Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Sida: 1 (9)
Slutrapport
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
Sida: 2 (9)
Innehåll
1
Basfakta.............................................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Projektet ..................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Bakgrund .................................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Sammanfattning ......................................................................................................... 5
2
Måluppfyllelse .................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Projektmål .................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Efterkalkyl ................................................................................................................... 8
3
Projektförlopp .................................................................................................................... 8
4
Projektets och kundens upplevda kvalitet ....................................................................... 9
4.1 Styrgruppens kommentarer
4.2 Projektledningens kommentarer
4.3 Rekommendation till fortsatt arbete
5
Referenser .......................................................................................................................... 9
6
Bilagor ................................................................................................................................ 9
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Utgåva P1.0-1
Sida: 3 (9)
Utgåvehistorik för dokumentet
<Här redovisar du vad som skiljer mellan de olika utgåvorna av slutrapporten genom att
övergripande ange syfte och orsak till ändringen och utgåveidentitet.>
Utgåva
Datum
Kommentar
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
1
Basfakta
1.1
Projektet
Sida: 4 (9)
1.1.1 Uppdragsgivare och uppdragstagare
Beställare/Projektägare:
Projektledare:
<Nnnn Nnnn>
<Rieko Saito>
1.1.2 Definitioner
<Här redovisar du ord och förkortningar som inte ingår i PPS ordlista i syfte att öka läsförståelsen.
Är läsarna obekanta med PPS, hänvisa då till PPS ordlista som en referens.>
Ord/förkortning/akronym
1.2
Förklaring
Bakgrund
<Underlag ska kunna hämtas från projektplanen.>
This project is based on the previous project approved by NGL and completed in 2012,
”Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad språkundervisning”, which tried to identify benefits and
difficulties of online teaching from teachers´ viewpoint, as well as pedagogical methods used in order
to overcome the difficulties. In the previous project, flexibility and wider opportunities for students
were mentioned as general benefits, while lack of physical co-presence, difficulty in having lively
debates/discussions, and high dropout rates were raised among the problems.
The current project (conducted in 2014) aims to investigate how online teaching/learning is
perceived by the students – and whether the issues that had been identified as “difficulties” by
teachers are perceived as problems from the students´ side as well. As it is often said that learning
and teaching are two sides of a coin, and the good teaching only evolves from learning about
students (Ramsden, 2003), we believe that it is very important to see if the pedagogical methods
adopted by the teachers match with what students perceive as problems of online learning.
In the current project, we put a special emphasis on the lack of physical co-presence in the
class, which was one of the major difficulties teachers suggested in the previous project. As various
theorists (Säljö 1992, Vigotsky 1986) suggest, if the learning takes place through interaction both
within and outside the classroom rather than through unidirectional “teaching”, it would be extremely
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
Sida: 5 (9)
important to know how this lack of “physical co-presence” is perceived by students in relation to this
interaction required for learning.
1.3
Sammanfattning
1.3.1 Projektets omfattning
The target group of the project was the students studying at the language department (Arabic,
Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, and
Swedish as Second Language) in the spring term 2014.
We sent out a questionnaire to the students who were active in May 2014. About 2,300
students received the questionnaire and 842 students answered (the answer rate was 37%). After
receiving answers from the students, we selected 20 students out of 842 students to conduct indepth interviews.
The reason why we focused only on the language students was to compare with the
previous project which focused only on the teachers at the language department.
1.3.2 Samband med andra organisationer
We got support from a survey company, Prifloat for formulating the questionnaire and analysis of the
results.
1.3.3 Sammanfattning erfarenheter
<Sammanfatta det viktigaste erfarenheterna.>
Taking the three challenges raised by the teachers in consideration, our focus in making the
questionnaire was on learning about the social aspects of online education from the students’ point
of view. According to Moore’s (1993) transactional distance theory, “distance” is a psychological
distance and this transactional distance has to be minimized if learning by distance is to be
maximized. Moore claims the importance of dialogue/interaction with students. Also, Hill et al. (2004)
argues that to maximize learning in online education, four types of interaction play important roles:
learner-instructor, learner-learner, learner-content, and learner-interface. The questionnaire survey
and in-depth interviews were conducted to investigate how students experience these four
categorized interactions. Here are the results of our analysis.
 Learner – Instructor interaction
Students are generally satisfied with the interaction with the teachers. To the question of comparison
between our online courses and campus courses at other universities, the students answered that
there was no significant difference between campus and online on “support from your teacher” and
“interaction with your teacher”. Making a good atmosphere was expected more in a campus
classroom, which misaligns to the teachers’ perspectives (feels colder atmosphere).
In general, teachers in online are expected to give very clear instructions and to give
detailed feedback and quick response to the e-mails.
 Learner – Learner interaction
56% of the student stated that they did not try making friends in their online courses. About 40% of
the students tried to make friends and stated that they miss some kind of “contact” with other
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
Sida: 6 (9)
classmates (and teachers) in a natural way (in breaks, etc).=more interaction may be needed
among students to exchange information about how to study or as a backup system for when the
contact with teacher does not work well.
However when it comes to assignments, 80% of students responded that they prefer
individual assignments rather than collaborative assignments because of their other commitments,
different studying style, time differences, etc. This means that in order to increase the opportunities
for learner-learner interaction, some other techniques than using collaborative assignments might
have to be developed.
 Learner – Content interaction
65% of the students stated that it is just as easy to achieve the learning outcomes in an online
course as it is in a campus course. 16% of the students stated that it is easier in an online course.
 Learner – Interface interaction
Technical issues were frequently raised as critical issues; internet speed, microphone issues, etc.
Especially the sound quality of other students was frequently raised as a critical issue by the
students. They feel distracted and demotivated to their studies, which we can say is very critical for
their learning environment.
80% of the students had technical problems and 67% of those used the support. 80% of
those who used the support felt that they got the help that was needed. The students who were not
satisfied with the support have mentioned, “no support for Linux OS”, “no support for connect via
mobile phones, mobile connection is slow if not a 4G-connection”, “sometimes there are waiting time
in order to get support”, “compatibility problems with some hardware”.
Students of the age 51 years or older felt somewhat higher degree of distance from the class
when they had technical problems compared to the younger students.
Summary
Through the results, we found out that the majority of the students were satisfied with the
interaction with teachers, but not with the interaction with their classmates. They mentioned that they
miss some kind of ”natural contact” during breaks or after the classes. Less interaction and less
social presence are perceived by both some students and teachers, but both groups think that it
does not affect reaching the learning outcomes. Does this “less interaction” affect their learning in an
invisible and indirect way somehow? For the future research, we need to investigate what “less
interaction” actually means to learning.
If this “less interaction” affects their learning somehow, what can we, as teachers, do to
overcome this issue when many students prefer not to have collaborative assignments? How can we
increase their interactions in other ways?
Technical issues such as microphone issues were raised strongly from the students. It
almost seems to be the essence of problems of online communication, and we must take urgent
measures to reduce the technical problems.
In this project, we focused on the aspects which online education lacks in terms of
communication. However, we found out that the majority of the students experience the
communication in online as something different in its nature from the communication in campus. This
suggests that maybe in the future research, we should investigate this perceived “difference”, that is
not only what is lacking in online education, but also the aspects which are better in online education
in terms of communication.
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
2
Måluppfyllelse
2.1
Resultat
Utgåva P1.0-1
Sida: 7 (9)
<Redovisa utfallet kontra det överenskomna resultatet och kommentera eventuella avvikelser.>
1. Identify the students’ view of online education
In general, we could identify the students’ view of online education.
2. See if the teachers’ pedagogical methods to overcome the difficulties of the online education are
matching to what students feel necessary.
Lack of physical co-presence, difficulty in having lively debates/discussions and high dropout
rates were the issues raised by the teachers.
The teachers made extra effort to make a good class atmosphere not to make students feel
isolated or alone and to overcome the lack of physical co-presence. But through the
questionnaire survey, we found out that the students expect a warm atmosphere in campus
courses more than online courses. Some students whom we interviewed mentioned that they
feel more nervous in campus because they pick up every small signals (all the non-verbal
communications) of others and feel that everyone is watching at you, whereas they don’t feel the
same in online.
To have lively debates or discussions during the classes, teachers tried to have variations of
utilizing seminar hours by combining with recorded seminars or by using discussion forum on
fronter before the seminars. Other teachers tried to divide students into smaller groups using
breakout rooms so that the students can use the microphone all the time to initiate smooth
discussions. Through the questionnaire, we found that the majority (73%) of the students think
that DU has lively debates/discussions as much as the other campus courses at other
universities or even more.
3. Share the results and make suggestions based on the results?
We presented our project at the language meeting (språkmöte) in the language department on
the 5th of November 2014 and at a conference (The 22nd International Conference on
Computers in Education-ICCE 2014) which was held in Nara, Japan in December 2014.
At the language meeting, we discussed how to make students interact during and outside
the classes. Having pre-seminars or seminars without teacher’s presence, using breakout
sessions as much as possible, having group work as often as possible were the examples of
suggestions.
Also, we discussed how to make students read the information carefully, which might be a
solution for technical problems. Often when they claim, it might be the case that they missed the
right information.
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
2.2
Sida: 8 (9)
Efterkalkyl
<Redovisa verkligt utfall jämfört med projektkalkylen.>
Kalkylpost
3
Timmar
Hiroko Inose (Japanese)
300
Mario Antonio Lopez
Cordero (Spanish)
300
Rieko Saito (Japanese)
250
Masako Thor (Japanese)
Consultant fee for Prifloat
Conference
Summa
50
Kalkylerad kostnad
Utfall
183,000kr
13,000kr
900klt +
196,000kr
Projektförlopp
<Beskriv övergripande projektets förlopp. Redogör för hur väl projektet följde projektplaneringen.
Beskriv eventuella viktiga händelser som påverkade förloppet på ett avgörande sätt.>
The project was conducted without any big problem.
1. Project team meeting (February)
The team had connect meetings, as well as frequent exchange of ideas and comments via emails to
discuss the division of work amongst members, the focus of the project and the timeline of the
project.
2. Literature search (March)
The literature search on the related themes (online education, perception of students etc.) was
carried out independently by each of the members. The information about previous studies was
shared by all members in the meetings and through the use of project meeting room created on
du&ja (vi möts).
3. Development of the questionnaire (April)
Based on our original project plan, and also on the findings from the literature search, we have
developed the detailed draft of the questionnaire with around 40 questions, through discussions in
the meetings, as well as frequent exchange of comments via emails.
4. Handling of the questionnaire (May)
Two of the project team members had a meeting with the survey company, where ideas about the
details of the survey (e.g. contents of the questionnaire, prize for the participants, telephone
interview to follow up etc.) were discussed. The company revised and commented on our
questionnaire draft based on the discussions at the meeting. After having revisions and comments
from a survey company (Prifloat AB), the draft was sent for the final check of the English text.
The final version of the questionnaire was sent out to HD students in the week 18-19.
5. Conducting in-depth interviews (June)
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps
Slutrapport
Dok.beteckning
Utgåva P1.0-1
< Pedagogiska metoder i nätbaserad
språkundervisning >
<Rieko Saito, Hiroko Inose, Mario Antonio
Lopez Cordero, Masako Thor>
<2015-01-24>
Sida: 9 (9)
The team received the preliminary results and selected 20 students to make in-depth interviews. 16
out of 20 students have replied to our e-mails and 16 interviews were conducted. Cinema tickets
were sent to those 16 students.
6. Analysis on the results of the questionnaire and in-depth interviews (August-September)
The survey company made a presentation about the final report of the analysis. After the
presentation, the team studied their analysis as well as students’ free text comments which were not
included in their analysis. The interviews were shared among the team through the transcriptions in
google document.
7. Making presentations and sharing ideas (November-December)
After making deeper analysis on the results, two presentations were made at an internal meeting
(språkmöte) and an international conference (ICCE 2014). In the internal meeting, we had an
independent session for discussing and sharing some pedagogical ideas. In the international
conference, our findings and ideas were shared by academics in the related fields.
4
Projektets upplevda kvalitet
<Redovisa styrgruppens och projektledningens kommentarer till projektet. Vad som anses ha
fungerat bra eller mindre bra med eventuella kommentarer>
4.1
Styrgruppens kommentarer
4.2
Projektledningens kommentarer
4.3
Rekommendation till fortsatt arbete
5
Referenser
<Redovisar vilka personer och dokument som kan ge ytterligare information om projektet.>
Ref.
6
Dokumentnamn, beteckning och namn
Utgåveid, datum
Bilagor
<Redovisar eventuella bilagor till slutrapporten.>


NGL2014 Questionnaire en-sw.final
Conference paper, (ICCE 2014)
Filnamn: Document1
Mall från Tieto PPS (ME20, 1.2.0)
www.tieto.se/pps