementary school students
by inviting them to accomplish writing tasks in familiar contexts. Learners could
accomplish writing not only in the classroom but outside of it; they could get insight
of a specic and familiar environment with real-life situation or context and describe
it in English.
Writing processes include tasks such as planning, drafting, and revising (Arslan
& Sahin-Kzl, 2010; Sun, 2007). Planning is often dened as the initial stage in the
writing process. After a learner has assembled some ideas about content, he/she will
write a rst version which can be polished later after receiving feedback from peers.
Previous studies have reported that contextual learning can promote students
motivation (Dornyei, 2003), and the rich visual resources, which derive from
context-based learning scenarios, will help students learn to write (Vincent, 2001).
Lan, Sung, and Chang (2007) and Stockwell (2007) revealed that mobile devices are
convenient tools for students to use to conduct a wide range of activities, particularly
for tasks involving learning English within certain contextual constraints. According
to Hwang and Chen (in press), a mobile device can help EFL students, particularly
novices, to extend learning and practicing EFL to outside of the classroom
environment by working in familiar situational contexts. Thus, learning becomes not
only a deliberate event or situation but it takes place spontaneously in learners daily
lives. Mobile devices are easy to carry into real contexts and they provide learning
content (i.e. pictures, voices, vocabularies, and sentences) based on contexts (Hwang,
Wu, & Su, 2008; Lu, 2008). Therefore, mobile devices were used in this study to help
elementary school students with sentence construction and basic writing in familiar
situational contexts.
This study proposed a system that used mobile devices to facilitate situated
writing tasks for EFL elementary school students. This novel system also provided
writing support: subject-related vocabulary words, a help with sentence patterns, and
the opportunity for students to take pictures of items they wrote about in given
situated writing activities. Moreover, students were encouraged to read peers writing
in familiar situational contexts and provide comments, which opened up more
opportunities to engage the students in situated writing activities.
361
The purpose of this study is two-fold. First, this study sought to propose a
writing system and to design situated writing activities for EFL elementary school
students to support their writing tasks. Second, this study was conducted to
empirically determine if the proposed system and designed activities could lead to
more eective writing. The following points of interest were researched:
(1) Explore the impact on students learning achievement while using the
proposed system.
(2) Investigate students perception of the proposed system and activities, their
intention to use the proposed system in their writing, and the relationship of
students perception and their intention.
(3) Analyze system usage in situated writing scenarios, follow-up commenting
and writing support, and the impact on learning achievement.
Literature review
English writing for beginners
Literature on development of English writing shows that children are ready to
acquire writing skills since early childhood; no matter whether they are native or
non-native English-speaking children (Butler & Hakuta, 2008; Samway, 1992).
Therefore more and more students start to learn EFL at a very early age (Butler &
Hakuta, 2008; Curtain & Dahlberg, 2004; Hwang & Chen, in press; Lan et al.,
2007; Matsuda & De Pew, 2002). This notion suggests that more attention needs to
be paid to research related to early EFL writing which will greatly contribute to
the development of theory and practice of the eld (Matsuda & De Pew, 2002).
The research results of the National Writing Project (US) (2003) indicated that
writing skills attained in early childhood will be engendered through painting,
conversations, spelling development, and picture stories. The research has also
shown that EFL students, who complete writing practice exercises at an early stage,
perform well in English writing afterwards. As writing is a formative capability,
writing skills are created by practicing and learning through experience (Myles,
2002). Therefore, it is important to oer students writing practice exercises at an
early stage of their development (Curtain & Dahlberg, 2004). To enhance writing
skills, schools are strongly recommended not only to allow students to practice more
(Canado, 2010; Johns, Lee, & Wang, 2008), but also to provide rich and diverse
writing materials in the face of learning challenges (Arslan & Sahin-Kzl, 2010). For
primary learners, lack of inspiration is a common obstruction. Therefore,
instructional learning materials need to be developed which may enrich a students
life experience.
In order to evaluate writing of students research conducted in Ontario, Canada
(Cheng & Myles, 2003; Ministry of Education and Training, 1999) has recommended
certain criteria. The criteria used to evaluate the work of rst to eighth grade
elementary students in Ontario, Canada (Ministry of Education and Training, 1999)
have been modied to include four dimensions: Reasoning, Communication,
Organization, and Convention.
In this research project, the design of writing activities is based on real situations.
Through existing real-world entities, the writing topics are created with rich visual
resources, which help the students to write. In turn, the motivation and thinking of
EFL students are stimulated.
362
363
would nd themselves in on a daily basis with mobile devices. The students describe
objects from multiple angles through eld observations and then they provide
comments to peers using high-level thinking skills. They compare, communicate,
think critically, and engage in interactions that stimulate a motivated learning
environment.
Meaningful comments
Peer feedback is dened as an evaluation method wherein a group of learners who
share similar learning experiences or backgrounds (i.e. learners who are in the same
year of study or in the same class) evaluate one anothers work (Topping, 1998).
Learners give feedback on their peers work based on analytical thinking,
comparisons, and communication (Arslan & Sahin-Kzl, 2010; Loewen & Erlam,
2006). Learners of a similar age or learning experience can understand their peers
questions and learning diculties (Fallows & Chandramohan, 2001). Most scholars
regard positively the application of peer feedback in an educational setting. It can
inspire learning and stimulate high-level thinking to achieve more eective results
(Topping, 1998). Additionally, peer feedback during the prewriting phase can
prompt a higher degree of student autonomy (Yang, Badger, & Yu, 2006). In recent
years, more research has applied peer feedback as a mechanism to evaluate primary
and secondary English writing skills (Yeh & Lo, 2009). It has been observed that
peer feedback can increase learners interest; therefore, teachers should provide
opportunities for their students to engage in such activities.
Pairing network technology with the peer feedback activity not only reduces
waste by eliminating the need for traditional pens and paper, but it also records the
learning path and stores every learners feedback through the use of a computers
recording capability. Furthermore, enabling learners to give expressive anonymous
feedback using a system encourages their openness and honesty; learners try to post
comments with meaningful content since they do not need to concern themselves
about whether their identity can be revealed, thus increasing overall reliability and
validity of their feedback.
Using mobile devices to elicit peer feedback not only takes advantage of
computer capabilities, but it also engages the characteristics of ubiquitous
computing. Learners can attain higher performance with the exibility to move
between their learning environments, engage in face-to-face interaction, and directly
communicate with peers (Liu & Sadler, 2003).
Stanley (1992) developed a four-step procedure to improve peer commentary
when discussing how to make students become better peer reviewers. These steps
were developed from an inductive analysis of diverse oral communicative behaviors
found to help shape peer revision in previous training studies and to help examine
peer negotiation. The rst step involves clarifying the writers intention: reviewers try
to get further explanation of what writers have said or what is not clear to them in
the writing. The second step includes identifying the problem: reviewers announce a
problematic word, phrase, sentence, or cohesive gap. The third step concerns
explaining the nature of the problem(s): reviewers explain why they think a given
term, idea, or organization is unclear or problematic (and why something should or
should not be used in the writing). The fourth and nal step requires making
suggestions: reviewers suggest ways to revise the words, content, and organization of
the writing.
364
Many primary EFL learners have issues with initiating eective peer comments.
Since primary learners have limited capabilities with vocabulary terms, sentence
types, and writing, identifying a way to help them comment on peers writing in real
scenarios is important yet challenging. Primary learners need positive writing
support structures, such as vocabulary libraries and sentence-type libraries. In this
research, situated peer comment activities are designed to enable learners to view
peers writings and to comment on them through mobile devices. According to the
four steps proposed by Stanley, the real context helps primary learners clarify the
authors intention and verify the topic. Learners observing the real context can easily
identify problems in peers writings and then give more specic suggestions for
improvement to peers in the comments.
Research design
This study used between-group, a quasi-experimental design, following the general
recommendations of Creswell (2008). The experimental group used our proposed
system to facilitate the English writing exercise in familiar contexts. The control
group, on the other hand, used a paper-and-pen-based method to carry out EFL
writing with picture support in the classroom. In this study we explore the impact of
using the proposed system on experimental students learning achievement by
evaluating dierences in learning achievement of the control and experimental
groups. We investigated perceptions of the experimental group toward using the
system and activities by administering a questionnaire survey. We also evaluated the
relationship between learners perceptions and intention to use the system. Finally
we analyzed learners system usage for situated writing, providing comments, and
writing support, and their relationship with learning achievement. The relationship
among variables was tested using various statistical methods discussed in the
following sections.
Research structure and research variables
We conducted one quasi-experiment (Creswell, 2008). Two classes participated in
this study: one class was identied as the experimental group and the other class was
identied as the control group. The experimental group used our proposed system to
facilitate their English writing exercises in familiar contexts. The control group
employed a traditional paper-and-pen based method with related pictures for their
EFL writing. In this study the same teacher has instructed both groups using the
same teaching materials. However, the English writing exercises were conducted by
students dierently. We wanted to explore whether there is signicant dierence
between the students learning achievement after the experiment.
Furthermore, this research studies the relationships of research variables of users
perceptions with intention to use the system and then it discusses the reasons behind
the participants perceptions. Figure 1 shows research variables of this study.
According to the denition of Davis (1989), a systems ease-of-use is related to
the degree of users who perceive that the proposed system is easy to use. This gure
is estimated by questionnaires in the research. A systems usefulness is related to
the degree a user believes our system could increase the performance of English
learning. Activity usefulness is dened as the degree of a users perception that our
activity could help them learn English. Activity playfulness indicates that a user is
Figure 1.
interested in and enjoys the activities to learn English. The users intention to use
is dened as a users intention to use our proposed system in the research. System
usage is related to the number of times a user actually employs the proposed system
during the research experiment.
The following six research variables related to students EFL writing activity
were determined in this study:
(1) Writing about objects: number of writings about objects related to particular
topic (e.g. the whiteboard in the topic of classroom facilities).
(2) Number of sentences: total number of sentences in a students writing.
(3) Useless comment: number of comments unrelated to topic.
(4) Encouragement comment: number of encouraging comments.
(5) Useful comment: number of helpful comments.
(6) Writing support: number of students using writing support. The writing
support for conventions in English includes vocabulary about objects in
contexts, as well as related paradigms including adjectives, adverbs, and
sample sentences.
Writing performance represents a learners performance using an English
language learning system under familiar contexts. We modied the existing rubrics
for evaluating writing skills of elementary school students (Ministry of Education
and Training, 1999). In this experiment we used four dimensions: reasoning,
communication, organization, and convention.
(1) Reasoning represents whether or not the writing is on topic.
(2) Communication reects whether or not the purpose of a specic writing
exercise is clear and interesting. Also within the scope of this criterion is
whether or not dierent sentence patterns are used in the writing.
366
Participation
Two classes, totaling 59 sixth-grade elementary school students (12 or 13 years old)
participated in our experiment. One class of 28 students was employed as the
experimental group. The other class of 31 students was employed as the control
group. Participants shared similar cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds.
According to observations from the instructor, who taught the students for
approximately 2 years, most students believed the school was a good learning
community. These students were not only involved in school activities, but they also
had positive interactions, such as helping one another or constructing knowledge
collaboratively.
The experimental group used our proposed system to facilitate the English
writing exercise in familiar situated contexts. The control group, on the other hand,
used a paper-and-pen-based method to carry out EFL writing with picture support
in the classroom. Both classes were provided with English language writing support
such as vocabulary, phrase and sentence examples. The experimental groups
support was pre-installed in the system. The control groups support was paperbased. For the control group, pictures related to writing subjects were provided.
During the experiment, the two groups had the same teacher and teaching materials
for their English classes, only the English writing exercises were conducted
dierently.
Experimental design
The experiment started in November 2010 and the participants met three times a
week, for a total of one and a half months. Participants had seven classes (45 min
each class) every week for learning English. Four of them were regular classes when
learners read text and the instructor taught them new vocabulary, about creating
sentences, grammar, etc. Then three classes which were allocated for situated writing
activities followed. The activities of the experiment included three situated subjects:
classroom, meal, and playground. Each situated subject could be divided into two
stages. During the rst stage learners visited real-world, life-related environment (i.e.
familiar contexts) where they were engaged in situated real-time writing with mobile
devices. During the second stage learners were engaged in peer commentary exercises
with mobile devices in the same familiar context. The situated writing activities were
90 min in duration, and the situated comment activities were 70 min in duration.
Each subject ran for 2 weeks, with three experiments per week, totaling 160 min. The
entire experiment spanned 6 weeks. Applying mobile devices to specic subject
environments, which were stimulated by situations and providing support for writing
tasks were the major activities of the rst 2 days of each week. After the data from
Situated writing
The three situated subjects the classroom, mealtime, and the playground were the
learners daily venues for studying and playing. Cross-eects exist between real
situations and knowledge learning (Hwang & Chen, in press; Hwang et al., 2011).
Students require familiar, real-context support to learn. After understanding the
knowledge concept that can be found in a given context, a learner can apply it in his
or her daily life to solve problems (Hwang, Yeh, & Lee, 2003). Learners can
determine a writing topic which they nd interesting. As shown in Figure 2, while
logged in to the mobile device, learners can view the map of this subject. Once a
specic topic is identied, the learner can create a writing record by clicking on a
corresponding location. Taking pictures of specic objects related to the writing
topic and uploading attachments is actually the beginning of writing. The
corresponding mission explanations, vocabulary, phrases, and writing samples are
provided by the mobile devices. Learners can look up support in real-time. When
nished, this step is saved and learners proceed to the next record insertion.
Situated comments
Before the commentary stage, instruction is provided to teach learners how to read a
peers writing and how to give comments appropriately within the four dimensions:
reasoning (determined by whether or not words and expressions used in writing
contents match the subject); communication (whether or not the writing content
applies a vivid statement or self-perceived point of view); organization (the degree of
uency or continuity of expressed content); or convention (whether there are
spelling, grammar, punctuation, or caption mistakes in the writing content). The
experiment targets primary English writers and the purpose of the evaluation activity
is to give comments to other learners in a familiar situation to facilitate the
development of high-level thinking abilities. Therefore, the language itself is not the
primary concern; the comments are mainly written in Chinese. The system enabled
learners to give expressive anonymous feedback which encouraged their openness
Figure 2. Experimental activities. (a) Map of subject in the mobile devices. (b) Situated
writing. (c) Situated comment.
368
and honesty. That is learners tried to post comments with meaningful content since
they do not need to concern themselves about whether their identity can be revealed,
thus increasing overall reliability and validity of their feedback. After synchronizing
the writing content to each mobile device, learners can view the comments and
pictures written by peers. This can be done based on subject or content, and then
learners may proceed to peers comments based on their contexts.
Research tools
Figure 3.
System architecture.
369
Figure 4. Situated writing and situated comments. (a) Main screen. (b) Writing support for
writing tasks. (c) Double-click the nodes to read the content. (d) Provide comments and
suggestions.
complete the mission of a given week. The proposed system provides examples of the
mission instructions, vocabulary, and writing.
(1) Situated writing
The rst step in this process is to click Add Writing and select the
corresponding location of the contents in the map. The contents are not
restricted to text form. Learners can take pictures and attach them to the
writing to increase the richness of the experience.
(2) Situated comments
Before processing peer comments, the server-side database is synchronized to
each local database to let learners read peers writing exercises. After
choosing a selected topic, or a peers ID, only corresponding content will
appear in the map. Learners can read the content and view pictures by
double-clicking the icon. Also, learners can provide comments and
suggestions by clicking Reply or View All Comments to read all
information provided by peers.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire was designed as a general survey of 70 items, in accordance with
the Likert ve-point format (i.e. Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree,
Strongly Disagree). The questionnaire consisted of ve subscales including system
ease of use, system usefulness, activity playfulness, activity usefulness and
intention to use. The questionnaires dimensions were based on the theory (and
previous research) of design (Davis, 1989; Potosky, 2002; Woszczynski, Roth, &
Segars, 2002).
All items of the research questionnaire were derived from the questionnaire of
our past research (Lu, 2008). Some puzzling or ambiguous items were modied,
removed, and arranged in accordance with experts comments regarding proper
370
Dimension
Value
0.875
0.858
0.920
0.933
0.880
0.870
0.900
0.971
371
Table 2.
Communication
Organization
Convention
Groups
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Experimental group
Control group
19.36
14.52
4.183
6.722
20.96
11.97
3.283
6.210
17.54
14.29
4.811
6.225
16.43
14.71
5.189
6.599
372
Table 3.
Within-subject eect
Experimental group
Control group
Between-subject eect
Reasoning
Communication
Organization
Convention
SS
df
MS
336.214
152.452
3
3
112.071
50.817
38.913***
11.208***
0.000
0.000
344.779
1190.746
154.954
43.468
1
1
1
1
344.779
1190.746
154.954
43.468
10.750**
46.875***
4.942*
1.219
0.002
0.000
0.030
0.274
Table 4.
Predictor
Activity playfulness
Note: ***p 5 0.001.
R2
Adjusted R2
0.732
0.721
70.900***
1.071
0.855
8.420***
373
Writing
about Number of
Writing
objects sentences Average Reasoning Communication Organization Convention performance
Min
3
Max
25
Sum
321
Mean 11.46
Table 6.
3
147
1419
50.68
1.00
7.27
117.49
4.20
10.13
24.30
452.54
16.16
11.82
24.70
486.18
17.36
5.54
24.53
401.82
14.35
5.47
24.61
430.24
15.37
34.51
97.79
1770.78
63.24
Predictor
Communication
Note: ***p 5 0.001.
R2
Adjusted R2
0.638
0.624
45.876***
3.104
0.799
6.773***
374
Table 7.
Useful comments
Encouragement comments
Useless comments
Min
Max
Sum
Mean
Pearson correlation
2
9
0
63
63
10
531
888
32
18.96
31.71
1.14
0.778***
0.038
71.900
Table 8.
Predictor
Useful comments
Note: ***p 5 0.001.
R2
Adjusted R2
0.605
0.590
39.885***
0.745
0.778
6.315***
375
376
and sentences is helpful for writing exercise. Therefore, we may conclude that
increasing the opportunities for students to practice using adjectives, conjunctions,
and sentence patterns can improve students learning achievement in English writing.
Regarding the use and perception of the proposed system, the more students were
engaged in writing useful situational comments, the greater their learning
achievement in English. Additionally, the results of the experiment revealed that
the writing support provided by the proposed system satised an important
requirement of some students: the opportunity to review and memorize vocabulary
terms related to familiar contexts. According to the result of analyzing the
questionnaires, most students stated that the proposed system and designed activities
inspired them to make sentences to describe the target object in contexts and
improved their ability to learn English.
In the future we will extend the scope of our study and apply the experimental
system in language learning throughout the school and involved neighboring
schools. Moreover, the system application can be extended further in the countrys
elementary education system as a whole.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the National Science Council (NSC), Republic of China
(Taiwan), under Grant NSC 101-2511-S-008-013-MY3 and NSC 101-2511-S-008-012-MY3
and it was conducted under the Project Digital Convergence Service Open Platform of the
Institute for Information Industry which is subsidized by the Ministry of Economy Aairs of
the Republic of China (Taiwan).
Notes on contributors
Wu-Yuin Hwang is the professor at the Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology,
National Central University, Taiwan. His research interests include second language learning,
HCI, and knowledge construction.
Holly S.L. Chen is a senior PhD student at the Graduate Institute of Network Learning
Technology, National Central University, Taiwan. Her current research interests focus on
mobile and game-based learning.
Rustam Shadiev is postgraduate research fellow at the Department of Engineering Science,
National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan. His research interests include second language
learning, human-computer interaction for collaboration, and speech to text recognition
technology for learning.
Ray Yueh-Min Huang is the Distinguished Professor at the Department of Engineering Science,
National Cheng Kung University and he is the Dean of College of Health and Information,
Chia-Nan University of Pharmacy and Science, Taiwan. His research interests focus on eLearning, multimedia communications, articial intelligence, and embedded systems.
Chia-Yu Chen graduated from Master program of the Graduate Institute of Network
Learning Technology, National Central University, Taiwan. Her research interest includes
mobile and second language learning.
References
Arslan, R.S., & Sahin-Kzl, A. (2010).How can the use of blog software facilitate the writing
process of English language learners? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 183197.
Butler, Y.G., & Hakuta, K. (2008). Bilingualism and second language acquisition. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Canado, M.L.P. (2010). Using virtual learning environments and computer-mediated communication to enhance the lexical competence of pre-service English teachers: A
quantitative and qualitative study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23, 129150.
377
Cheng, L., & Myles, J. (2003). Managing the change from on-site to online: Transforming ESL
courses for teachers. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 18(1),
2938.
Chuang, C.C. (2006). The eects of mapping strategy applied in English childrens books
instruction on the English sentence-making ability of elementary students (Unpublished
masters thesis). National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
Collins, A. (1988). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology (Technical Report No.
6899). Cambridge, MA: BBN Labs.
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Pearson Education.
Curtain, H.A., & Dahlberg, C.A. (2004). Languages and children, making the match: New
languages for young learners. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319340.
Dornyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in
theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(S1), 332.
Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: Reections on
use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6, 229246.
Ferris, D.R., Pezone, S., Tade, C.R., & Tinti, S. (1997). Teacher commentary on student
writing: Descriptions & implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 155182.
Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N., McKnight, C., & Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: Childrens
reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 583599.
Guilherme, M. (2007). English as a global language and education for cosmopolitan
citizenship. Language and Intercultural Communication, 7(1), 7290.
Harklau, L. (2002).The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 11, 329350.
Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2010). An instructional design framework for authentic learning
environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 2348.
Hwang, W.Y., & Chen, H.S.L. (in press). Users familiar situational contexts facilitate the
practice of EFL in elementary schools with mobile devices. Computer Assisted Language
Learning. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2011.639783
Hwang, W.Y., Shadiev, R., & Huang, S.M. (2011). A study of a multimedia web annotation
system and its eect on the EFL writing and speaking performance of junior high school
students. ReCALL, 23, 160180.
Hwang, W., Wu, S., & Su, J. (2008). A study of listening diversity and speaking for
English learning with mobile device supports. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5353,
748757.
Hwang, W.Y., Yeh, D.M., & Lee, C.Y. (2003). The multi-user and multi-media interaction
mechanism, Chinese Journal of Science Education, 11, 373389.
Johns, T.F., Lee, H., & Wang, L. (2008). Integrating corpus-based CALL programs in
teaching English through childrens literature. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21,
483506.
Kelch, K. (2010). Curriculum development in English language teaching: Innovations and
challenges for the Asian context. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 3,
2242.
Lan, Y.J., Sung, Y.T., & Chang, K.E. (2007). A mobile-device-supported peer-assisted
learning system for collaborative early EFL reading. Language Learning & Technology, 11,
130151.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lerstrom, A. (1990). Speaking across the curriculum: Moving toward shared responsibility.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the conference on college composition and
communication, Chicago, IL.
Liu, J., & Sadler, R.W. (2003). The eect and aect of peer review in electronic
versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2,
193227.
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 114.
378
Lu, S.I. (2008). A study of peer listening diversity for English learning with MCSCL (master
thesis). National Central University, Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology,
Taiwan.
Matsuda, P.K., & De Pew, K.E. (2002). Early second language writing: An introduction.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 261268.
Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis
in student texts. TESL-EJ, 6, 120.
National Writing Project (U.S.). (2003). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in
our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and
practices in the Asia-Pacic region. Tesol Quarterly, 37, 589613.
Ministry of Education and Training. (1999). The Ontario curriculum exemplars, grades 18:
Writing. Toronto, Canada: Queens Printer for Ontario.
Potosky, D. (2002). A eld study of computer ecacy beliefs as an outcome of training: The
role of computer playfulness, computer knowledge, and performance during training.
Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 241255.
Samway, K.D. (1992). Writers workshop and children acquiring English as a non-native
language (NCBE Program Information Guide 10). Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be eective peer evaluators. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 1, 217233.
Stockwell, G. (2007). Vocabulary on the move: Investigating an intelligent mobile phonebased vocabulary tutor. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 365383.
Sun, Y.C. (2007). Learner perceptions of a concordancing tool for academic writing.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20, 323343.
Tsui, A., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benet from peer comments? Journal of
Second Language Writing, 9, 147170.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of
Educational Research, 68, 249276.
Vincent, J. (2001). The role of visually rich technology in facilitating childrens writing. Journal
of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 242250.
Woszczynski, A.B., Roth, P.L., & Segars, A.H. (2002). Exploring the theoretical foundations
of playfulness in computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 369388.
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a
Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179200.
Yeh, S.W., & Lo, J.J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and
corrective feedback. Computers & Education, 52, 882892.