Main Article Content

Abstract

This article presents part of a study on the implementation of online portfolios in an EFL writing class and is focused on the facilitation of online portfolio implementation. Students’ experiences in learning EFL writing using the online portfolios and my experiences in facilitating the online portfolio implementation were explored through action research. As for methods for generating data, this study involved students’ interviews, my reflective journals, and an analysis of students’ online portfolio entries. The study reveals that throughout the action research, problems emerged dealing with the use of a blog as the online portfolio platform, online feedback activities and students’ reflection. Some changes in the instructional plan were made throughout the three action research cycles in this study which include; guidance for peer feedback and reflection, organization of students’ online portfolios and procedure of peer commenting. The study suggests that the success of the online portfolio implementation in facilitating students’ learning of EFL writing requires teachers’ understandings of their own roles as well as their willingness to undertake and develop their roles as facilitators in an e-learning environment.

Article Details

How to Cite
Warni, S. (2017). Facilitating an Implementation of Online Portfolios in an EFL Writing Class. Journal of ELT Research: The Academic Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 24-36. Retrieved from https://journal.uhamka.ac.id/index.php/jer/article/view/158

References

  1. Anderson, G. L., & Herr, K. (2005). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty: Sage Publications, Incorporated.
  2. Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT journal, 54(2), 153-160.
  3. Barrett, H. C. (2005). Researching electronic portfolios and learner engagement. The Reflect Initiative, TaskStream Inc.
  4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5 (1), 7-74.
  5. De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R. J. (2006). Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35(3), 257-286.
  6. Freedman, S. W. (1987) Response to student writing (Research Report No. 23), National Council of Teachers of English: Urbana, IL.
  7. González, K., Padilla, J. E., & Rincón, D. A. (2011). Roles, Functions and Necessary Competences for Teachers’ Assessment in b-Learning Contexts. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 149-157.
  8. Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J.M., Steeples, C. & Tickner, S. (2001). Competencies for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology, Research and Development 49(1): 65–72.
  9. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S.R., Teles, L. & Turoff, M. (1997). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MITT Press.
  10. Hartnell-young, E., Harrison, C., Crook, C., Pemberton, R., Joyes, G., Fisher, T., & Davies, L. (2007). The impact of e-portfolios on learning.
  11. Jones, J. (2001). CALL and the teacher's role in promoting learner autonomy. CALL-EJ Online, 3(1), 3-1.
  12. Joyes, G., Gray, L., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2010). Effective practice with e-portfolios: How can the UK experience inform implementation?. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1).
  13. Kalkowski, P. (2001). Peer and cross-age tutoring. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory School Improvement Research Series. Retrieved from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/9/c018.html.
  14. Kariman, T. M. (2005). Challenges in English Language Education in Indonesia. Linguistik terapan, 2(2).
  15. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner, 3rd Ed. Geelong: Deakin University.
  16. Kern, R. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Using e-mail exchanges to explore personal histories in two cultures. Telecollaboration in foreign language learning, 105-119.
  17. Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of social issues, 2(4), 34-46.
  18. McKernan, J. (1988). The Countenance of Curriculum Action Research: Traditional, Collaborative, and Emancipatory-Critical Conceptions. Journal of curriculum and supervision, 3(3), 173-200.
  19. McNiff, J. (1988). Action research: Principles and practice. London: Routledge Publishers.
  20. McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (1996). You and your action research project. London: Routledge.
  21. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2005). Action research for teachers: David Fulton.
  22. Moon, J. (2001). PDP working paper 4 reflection in higher education learning. Higher Education Academy www. heacademy. ac. uk/resources. asp.
  23. Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing academic English. (4th Ed.). New York: Pearson Longman
  24. Parr, J. M., & Timperley, H. S. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing writing, 15(2), 68-85.
  25. Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge university press.
  26. Sim, J. W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2010). The use of weblogs in higher education settings: A review of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 5(2), 151-163.
  27. Stacey, E., & Gerbic, P. (2008). Success factors for blended learning. Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings ascilite Melbourne 2008, 964-968.
  28. Stephenson, J. (2001). Teaching and Learning Online: Pedagogies for New Technologies.
  29. London: Kogan Page.
  30. Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action research for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.