HUMANISING MOBILE ONLINE ESL BLENDED LEARNING MODEL

Tengku Intan Suzila  Tengku Sharif; Mohd Yusri  Mohamad Noor; Siti Rohana  Omar; Teo Kok  Seong

doi:10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp473-494

Tengku Intan Suzila Tengku Sharif Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara Cawangan Pahang, 27600 Raub, Pahang, Malaysia.
Mohd Yusri Mohamad Noor Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi Mara Cawangan Pahang, 27600 Raub, Pahang, Malaysia.
Siti Rohana Omar Centre for Environment and Sustainability, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, 76100 Durian Tunggal, Melaka, Malaysia.
Teo Kok Seong Institute of Ethnic Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp473-494

Abstract

Background and Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic has given a massive proliferation of technology, particularly in education, redefining language learning from face-to-face (F2F) and off-classroom known as blended learning (BL) to a new kind in online distance learning/education (ODL/E). BL is now a mix of synchronous and asynchronous learning. The shift, however impressive it may appear, does not guarantee the effectiveness of the learning process. The gap that leads to the current study is how bibliometrics has shown minimal focus on undergraduates’ acceptance of these changes, especially in English as a Second Language (ESL) learning classes to the newly embraced online BL (OBL) and how humanistic values are important in ESL lessons. Thus the study sets out to understand several issues pertaining to the use of mobile communication devices as a learning tool in ESL MoBL.

Methodology: The present study is a mixed-method research approach using a sequential exploratory design. A set of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) questionnaires was distributed to understand 264 teacher-trainers, degree and diploma students’ inclination towards ESL mobile learning platforms after a semester of mobile open blended learning (MoBL) integration, whilst side-lining the unnecessary information of Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2). Interviews based on Analysis, Design, Assess, and Belief (ADAB) Model further enriched the data on the humanisation aspects of MoBL.

Findings: Findings showed that learners’ inclination to the new MoBL can be affected by gender, age, and maturity. Thus to implement a more humanistic learning modification demands a thorough understanding of students’ needs.

Contributions: The novelty of these findings is the sampling contrasting both degree and diploma students along with teacher-trainees’ perceptions of humanistic values in OBL highlights the effects of, age, maturity and gender on technology in education. This paper suggests a discussion on the humanistic MoBL model for ESL learners. The future implication of the findings suggests age, maturity, and gender affect students’ inclination towards the new MoBL, and pushes the need for more humanistic essences in MoBL.

Keywords: Education, ESL and ELT, humanistic values, mobile learning model, online blended learning, and open distance learning.

Cite as: Tengku Intan Suzila, T. S., Mohd Yusri, M. N., Omar, S. R., & Teo, K. S. (2022). Humanizing mobile online ESL blended learning model. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 7(2), 473-494. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol7iss2pp473-494

References

A.D.A.B Model (2021). Universiti Teknologi Mara. https://cidl.uitm.edu.my/CG-ADAB.php

Abu-Dalbouh, H. M. (2013). A questionnaire approach based on the technology acceptance model for mobile tracking on patient progress applications. Journal of Computer Science, 2(6), 763-770.

Abou-Khalil, V., Helou, S., Khalifé, E., Chen, M. A., Majumdar, R., & Ogata, H. (2021). Emergency online learning in low-resource settings: Effective student engagement strategies. Education Sciences, 11(24), 1-18.

Andujar, A. (2016). Benefit of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing. System, 62(1), 63-76.

Annabi, C., & Wilkins, T. (2016). The use of MOOCs in transnational higher education for accreditation of prior learning, programme delivery, and professional development. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), 959-975.

Arulogun, O. T., Akande, O. N., Akindele, A. T., & Badmus, T. A. (2020). Survey dataset on open and distance learning students’ intention to use social media and emerging technologies for online facilitation. Data in Brief, 31(1), 1-8.

Aspy, D. N. (1974). Toward a technology for humanizing education. Research Press Company.

Avci, H., & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A case study on mobile-blended collaborative learning in an English as a foreign language (EFL) context. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(7), 45-58.

Aydin, B. (2021). Determining the effect of student-content interaction, instructor-student interaction and student-student interaction on online education satisfaction level. In W. B. James, C. C., & M. Cavusoglu (Eds.), Advances in global education
and research (pp. 1–9). M3 Publishing.

Bisquolm, S. (2021). The digital challenge – On how we live and cope with digital dangers. (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Zurich.

Chuttur, M. Y. (2009). Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments, and future directions. Working Papers on Information Systems, 9(37), 9-37.

Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49(15), 91-96.

Dismas, W. (2019). The effects of KAHOOT! In teaching reading to tenth grade students. Magister Scientiae, 45(1), 86-105.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

Gunuç, S. (2017). Technology integration in English language teaching and learning. The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 5(2), 349-358.

Han, Y., Tian, L., & Cheng, W. (2017). Design and implementation of mobile blended learning model based on WeChat public platform. MATEC Web of Conferences, 100(1), 1-6.

Hoong, L. S., Thi, L. S., & Lin, M.-H. (2017). Affective technology acceptance model: Extending technology acceptance model with positive and negative affect. Knowledge Management Strategies and Applications, 1(1), 147-165.

Huang, R., Tlili, A., Chang, T. W., & Zhang, X. (2020). Disrupted classes, undisrupted learning during COVID-19 outbreak in China: Application of open educational practices and resources. Smart Learning Environments, 7(19), 1-15.

Issabekova, A. K., & Katenov, А. К. (2021). The phenomenon of synergy in education. In Business, economy and society: Challenges in a post-pandemic era (pp. 193-196). KIMEP University.

Kai Wen, K. Y., & Tan, K. H. (2020). ESL teachers’ intention in adopting online educational technologies during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 7(4), 387-394.

Kamarulzaman, W., & Siew, W. H. (2020). Program evaluation on learning materials, tutors, assessment matters and overall program structure from ODL students' perspective. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(7), 3142-3147.

Kellermann, D. (2021, March 8). Academics aren’t content creators, and it’s regressive to make them so. The Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/academics-arent-content-creators-and-its-regressive-make-them-
so

Khodeir, L. M. (2018). Blended learning methods as an approach to teaching project management to architecture students. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57(4), 3899–3905.

Majeed, M. R. A., & Muslim, I. M. (2016). Technology usage in English language teaching and learning: Reality and dream. Journal of College of Education for Women, 27(6), 2180-2191.

Melor, M. Y. (2018). Innovation in education and lan¬guage learning in 21st century. Journal o¬f Sustainable Development Education and Research, 2(1), 33-34.

Muin, N. A. (2021). Supporting and engaging isolated language learners in Open and Distance Learning (ODL) classes: A comparative study between a Malaysian and an Indonesian university undergraduate student. In E-Proceedings of
International Conference on Language, Education, Humanities &Social Sciences (i-LEdHS2021) (pp. 420-410). https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/45121/1/45121.pdf

Muzammil, M., Sutawijaya, A., & Harsasi, M. (2020). Investigating student satisfaction in online learning: The role of student interaction and engagement in distance learning university. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 88-96.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers’ College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2021). Humanizing strategy. Long Range Planning, 54(4), 1-11.

Perlusz, S. (2004). Emotions and technology acceptance: Development and validation of a technology affect scale. IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, 2(1), 845-847.

Rudloff, A. (2007). Complete list of behavioral interview questions. https://las.depaul.edu/academics/modern-languages/studentresources/resources/Documents/completelistofbehavioral.pdf

Self, J. (2021). Teaching K-12 Science and Engineering in during a crisis. The National Academy Press.

Shahzad, S. K., Hussain, J., Sadaf, N., Sarwat, S., Ghani, U., & Saleem, R. (2020). Impact of virtual teaching on ESL learners' attitudes under COVID-19 circumstances at post graduate level in Pakistan. English Language Teaching, 13(9), 1-9.

Solano, L., Cabrera, P., Ulehlova, E., & Espinoza, V. (2017). Exploring the use of educational technology in EFL teaching: A case study of primary education in the south region of Ecuador. Teaching English with Technology, 17(2), 77-86.

Syahrin, S., & Salih, A. A. (2020). An ESL online classroom experience in Oman during COVID-19. Arab World English Journal, 11(3), 42-55.

Tengku Intan Suzila, T. S., Omar, S. R., & Mohd Yusri, M. N. (2018a). Foundation students’ readiness towards e-learning mediamorphosis. TMTRD UTeM, Melaka, Malaysia.

Tengku Intan Suzila, T. S., Mohd Ikhsan, R., Mohd Yusri, M. N., & Omar S. R. (2018b). MoBL: A mobile blended learning application. UiTM Raub, Pahang.

Tengku Intan Suzila, T. S., Mohd Yusri, M. N., Omar, S. R., & Teo, K. S. (2021). ESL learners’ transitional readiness to mobile blended learning mediamorphosis. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development,
10(3), 202–212.

Trotman, D. (2017). Key concept: Pedagogy. In D. Trotman, R. Willoughby, & H. E. Lees (Eds.), Education Studies (pp. 196-200). Routledge.

Wang, C. S., Huang, Y. M., & Hsu, K. S. (2017). Developing a mobile game to support students in learning color mixing in design education. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 9(2), 1-6.

Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219-235.

Yusuf, Q., Yusuf, Y. Q., Erdiana, N., & Pratama, A. R. (2018). Engaging with Edmodo to teach English writing of narrative texts to EFL students. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(3), 333-349.

Zare, M., Sarikhani, R., Salari, M., & Mansouri, V. (2016). The impact of e-learning on university students’ academic achievement and creativity. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 8(1), 25-33.