Short communications. eLearning in EFL: Problems and Solutions

Open access

Short communications. eLearning in EFL: Problems and Solutions

This paper investigates certain problems encountered when technology-based instruction is employed in teaching English as a foreign language. Three EFL specialists from Saudi Arabia are interviewed and their insights on solving those problems are presented. Many academics feel ill-equipped to utilize new technologies in teaching because they are technophobes who fear or dislike technology or do not have sufficient experience in employing computer applications. Other academics found technology-based teaching time-consuming, leading to increased workload, and demanding high levels of technical support. Solutions to face the reluctance to engage in electronic forms of teaching include the provision of instructional support to provide faculty with the necessary technical skills, changing college policies to consider teaching with technology an activity for which faculty receive credit, improving the reward system to motivate faculty to better productivity and higher performance, and addressing critical work-related issues, such as workload.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Bartscherer P. (1999). The Pew Grant Program in course redesign. Available at: http://www.center.rpi.edu/grantgde.pdf

  • Burpee P. & Wilson B. (1991). Distance education in the Faculty of Education. McGill Journal of Education Spring 7-15.

  • Carpi A. (2001). Improvements in undergraduate science education using webbased instructional modules: The natural science pages. Journal of Chemical Education 78 1709-1712.

  • Chrzanowski J. (2002). Teaching and learning in the online environment: Changing teacher-student relationships online. Paper presented at the Eighth Sloan-C International Conference. November 10th. Orlando FL.

  • Cravener P. (1999). Faculty experiences with proving online courses: Thorns among the roses. Computers in Nursing 17 42-47.

  • Dearing R. (1997). Higher education in the learning society: Report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. London: HMSO.

  • DiPiro J. T. (1999). The Virtual University - higher education ‘on-line.’ American Journal Of Pharmaceutical Education 63 170-174.

  • Fessakis G. Petrou A. & Dimitracopoulou A. (2004). Synchronous computer mediated collaborative activities among collocated students: Conditions that make them valuable in every day educational practice. Paper presented at the CSCL SIG First Symposium October 7th-9th Lausanne Switzerland. Available at: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/06/91/PDF/Fessakis-George-2004b.pdf http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/06/91/PDF/Fessakis-George-2004b.pdf

  • Firdyiwek Y. (1999). Web-Based courseware tools: Where is the pedagogy? Educational Technology January-February 29-34.

  • Harasim L. Calvert T. & Groenboer C. (1997). Virtual-U: A Web-based system to support collaborative learning. In B. H. Khan (Ed.) Web Based Instruction (pp. 149-158). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

  • Hokanson B. Hooper S. (2000). Computers as cognitive media: examining the potential of computers in education. Computers in Human Behavior 16 537-552.

  • Huff W. D. (2000). Colleges and universities: Survival in the information age. Computers and Geosciences 26 635-640.

  • Jackson G. (1994). Incentives for planning and delivering agricultural distance education. Agriculture Education Magazine 66 15-16.

  • Kearsley G. (1998). A guide to online education. Available at: http://www.fgse.nova.edu/~kearsley/online.html

  • Kilian C. (1996). An online writing course. Available at: http://crofsblogs.typepad.com

  • Lee J. (2001). Instructional support for distance education and faculty motivation commitment satisfaction. British Journal of Educational Technology 32 153-160.

  • Littlejohn A. & Sclater N. (1998). Overcoming conceptual barriers to the use of internet technology in university education. Proceedings of WebNet98. Available at: http://www.cvu.strath.ac.uk/admin/cvudocs/webnet98/skills.html

  • Mereba T. (2003). Managing transformation: Aligning technology initiatives with institutional priorities. TechTrends 47 42-44.

  • Milheim W. (1993). Using computer-based instruction with adult learners. Journal of Continuing Higher Education 41 2-7.

  • Morgan G. (2003). Faculty use of course management system. Educause Centre for Applied Research. Available at: http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS0302/ekf0302.pdf

  • Olcott D. J. & Wright S. J. (1995). An institutional support framework for increasing faculty participation in postsecondary distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education 9 5-17.

  • Poling D. J. (1994). E-mail as an effective teaching supplement. Educational Technology 34 53-55.

  • Sliwa S. (1994). Re-engineering the learning process with information technology. Academe 80 8-12.

  • Sosabowski M. Herson K. & Lloyd A. (1998). July. Enhancing learning and teaching quality: integration of networked learning technologies into undergraduate modules. Active Learning 8 20-25.

  • Spratt C. Palmer S. & Coldwell J. (2000). Using technologies in teaching: An initiative in academic staff development. Educational Technology & Society 3 455-461.

  • Tearle P. Dillon P. & Davies N. (1999). Use of information technology by English university teachers. Developments and trends at the time of the National Inquiry Into Higher Education. Journal of Further and Higher Education 23 5-15.

  • Weisskirch R. S. & Milburn S. S. (2003). Virtual discussion: Understanding college students' electronic bulletin board use. Internet and Higher Education 6 215-225.

  • Williams V. & Peters K. (1997). Faculty incentives for the preparation of webbased instruction. In: B. H. Khan (Ed.) Web Based Instruction (pp. 107-110). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

  • Wolcott L. L. (1997). Tenure promotion and distance education: Examining the culture of faculty rewards. American Journal of Distance Education 11 3-18.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.118
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.410

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 255 91 2
PDF Downloads 115 71 2