The Effects of Authentic Audience on ESL Writers: A Task-Based, Computer-Mediated Approach By Julian Chen & Kimberly Brown

The Students

Worldview Pragmatism Constructivism

Theory Knowledge is constructed through experience Create learning communities that mirror real- world collaboration Students see problems from multiple perspectives Emphasis on challenging authentic projects

Theoretical Framework TBLT Self-Determination Theory (motivation) L2 Self-Perspective on Motivation

Interest in Authentic Audience? Based on experiences using service learning in ESL. Students’ English is useful at any proficiency level. Students’ awareness of audience and motivation to write can be increased by removing the audience abstraction associated with traditional writing assignments. English at any proficiency level can be used for a real purpose.

Interest in Task-Based Language Teaching Julian

Interest in CMC New computer platforms have changed the meaning of ‘audience.’ Students have access to a widely distributed audience. An immediacy in interaction exists in CMC that does not exist on paper. Creative, innovative tasks can be created at a low cost. CMC environments can motivate students in new ways. Students have greater opportunities to construct knowledge.

Purpose To empower and motivate students and to generate findings that will aide ESL teachers in creating higher-quality task-based CMC lessons. To examine the effect of task-based instruction targeting an authentic audience in a CMC environment on six ESL adult learners’ development of writing proficiency To explore their perceptions about the task-based CMC approach, on their motivation to work to improve their English writing skills.

The Literature Task Based Language Teaching

The Literature continued Motivation

Motivation New Web 2.0 tools warrant new explorations into how computer technology can serve as a motivator to learn. Additional research regarding student motivation as generated by a task-based approach to language teaching is needed in order for educators to design motivating tasks. Some studies have been done on the impact of audience in CMC environments. However, little research linking motivation and authentic audience within a task-based, CMC environment has been done. I think I can

Research Questions Does task-based instruction, targeting an authentic audience in a CMC environment, have an effect on ESL learners’ overall writing quality? If so, to what extent is their writing quality due to the task-based CMC approach infusing authentic audience, different from that of their counterparts who were not exposed to this new approach? What are students’ perceptions about the authentic task- based CMC instruction? Does this approach facilitate or debilitate their motivation toward English writing?

Task Descriptions Task 1: Travel Websites – Students were asked to collaborate with a classmate and create a travel website. The audience members for this task were other international students and program faculty. Task 2: State Department Websites – Students were asked to research the role of State Department English Language Officers and create an informative website about their own countries that would be useful for a business traveler going abroad to train English teachers. Task 3: Culture Gap Websites – Students were asked to create a needs analysis survey using an online program and administer it to a group of American students. They then created a informative website based on the needs analysis.

Methods (con.) Data Collection Process essays from this and a previous course (same level, same program) Interview transcriptions Online survey report Data Analysis Both researchers analyzed the writing and the scores were averaged. Interview transcriptions underwent a constant comparison analysis by both researchers who identified emerging themes independently and then collaborated on a final coding of the interview data. These themes were then compared to responses generated by the online questionnaire.

Methods Research Design Concurrent, mixed-methods, case study Participants & Setting 6 adult English language learners, age 28 – 33. Turkish, Ivorian, Saudi Arabian, Vietnamese, Korean, Spanish Post-secondary, Intensive English program, Reading/Writing/Grammar course Instruments Open- and closed-ended questionnaire 30 minute interview Writing scoring rubric

Student Work

Results Quantitative Online questionnaire J23PE/?ts= J23PE/?ts= Writng analysis -

Results (con.) Qualitative (some quotes) ‘Yes I think it’s [technology] good because we learn many computer like analyze things. I like that. Like I like we post our work online, and my family can see all my work. I think it’s a good thing. My family is very happy with that. They can see my evolution.’ ‘I spent a lot of time like because of my homework and it’s difficult but I think it’s good because I’m very motivated.’ ‘Yes I think it’s better because you do more because you know that people will watch so you try to do very well to write very clearly.’ ‘I feel that I want to be more professional in writing, I like it. Maybe in the beginning, I am not interested in writing, because I don’t know what to write before. But now it’s different.’ ‘Ya, you know, because you write for Americans, they know how to read, they know how to write, so I have to do my best. So I have to be more careful when I write. Sometimes I feel how it looks like if they…hmm, you don’t want them laugh about you.’ ‘I’m worried honestly. I’m worried, not my English skill, I worry they misunderstand Turkey. Maybe they misunderstand my mean. This is very worry and this is also very pride thing because I feel represent Turkey.’ Table -

Results Summary Effect on overall writing quality/extent to which improvements due to audience authenticity Student perceptions Motivation?

Discussion

Limitations

Conclusions