INTRODUCTION
Moodle is a Course Management System (CMS), a free and convenient web application that educators can use to create effective online learning sites. The use of Moodle in teaching carries some implications. There are several differences between distance learning and traditional classrooms learning in -at least- two ways; one obvious difference is the place. According to Broadfield (2004), classroom learning requires a number of students personally to attend in a certain place. Whereas, online learning allows students to learn from wherever the learner has access to a network connection, including home, library, and so on. The next difference is the time; distance learning provides 24/7 accessibility to course materials. Broadfield (2004) states that learners have the ability to choose the most convenient schedule in regards to their free time opposed to the more restrictive demands of attending a physical classroom.
This paper will focus on ED students who have experienced using F-learn. To guide my study, I use the research question: What are students‘ experience and expectation of using F-Learn?
At the end of this research, it is expected that this paper can answer what students‘ expectation of using F-learn are. Furthermore it can be a reflection for
teachers for better F-learn and better method of using F-learn.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Distance Education refers to the interactive, educational process between student and teacher separated by physical distance. It adapts to individual differences and the way students react to media. Personality, intellectual abilities, cognitive and learning styles are important concerns in distance education (Harry & Keegan, 1993).
The most common software for distance learning is Moodle, an Open Source Course Management System (CMS), also known as a Learning Management System or a Virtual Learning Environment. It has become very popular among educators around the world as a tool for creating online dynamic web sites for their students.
SWCU used Moodle application named F-learn since 2007 and so far 14 faculties use it. In ED itself, so far there are five teachers who use F-learn. As a software, F-learn does not work alone, it needs people to run the program, generally called user. Users which are human beings have reaction to what they have a deal with, in this case is F-learn. Users who have ever used F-learn have learning experience about using learn, they also have expectation of using F-learn.
(McCluskey, 2001) writes that when we are talking about ‗learning experiences‘, the word ‗learning‘ is strongly bound to our experience of learning
in institutions (schools, colleges, and universities). The word ‗experience‘ refers both to the contact with the world around us and the knowledge we derive from it. By definition, learning experiences are those events and activities from which we learn by experience and can identify, to a certain extent, what we have learnt. Gallagher (2011) describes learning experiences as every situation someone finds themselves in as a learning process.
for how the classroom should operate, then the process of establishing classroom expectations can begin. Expectation informs students‘ choices about how learning
activities come to create the best end, goals and outcomes (Gallagher, 2011). Expectations generally communicate how students treat each other as opposed to procedures that communicate how students operate in the classroom (Evertson & Emmer, 2009).
Many researchs were done to discuss the implementation of Web 2.0 technologies in language classroom (e.g. Mills, 2010; Shih, 2011; and Sumakul, 2012). A lot of studies found positive impact on supporting students‘ learning processes and outcomes (e.g Meskill & Anthony, 2007; Kost, 2008; McLoughlin & Lee, 2008; Waycott & Kennedy, 2009; Mills, 2010, and Sumakul, 2011) but many researchers suggested that Web 2.0 technologies may not always be suitable for formal teaching and learning setting (e.g. Lohnes & Kinzer, 2007; Salaway, Caruso & Nelson, 2007; Waycott, Bennett, Kennedy, Dalgarno & Gray, 2010 and Shih, 2011).
A research done by Omoregie (1997) found that the effectiveness of distance learning is based on preparation, the instructor‘s understanding of the
needs of the students, and an understanding of the target population. Valentine (2002) added that the quality of instruction depends so much on the attitude of the instructor. Therefore, there are so many studies that tried to reveal the issues from instructor‘s point of view. Unfortunately there are not so many researches that see from student‘s point of view even Walcott cited in Carter (2000) found that ―to
to look at the distance teaching from the students‘ point of view‖. That is in in line with Lee (2008) who pointed out that teachers should be aware of the influence of students‘ feedback practices on their expectations and attitudes. That is why, it is
interesting to discuss F-learn in this study.
THE STUDY
Context of the Study
This study took place in ED - SWCU. This university is located in Salatiga, Central Java, Indonesia. ED use F-learn since 2007, in the last three years, there are at least five courses and covers around 200 students use F-learn. learn is used to support teaching and learning process, teachers make use F-learn to upload syllabus, materials or exercises and it is also used as a portal for students to submit or upload their assignments. Although those courses employ F-learn, students are still required to attend regular class.
Participants
Sheppard 2006). Key informants are observant, reflective members of the community of interest who know much about the culture and are both able and willing to share their knowledge (Bernard 2002, Campbell 1955, Seidler 1974, Tremblay 1957).
Most of the participants of this study experienced in using F-learn at least in two different courses with different teachers. The participants are also selected from four different years of admission, so the result of this study can be a sample of thought of ED‘s students in SWCU.
Method and Methodology
An attempt to answer the Research Question ―What are students‘ experience and expectation of using F-Learn?‖ is included in qualitative research. Strauss and Corbin (1990) claim that qualitative methods can be used to better understand any phenomenon about which little is yet known. It can also be used to gain new perspectives on things about which much is already known, or to gain more in-depth information. Mack, N. et.al (2005) added, it is the best way to understand a given research problem or topic from the perspectives of the local population it involves. Qualitative research is especially effective in obtaining
culturally specific information about the values, opinions, behaviors, and social contexts of particular populations.
histories, perspectives, and experiences, particularly when sensitive topics are being explored.
Data Instrument
[image:7.595.99.518.213.617.2]In order to collect the data from the participants, semi-structured interview was employed. Mack, N. et.al (2005) said that a semi-structured approach to interview represents a compromise between standardization and flexibility. Bahasa Indonesia was used in the interview, in order to make particpants fully understand the questions and can comfortably answer those questions. There are six guide questions that is used (Table 1).
Table 1. Guide questions
Experience Expectation
The definition of F-learn In-class meeting
Features Features
Perception toward the use of F-learn Teacher‘s role
To see participants‘ experience, first, I asked participants about their
understanding toward the definition of F-learn, this is important to see how far participants know F-learn. Second question is asking about features. Third question is about participants‘ perception on the effectiveness of F-learn so far.
This is to wrap up previous questions. Whether participants satisfy with the use of F-learn so far or not.
of in-class meeting need to be conducted. Because in ED, students are still required to come every week even they use F-learn. Second question is about participants‘ expectation toward features, since they did not have any experience
in synchronous activities. Last question is about teacher‘s role. This question is raised because during the interview, many of the participants gave suggestion on it. Data Analysis
To analyze the data, first, the recording was transcribed. Pseudonym is adopted in the discussion to present the data. The body of textual material then reviewed to identify important features and then reviewed to identify its patterns. Identification of patterns leads to some generalizations or tentative conclusions regarding the data. Those are based on what Bogdan and Biklen presented qualitative data analysis as "working with data, organizing it, breaking it into manageable units, synthesizing it, searching for patterns, discovering what is important and what is to be learned, and deciding what you will tell others" (1982).
Procedure
discussion the grouping of the data are presented and discussed. Then the conclusion is drawn by looking at their expectations and examine whether their expectations are underlie by their experience or not.
DISCUSSION
A. Experience – Definition of F-learn
flearn.uksw.edu defines F-learn as ―Media Pembelajaran On-line Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana (an On-line learning media of Satya Wacana Christian University)‖. Isenberg and Glancy (2011) added, ―Online learning
media is digital media that is created and displayed using computer technology for the purpose of learning.‖ By those two definitions it is clear that F-learn is digital
media of SWCU that is created and displayed using computer technology for the purpose of learning.
When being asked to define F-learn, most of the participants came up with explaining that F-learn is a tool or an online system to support or assist both students and teachers in teaching and learning process. These facts were mentioned by Marni “Flexible learning is an online facility to assist students to learn outside class room besides regular in-class room meeting.‖ Lastri also has similar point, saying that F-learn is ―A tool to assist students and teachers in teaching and learning process.‖
system to support teaching-learning process that is not requiring students to come
to class.‖ His answer is supported by Hassenburg (2009) who pointed out that the core advantage of on-line learning system is at the freedom to choose time and place for learning. Flexible!
Interestingly, there are some students that gave restricted meaning of F-learn by explaining that F-F-learn is used for few activities only, even actually there are much possible activities that students can do using F-learn. These are their answers:
“F-learn is a tool for teachers to distribute the materials for students.” –YAYUK
“A tool that facilitate teachers to give information to students and can be used for students to submit assignments.” –NUNUNG “Online facility that teachers usually use it to give assignments for students.” –ENDANG
These participants gave such perceptions on F-learn likely based on their past experience that they used F-learn in only few activities. Just like what Burgoon (1994) said that perception is the process of making sense out of an experience as well as the imputing of meaning to experience. In other words, a perception of a person will be tremendously affected by his/her past experience.
that they only used F-learn in a few or even just one activity. This will be elaborated in the next point of discussion.
B. Experience – Activities in F-Learn
The idea of distance learning is to facilitate its users to conduct teaching and learning process without requiring to physically attending a certain place (Broadfield, 2004). Even so, there are many activities that can be done through distance learning applications. There are two primary types of distance learning activities, synchronous and asynchronous (Hines & Pearl, 2004). Synchronous learning can be effectively used for explaining difficult concepts, introducing new topics, delivering lectures via web conference or teleconference, hosting guest speakers, and question and answer sessions. While asynchronous learning can be effectively used for in-depth discussions that take place over time, role playing, application activities based on case study scenarios, one-to-one interactions among students and activities that require more independent thinking time (Johns Hopkins University School of Education, Center for Technology in Education, 2010)
Table 2: Participants‘ experience in using F-learn
Get information Checking class description, checking syllabus, checking grades, checking teacher‘s accouncement,
downloading materials
Submit assignments Submit / upload assignments
Discuss in a discussion forum
Discuss in a discussion forum
Some teachers post their class description on F-learn and let the students check it by themselves online. It usually contains an overview about the goal of the class, the activities that students are going to have, some information like for example the class is a prerequisite class for other class. This became favorite answer of participants since Yayuk and Cipluk and most of the other participants mentioned this activity. Here is what Yayuk said, ―To inform the students about class description….‖Yayuk also mentioned the same thing ―To see class description, ….― –Cipluk
“To inform the students about the syllabus….. And if I could choose, I prefer that teacher distribute the syllabus via F-learn rather than printed in papers since it could easily lose”–Watik.
In addition to syllabus, Teachers post the grades on F-learn so students can check it online. Some teachers even made in the order from the highest to the lowest grade. Participants said that this strategy gives them a challenge to get good grades.
“…and to see grades. And I think showing grades on F-learn this gives a challenge because you do not want your friends seeing your name in the bottom of the order”–Kodir.
Students receive the course syllabus at the beginning of the semester which contain time table, but when there is a sudden change of the date or the activity for the following meeting, teacher posts the announcement on F-learn. Atik states, “Teachers used F-learn to to inform the students about the schedule, and to announce students if there is a change of the schedule...” The announcement is also sometime only a reminder for students of deadline, quizzes or tests, like what Lastri said,“as a reminder of tasks and tests…”
Sometime, teachers use electronic book (e-book) instead of printed textbook. Teachers then store the e-book on F-learn which can be downloaded by students who are enrolled in the course. Endang said, “Teachers use it to distribute materials for students to download them….”
by Marni who mentions, “To submit assignments….” and Diah, “….upload/submit assignments.”
In discussion forum, (non-real-time), teachers post an issue in form of statement and or question which students are required to solve or discuss by commenting on it. Aminah said, “…and to discuss a certain topic in a discussion forum”
Participants‘ answers indicate that the participants are experiencing narrow activities of using F-learn, most of the activities tend to be more like the teacher posts something and the students check them in later time. It is clear that F-learn is only used for asynchronous activities. All of the participants did not have any experience in using F-learn as synchronous system, so it leaves a huge opportunity for F-learn to be explored more or to be maximized of its use.
C. Experience – The effectiveness of F-Learn
Shanker and Hu (2008) said that an effective distance learning use both learning environments, asynchronous and synchronous communication tools like chat, peer-to-peer, e-mail, video conferencing, etc. That statement can be interpreted that distance learning that only use one type, synchronous or asynchronous, is less effective compared to distance learning that uses both types.
far is not effective yet.” Even so, participants mentioned several reasons behind
their answers. From the previous discussion, it is clear that participants did not experience many activities in F-learn. Aside from measuring the effectiveness in terms of asynchronous and synchronous modes, some participants stated that some other factors, like the lack of teacher feedback and poor quality internet connection, affect the effectiveness of F-learn.
This is not a surprising fact that most of participants answered that the use of F-learn so far is not effective, since they did not experience many activities through F-learn, and more importantly, the fact that they do not experience any synchronous activities. Atun is one of the participants who answered,“Not effective, because the teacher only used it to post assignments”.
Although they had discussion through F-learn, participants were not guided and monitored. Wassermann (2010) in her article listed several guidelines in order to achieve effective discussion. In the list, teacher needs to get involved in students‘ discussion to appreciate Students' ideas and to clarify what students
mean when an understanding is elusive. Cathy and Terence (2002) also suggest that instructor give fast feedback to students. Unfortunately, from participants‘ answers, it seems that teachers did not do this. Lastri said,“It is not effective, because in discussion forum the teacher did not give feedback at all, so students
got confuse.”
all involved in distance learning.‖ (Valentine, 2002). Endang said,“The problem is on the poor internet connection.”Similarly, Atik stated,“…often the internet connection is bad!” Their arguments support Teaster and Bliesner (1999) who
found that unanticipated technical problems negatively affected the overall quality of learning process. It becomes even clearer that Threlkeld & Brzoska (1994) in their study found that when establishing a distance education program, one of the most important things to be considered is the foundational network and telecommunications.
To sum up, it can be concluded that most of participants think that the use F-learn so far is not effective. The reasons behind their answer are the participants did not experience many activities in F-learn, lack of teacher feedback, and poor quality internet connection. During the interview to seek participants‘ experience on using F-learn, they also mentioned some suggestions
to improve F-learn. It means that participants have expectation for better F-learn. Participants‘ expectation on F-learn will be covered in next section.
Challenges
Unstable Internet connection cause a failure when participants tried to download material or upload assignments, or even F-learn cannot be opened. This problem is depressing, as good internet connection is essential for teaching-learning process via F-learn. That makes Atik and her friends highly suggested that the supporting unit for distance learning can assure that the internet connection is good enough. She states,“Of course the internet connection matter it should be fixed first, so students get guarantee that internet connection always
works well.”
No one can help to solve those that issue except technician or any concerned party. Valentine (2002) said that ―One overlooked factor in the success
or failure of distance learning programs is the role that the technicians play in distance learning.‖ It is expected that the technician give a good respond toward these issues, in order to make F-learn and the use of F-learn more effective.
D. Expectation - Features
In this first point, researcher will present participants point of view toward expectation on features they wished to have in F-learn since they only have experience in asyncronous activities. Participants were asked what features they wished to have in F-learn and they could answer the question as broad as possible.
Ironically, most of them mentioned features that actually F-learn had already had, but
were not used by teachers yet. Like online test and chat box/ direct message. Some came
up with a suggestion to integrate F-learn with another software which is called Dropbox.
Interestingly, because participants are chosen from various backgrounds, some of them
also mentioned discussion forum / forum just because they never done discussion forum
via F-learn. For the following discussion, the explanation of those proposed activities are
taken from moodle.org.
Watik suggested that Online-test can be done via F-learn. moodle.org explains that teacher can design and create quizzes based on large variety of question types, such as multiple choice, true false, and short answer questions. Here is Watik‘s answer, “Online test maybe can be applied using F-learn, so all
of the students access F-learn together in certain times and do the test at the same
time but from wherever they are.”
“Chat box to directly chat with other students or teacher will be so much helpful so students do not use SMS or email to contact the teacher or other students.”
Atik recommended that Dropbox system can be integrated in F-learn. She said, “..It would be much better if the Drop-box‟s system is applied in F-learn…” wikipedea.org defines Dropbox as ―file hosting service that offers cloud storage,
file synchronization, and client software. Dropbox allows users to create a special folder on each of their computers, which Dropbox then synchronizes so that it appears to be the same folder (with the same contents) regardless of which computer is used to view it. Files placed in this folder are also accessible through a website and mobile phone applications.‖ www.dropbox.com has briefer definition. It says that In Dropbox, users can put their files in Dropbox and get the same files in others computers, phones, or tablets.
Diah and Watik mentioned discussion-forum. module.org defines discussion forum / forum as ―an activity where students and teachers can exchange ideas by posting comments‖ It also said that ―A forum can contribute
significantly to successful communication and community building in an online environment.‖ Watik said “It would be great if there is discussion forum in it
where students and teachers can discuss certain topic.” Her suggestion is also supported by Diah who mentions, “There are some features that had been there already, but teachers did not use it, as example, there is a feature that students
can post a question or an issue and another students or the teacher can comment
E. Expectation – In-class meeting
(Broadfield, 2004). One essential advantage of distance education is the freedom for students to choose place for learning (Hassenburg, 2009). Unluckily, it is not the case in SWCU. Students are still required to come to class even though they use F-learn in their class. Based on that phenomenon, participants are asked ―What are your expectations in terms of face-to-face, for classes using F-learn?‖
In general, there are only two different answers given by participants. The first group expected that in-class meeting can be conducted every other week. The second group stated that in-class meeting weekly is necessary. These two answers imply that regular face to face meeting is necessary. However, those belong to the group who agrees that the meeting is every other week has significant reason that is worth discussing.
Most participants expected that in-class meeting is conducted every other week since they think that in-class meeting regularly is impractical because sometime teacher only re-do activity that has been done in F-learn. Aminah‘s stated, “One week meet, one week not. Meeting in-class every week was sometime useless because some of the activities actually had already done in F-learn” Ratna also agrees with Aminah by saying, “One week meet, one week not. Because the materials which students get from F-learn is the same with the
materials that students get in the class room.”In addition, Aminah, Ratna and
-class meeting is still necessary because teachers still need to explain important
points of materials or to discuss assignments.” –Aminah. These participants also
proposed an idea, a complementary activity that might be done in this strategy. “So at in-class meeting time the teacher can teach what they need to teach and
also to assign the students of what they need to do in F-learn for the following
week.”–Marni. Her idea also supported by Ratna who said,“In-class meeting can
be used for teacher to explain some important points. And when do not meet,
teachers can assign students to do assignments.” The idea to combine off-class learning / online class learning with face-to-face learning is not a new approach. It has been used in academy in more than four decades (Dziuban, Hartman, Moskal 2004). There are quite a lot of terms referring this practice, including blended learning, mixed mode instruction, and hybrid learning, which basically refer to a same concept. Dziuban et al. (2004) said that ―The term ―blended learning‖ refers to courses that combine face-to-face classroom instruction with online learning and reduced classroom contact hours (reduced seat time)‖
There rests of the participants prefer that in-class need to be conducted every week, just like normal class. They think that the use of F-learn is limited only to what they have already experienced. Atik said, “As usual, every week, because I think F-learn is just an additional instrument to support
teaching-learning process and F-learn cannot substitute the regular meeting in class.‖ Yayuk even has clearer point by answering,“Every week, because F-learn is just an additional tool to help teachers to distribute materials and inform students
using F-learn. These participants had the experience of receiving an explanation from the teachers via F-learn, but they found it not sufficient or difficult to understand. Cipluk is one of them by saying “in-class meeting still needed regularly because it is clearer when teachers explain the materials directly
in-class.‖ Her point is supported by Lastri by answering, “As usual, per week because sometime students don‟t understand only by reading teachers explanation
in F-learn. Teachers need to teach in-class orally.‖ Pedretti and Lippe (2012) in their latest paper wrote that using Moodle still beneficial in traditional classroom, such as teacher prepare, assemble, and post materials online.
To sum up, Participants expectations suggest that in-class meeting cannot be replaced by distance learning, since clarity is more negotiable when direct interaction happens in classroom. In addition, blended or hybrid learning should be more carefully designed to avoid overlap activities between online and in-class learning. Teacher needs to have proper strategy to combine in-class activity and distance activity. From this point, it is clear that the role of the teacher is an important aspect. Therefore, the role of the teacher will be elaborated more in the next point.
F. Expectation – Roles of teachers
To continue the previous discussion which result on pointing out the importance of teacher‘s role, participants are asked about their expectation of the
instructors and their attitudes towards teaching in a distance-learning environment as a major potential roadblock to effective distance education. Walcott, cited in Carter(2000), found in their study that ―to effectively bridge the gaps between classroom and distance teaching, faculty need to look at the distance teaching from the students‘ point of view‖. Participants‘ answers are divided into two
categories, the first one examines about the expected teachers role, and the second one discusses about teachers‘ feedback.
Blended learning considered to be the proper combination of technologies in addition to face to face learning (Farooq, 2013). He also said that the proper teacher role depends upon the usage of technologies with face to face teaching enrolments. Armes (2012) added that in blended learning, the classroom teacher‘s role can expand in challenging and stimulating ways.
Most of participants experienced being requested by their teacher to download material from F-learn, and prepare themselves by reading the materials before in-class meeting. Participants find a problem in this practice. The problem is that teacher assumes the students already understand the material. Just like what Diah said, “Sometime teachers assume that students have understood the materials because students have already had the materials before the class.” So
at the following in-class meeting teacher does not explain the material and continue to the next discussion. In this case, participants expect a traditional role of a teacher (Choudhury, 2011) who teach and makes sure that students understand the
cannot automatically lead to learning for the simple reason that learning is primarily a
personal construt controlled by the individual learner‖Here is Yayuk‘s respond, “Students can download the materials from F-Learn and learn by his/herself, but
teacher still should teach and make sure students understand the materials.
”Aminah also has similar response “As usual, teacher has a responsibility to teach and explain unclear points.”
The second suggestion,participants expect that teacher holds their role as tutor (Harmer, 2001) who give feedback and offer guidance. So far, teacher does not
give comprehensive feedback and even sometime teacher only write an ―OK‖ as a feedback. It becomes confusing for students when they need to know whether they have learnt the expected objectives. If the students do not understand what they are supposed to do they may well not get full advantage from an activity (Harmer, 2001).
Here are some responds from participants concerning this issue,
“Teacher should be more details in giving feedback, not only an „OK‟, so students know what is wrong and what is right” – Nunung
“In F-learn teacher should be more active in forum discussion by giving meaningful feedback, so we (students) know „where we should go‟ in discussing a certain topic.‖ –Aminah
“Feedback should be clearer, teacher should pay attention more in giving feedback so students can clearly get what the teachers mean.”–Watik
In the case above, the appropriate teacher feedback is needed to support their learning by elaborating which is right and wrong answer. Ragan (2007) supported by saying ―Effective online instructors provide timely, quality, and
“Teachers should be more serious in discussion forum, make sure the students to actively contribute in the discussion because there is a good chance for students to learn from others. Because the last time my class use discussion forum, the teacher did not require all of the students to contribute in the discussion, and the teacher did not give grades to active students who contribute, so it is kind of useless. ” –Marni
Teacher feedback is necessary to appreciate students‘ effort for involving in the discussion forum. Anderson (2001) states, ―In online discussions, your students will feel motivated to participate and learn when teacher provide timely feedback to comment, confirm, evaluate, or to question‖ Ragan (2007) also added
by saying that teacher needs to provide meaningful feedback with recognition of good work as well as specific suggestions for improvement.
CONCLUSION
This study has presented ED students‘ experience and expectation toward the use of F-learn in FLL SWCU. The study found that most of students are able to describe the definition of F-learn nearly the same as the definition in its website. Interestingly there are few participants interpreted F-learn in restricted meaning by saying that F-learn is an application that used for only one or two activities. That statement is explained by the fact that participants are experiencing relatively narrow activities of using F-learn, and only within scope asynchronous system, despite the fact that F-learn also can be used for synchronous activities.
learning use both learning environments, synchronous and asynchronous communication tools. Even so, there are some other reasons; lack of teacher feedback and poor quality internet connection, make participants think the use F-learn so far was not effective.
Participants have expectations toward features, teaching and learning method, and the role of the teacher. In the first point discussing about features, participants suggested online test, chat box / direct message, discussion forum, and Dropbox. Most of those feature are actually had already been in F-learn. This shows that they have never experienced in using those features. Here, teachers are suggested to be more aware of the potential that F-learn has and can utilize them to meet better outcome.
Regarding the expected teaching and learning method, particularly on in-class meeting. The interviews suggest that in-in-class meeting cannot be replaced by distance learning, since clarity is more negotiable when direct interaction happens in classroom. Faroq (2013) said, ―Blended learning modernized and considered to be the proper combination of technologies in addition to face to face learning‖. In
addition, blended learning should be more carefully designed to avoid overlap activities between online and in-class learning.
Faroq (2013) also said that the proper teacher role depends upon the usage of technologies with face to face teaching enrolments. But from participants‘ point of view, participants suggest that teachers still need to hold
feedback for activities such as discussion forum. Ragan (2007) supported by stated ―Effective online instructors provide timely, quality, and appropriate feedback to support and facilitate students‘ learning process‖. Teacher feedback is also necessary to appreciate students‘ effort for involving in the discussion forum.
Since this study only explores students‘ point of view, further research needs to be done from teachers‘ point of view. So there better understanding
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research project would not have been possible without the support of many people.
I would like to express my very great appreciation to my supervisor, Christian Rudianto, M. Appling., for his valuable and constructive suggestions during the planning and development of this final paper work. Deepest gratitude are also due to advice and useful insight given by my examiner Dian Toar Y.G. Sumakul,S.Pd.,M.A..
I am particularly grateful for the prayers, support, and motivation from Rosita Adi Kristanti and my beloved family.
I wish to acknowledge the help provided by many of my colleagues Ivana Mary Puspitasari for introducing me to the topic, Krisma Putra Salim and Ardiyarso Kurniawan who are always available to share their ideas and help me in making this paper, and to Niners family who give me abundant encouragement and inspiration.
Furthermore I am grateful to grow in ED of SWCU which gave me opportunity to learna lot of valuable lessons from many good lectures.
REFERENCES
Armes, C. (2012).The Role of the Teacher in Blended Learning: Data,
Management, and Student Support.The science of learning blog. Retrieved from:
http://www.scilearn.com/blog/role-of-the-teacher-in-blended-learning.php
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, R. D., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing
teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of
Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17.
Bates, T. (1995). Technology: Open learning and distance education. New York: Routledge.
Berge, Z.L. (1995). Facilitating Computer Conferencing: The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator. Educational Tech.
Bernard, H.R. (2002). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative methods (3rd ed). California :AltaMira Press
Bernard, R. M., Abram, P. C., Lou, Y.,Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., etal. (2004). How does distance educationcompare with classroom
instruction? Ameta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, 379-439.
Bogdan, R. C. &Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Branon, R. F., & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronousand asynchronous communicationtools in distanceeducation: A survey ofinstructors. TechTrends, 45, 36-42.
Carter, A. (2001). Interactive distance education: Implications for the adult learner. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28 (3), 249-261.
Cavanaugh, C., & Cavanaugh, T. (2002). Distance Learning Success Factors in the Resources-Processes-Results Cycle and the Web Accessibility
Guidelines. University of North Florida
Charles, D. D., Joel, L. H., Patsy, D. M. (2004). Blended Learning. Boulder: Colorado.
Choudhury, A. S. (2011). Classroom roles of English language teachers: The traditional and the innovative. 1, 33-40
Clark, M. (2001). The Soft Technology of Distance Education. Available from: http://www.uc.edu/ucitnow/summer_ol/softtech.html
Danz, N.P., Regal, R.R. Niemi, G.J. Brady, V.J. Hollenhorst, T. Johnson, L.B. Host, G.E. Hanowski, J.M. Johnston, C.A. Brown, T. Kingston J. & Kelly. J.R. (2005). Environmentally stratified sampling design for the development of Great Lakes environmental indicators. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 102:41-65.
Emmer, E. T., &Evertson, C. M. (2009). Classroom Management for Middle and High School Teachers. London : Pearson
Gallagher, S. (2011). What is a Learning Experience?. Available from
https://sites.google.com/a/adlnet.gov/future-learning-experience-project/project-updates/whatisalearningexperience
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Longman.
Hines, R. A., & Pearl, C. E. (2004). Increasinginteraction in web-based
instruction:Using synchronous chats andasynchronous discussions. Rural SpecialEducation Quarterly,23, 33-36.
Isenberg, S. & Fletcher, G. (2011). Taxonomy of Online Media: Integrating Andragogy, Transformative Learning, and Media Synchronicity Theory to
Improve Learning. Lindenwood University, St. Charles.
Johns Hopkins University School of Education, Center for Technology in Education (2010). Synchronous vs. Asynchronous Distance Learning Activities. Available from
http://olms.cte.jhu.edu/olms/data/resource/7643/Synchronous%20vs%20As
ynchronous%20Learning%20Activities.pdf
Keith, H., Magnus, J., & Keegan, D. (1993). Distance education - New perspectives. London :Routledge.
Kost, C. R. (2008). Use of communication strategies in a synchronous CMC environment. In S. S. Magnan (Ed.), Mediating discourse online (pp. 153-190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lee, L (2008). Focus-on-form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 53-72. Lewis, J.L. & Sheppard, S.R.J. (2006). Culture and communication: can landscape
visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? Landscape and Urban Planning 77:291–313.
Lohnes, S. & Kinzer, C. (2007). Questioning assumptions about students' expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate, 3(5).
McCluskey, A. (2009). Tracing out learning experiences. Available from http://www.connected.org/learn/Learning-experiences.html
McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. J. W. (2008). Mapping the digital terrain: New media and social software as catalysts for pedagogical change. In Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educational technology? Proceedings ascilite Melbourne 2008.
Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2007). Form-focused communicative practice via CMC: What language learners say. CALICO Journal, 25 (1), 69-90. Michael Burgoon, Frank G. Hunsaker, Edwin J. Dawson (1994). Human
Communication. Sage Publication.
Mills, N. (2010). Situated learning through social networking communities: The development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire. CALICO Journal, 28 (2), 345-368.
Moodle Website.Quiz module. Retrieved from: http://docs.moodle.org/20/en/Quiz_module
National Center for Accessible Media (2005).Guidelines for developing
accessiblesynchronouscommunication andcollaboration tools. Available fromhttp://ncam.wgbh.org/salt/guidelines/sec7.html
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2000). Making the transition: Helping teachers to teach online. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE: Thinking it through.
Nashville,Tennessee. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NUsing Moodle: Hybrid Instructional Formats)
Pedretti, P. &Lippe, G. (2012). Using Moodle in the Traditional Classroom. Retrieved from http://www.wfbschools.com/CompSci/UsingMoodle.pdf
Punjab, M. K. F. (2013). Roleof Class TeacherinBlendedLearningEnvironment. Lahore: InformationTechnologyBoard(PITB).
http://florida.theorangegrove.org/og/file/489805c0-7346-6cb7-320a-5610cb10f9da/1/OnlineEdu.pdf
Romiszowski, A., & Mason, R. (2004).Computer-mediated communication.In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook ofresearch on educational
communicationsand technology (pp. 397-432). Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rovy, B., & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous andasynchronous communication tools indistance education.TechTrends, 45, 36-42.
Salaway, G., Caruso, J. & Nelson, M. (2007). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2007. Boulder, Colorado:
EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research.
Shanker, M. & Michael Y. Hu (2008).Improving Teaching Effectiveness Using Distance Education Tools. Kent State University, USA: IGI Global.
Shih, R.-C. (2011). Can web 2.0 technology assist college students in learning English writing? Integrating Facebook and peer assessment with blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27 (Special Issue, 5), 829-845.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Sumakul, D. T. Y. G. (2012). CMC in ELT: Teories and Practices. Research in teacher education: What, how, and why? Proceedings of the 6th FBS
International Seminar (pp. 229-253). Salatiga: Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University.
Sumakul, D. T. Y. G. (2011). EFL Learners' Communication Strategies in Coping with Grammatical Difficuties in Synchronous CMC. Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
Teaster, P., &Blieszner, R. (1999).Promises and pitfalls of the interactive television approach to teaching adult development and aging. Educational Gerontology, 25 (8), 741-754.
Threlkeld, R., &Brzoska, K. (1994). Research in distance education.: Strategies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Tremblay, M.A. (1957). The key informant technique: a nonethnographic application. American Anthropologist 59:699-701.
Valentine, D. (2002). Distance Learning: Promises, Problems, and Possibilities. University of Oklahoma
Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B. & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202-1211.
Waycott, J. & Kennedy, G. (2009). Mobile and Web 2.0 technologies in
undergraduate science: Situating learning in everyday experience. In Same places, different spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009.
Wassermann, S. (2010). Meeting Students Where They Are: Effective Classroom Discussions, 67. Retrieved from:
