1. Question 1 Why did a majority of students perceive the innovative web-enhanced Japanese language courses favorably and participate in additional online learning activities?

2. Easy access   The integration of technology was perceived helpful and adopted at ease when the technology provided students with convenience (unlimited access at anytime from anywhere) and comfort (knowing exactly what was going on and expected in class).

3. Frequent usage   It appears that the students engaged themselves to online learning when they had a routine usage of technology in class and hence formed “good” habits to use the online materials regularly.   The more they used it, the more they felt that technology was useful to their learning

4. Learning “Hub”   The students perception was favorable when all necessary information is stored in one place

5. Consistency   Consistency in terms of time (when posted), location (where posted), and format (how presented) promoted adoption.   A systematic presentation of visual and descriptive advanced organizers such as the online daily schedule increased the value of online material in the eyes of students.

6. Eclectic Approach   A variety of learning tasks that accommodate learners’ different learning styles   Combination of instructive and constructive instructional approaches

7. Solidarity   The students formed positive views towards the use of technology when technology promoted social aspects of learning, namely communication with other students

8.   Then, in developing the course, what aspects could be viewed as “essence” for success?

9.   Identified steps for the development of the course: to develop the product (online learning material), pilot it in real classrooms, evaluate and revise it, and implement it again.

10. Product development   To produce high quality online learning material: a specific, practical, and user- friendly system that helps students to learn the language

11.   Instructor observed an existing exemplary WebCT French course as a student.   Online specialist enrolled as a student in the Japanese language class and provided daily feedback on the development while learning the Japanese language (served as the end-user, who is the primary beneficiary of the product)   Students’ daily comments

12. Implementing: Will it work in my classroom?   The online material was tested and re- tested on a daily basis by seeking out the answers to the following questions:   Would every student be able to use the product and bring about positive results in their learning?   How would the students make progress in their learning?

13. Evaluation: Product must be excellent   Items: Practicality, adaptability, authenticity, intrinsic interest, overall quality, degree of interaction evoked, level of student engagement, and contribution to student proficiency.   Evaluators: the developer, the instructor and the students.   Evaluated not only the product itself, but also the process of implementation through dialogues, surveys, and observations.

14. Improvement and implementation   Rogers’ hypothesis (1995) ”A change agent’s relative success in diffusing the innovation would be positively related with the extent of change agent’s effort in contacting clients, a client oriented project to meet his or her needs, a higher degree of empathy towards his or her client, credibility in the client’s eyes, the extent to which he or she works through opinion leaders, and the increasing clients’ ability to evaluate and accept innovation.”

15.   The change agents (instructor and the developer) and the clients (students).   Acted responsibly and promptly to meet the needs of clients (students) in this attempt.   Facilitated meaningful and constructive dialogues on an equal basis and brought their strengths together to get things done through democratic and collaborative work relationships.

16. Conclusion Technology was favorably adopted when students had easy access and used the innovation frequently. The participating students engaged more when the instructor set up a course in a way that all necessary information was stored in one place (“hub”), the delivery of online materials was consistent in terms of time, location, and format, and the instructor implemented eclectic instructional approaches. The students perceived the use of technology as a tool to create a friendly atmosphere.

17.   As for the development, it is critical to form an enthusiastic and competent team who could continuously develop the material, pilot them, evaluate them objectively, revise them by accommodating the needs of clients, and implement them responsively.

18. Working Model Developing Piloting Assessing Assessing Revising Improving Assessing Instructor Consultant Student Collaboration Instructor Consultant Student Learning “Hub” Consistency Eclectic Approach Solidarity Easy Access Frequent usage

19. Limitation   The findings of this research have limitations because this is an intrinsic case study. To verify the findings and explore possible factors, more surveys and interviews should be conducted, and each finding should be explored in depth through different data collection methods and data analysis.