E-learning and Autonomous Learning by Gumawang

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

E-learning and Autonomous Learning A study of students’ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com) Faculty of Art and Design, ITB www.itb.ac.id Bandung Talent Source www.bandungtalentsource.com

Abstract This paper reports on a study which examines students‟ responds towards webbased materials and learners autonomy. The web-based materials are put in a website (www.talenta-college.com/online) and accessed during the English class of a junior high school students grade VIII for a semester with an English teacher as a facilitator. These materials are also accessible (with usernames and passwords) from outside the class hours from any computer connected to the internet. Data were collected using questionnaires, interviews and observations. The data show that the students enjoy learning English using web-based materials and the data from interviews and observations show reasonable levels of students‟ autonomy.

Introduction There has long been a perceived relationship between web-based materials in general, and multimedia-based materials in particular, with self-study and learner autonomy and there are good reasons for this. Benson (2001, pp. 138–140) for example notes that multimedia applications offer a „„. . . rich linguistic and non-linguistic input, by presenting new language through a variety of media and by offering branching options‟‟, which, it is asserted, give students control over the selection of materials and over the strategies to use. However, before we consider the extent to which these associations and assertions happen, the first part of the paper defines web-based materials and, learner autonomy, and reviews work which has already been conducted. The remaining part of the paper deals with the study, it describes the English class in which the study took place. It then moves on to the research questions and the participants before considering the most significant findings.

Literature Review Web-based Materials

1997, p.1) defines as „„the search for and study of applications of the computer in language

Page

applications within the field of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) which (Levy,

Web-based Materials for language teaching and learning can be viewed as the software

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

teaching and learning‟‟. More recently Egbert (2005, p. 4) defines CALL as „„learners learning language in any context with, through, and around computer technologies‟‟. Jarvis (2004, p. 116) develops these broad definitions to characterise the software applications as Web-based Materials which are „„Language specific as well as more generic Information Technology (IT) programmes‟‟ and it is this definition which is used in this study. The most common examples of generic IT include the word processor as well as many web and email-based applications; these are not specifically developed for language teaching and learning but, as will be seen, are nevertheless considered to have an important role.

There

are

numerous

examples

of language-specific Web-based materials

including

commercially available products such as those offered by the big English Language Teaching (ELT)

publishers

including

http://www.cambridge.org/elt/multimedia/

Cambridge or

University

Oxford

http://www.oup.com/elt/catalogue/general/multimedia/?cc=gb,

Press

University well as

Press specialist

Providers such as Clarity Software http://www.clarity.com.hk/. It is worth noting here that virtually all publishers explicitly refer to the value of their web-based materials for self-study. Numerous language-specific on-line websites, of varying degrees of quality, are also available, frequently free of charge; two examples include: Activities for ESL/EFL students http://a4esl.org/ for general English and using English for academic purposes http://www.uefap.com/ for more specific purposes. Web-based materials in particular for language learning can provide learners with a range of authentic and pedagogical materials. It is little wonder then that they have been widely regarded as having a positive influence on autonomy (Warschauer, 1995; Warschauer et al., 1996; Motteram, 1998).

Learner Autonomy and Web-based Materials A great deal of work has, of course, already been done in the area of learner autonomy; see for example Benson (2001), Dickinson (1996), Little (1991), Palfreyman and Smith (2003), Scharle and Szabo, 2000, with most definitions focusing on the notion of taking charge of one‟s own learning. Dickinson‟s (1987, p. 11) definition as „„the situation in which the learner is totally responsible for all of the decisions concerned with his learning and the implementation

Page

contexts where there is no direct practitioner intervention. Students are free to make choices

of those decisions‟‟ is particularly useful here as we are examining the concept in self-study

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

about what materials to use and are not required to justify their choices in terms of the benefits of such materials for their language learning.

Context: Process of Writing Web-based Materials and Facilitator The process of creating Web-based materials started with identifying the competency standard and competency based, writing the syllabus, writing the scope and sequence. The competency standard for Junior High School class VIII is stated in the national curriculum (KTSP 2006). The basic competencies stated in the KTSP should be translated into teaching and learning process in class. Wells (1987) states that there are four levels of literacy, that is performative, functional, informational, and epistemic. First level is merely able to read and write, second is ability to apply language for life or skills for survival like reading manual or filling application form of credit card. English Language teaching and learning at junior high school is designed to help students in reaching functional literacy level. Third level is ability to access knowledge in English, and senior high school student graduates are expected to reach this level. Alwasilah (2003) points out that level of epistemic is ability of orthogonal transformation of knowledge in English and this level is assumed to be too high for senior high school graduates.

Hamid (1987) points out that the language classroom teaching and learning go through four phases; building knowledge, modeling text, joint construction of text and independent construction of text. Building knowledge refers to learning and recognition phase of topic that will be studied. When a theme selected is transportation, for example, teacher and student involves in conversation about that. At this phase, students practice listening and speaking. Students are asked to practice ordering a taxi or plane ticket through a telephone. In short, experience and knowledge of student about the topic is explored as wide as possible. This exploration is more or less in line with activation concept of student scheme.

Modeling text is an extension phase of text exposure to conversation text, for example cab ordering text. At this phase reading skill is taught, especially reading brief texts like menu in restaurant, simple manual such as how to turn of water heater, how to operate VCD player, etc.

Joint construction of text, this phase is designed to create collaboration among students. As a

Page

able to do this collaboration after passing through two previous phases above. For example,

result, texts are expected to emerge from this collaboration. The students are assumed to be

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

after the students discuss simple text such as menu in a restaurant, then they can create their own menu for an imaginary restaurant in a group.

Independent construction of text is the highest phase in learning a language at the level of junior high school, that is the ability to produce monologue text, such as how to make fried noodle as his/her favorite food. At this phase students are also expected to be able to produce monologue texts on their own, and discuss them in class. This sharing activity is intended to encourage students in appreciating others‟ work.

Based on the standard competency and basic competency and the above explanation, a syllabus for junior high school class VIII semester I was defined. The syllabus is an elaboration of the standard competency of the four skills; reading, listening, speaking and writing, into learning materials, learning activities and indicators.

After designing a syllabus, then a scope of sequence is written as a guide for class activities. The scope and sequence for conventional class, SMP VIII grade is prepared by the classroom teachers and the researcher. First the topics to be covered during the semester were chosen and followed by formulating the learning target (what to learn) and learning indicators. The indicators were written in Indonesian so that the school curriculum developer, administrator and head master can understand clearly. The teaching materials were written as a draft based on the learning target and indicators. When a draft of a unit was completed then the “tasks and skills” column was filled in. At this stage the materials, learning targets and indicators were checked and adjusted when needed.

After preparing the scope and sequence, teaching materials for the class are written by the class teacher and the researcher. There are some factors to be considered in writing, designing, adapting and selecting materials; (1) all of the materials should be appropriate, and motivating for the learners in terms of age, interest, and level. (2) The topics presented in the materials should be motivating for the students such as to practice using the language, to read more about the topics, or to listen more about the topics. (3) The topics should generate all types of language stated in the syllabus such as descriptive, narrative, and interpersonal. (4) The

work, and projects work. (5) The layout presentation of the materials should be clear, (avoid too

many colors, fonts and excessive sounds). (6) The lay out presentation should be organized for

Page

materials should give opportunity to the students to study collaboratively –pair work, groups

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

learning (it is easy to find ways through each page or screen). (7) The layout of the materials should be economical in term of space to generate maximum learning activity for each space and screen. (8) The sequencing of the materials should give opportunity for students to reflect on their learning, and to revisit learning encountered earlier. (9) Some materials should be accessible for class context, self-study and home study. The process of developing materials can be seen in diagram below. Material Development Process

Planning -Identifying the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;kompetensi dasarâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; from the KTSP, writing the syllabus.

E V Writing teaching materials for conventional classroom teaching - Adapting the teaching materials into learning materials in digital format and placed in the LMS - Choosing the appropriate software -

A L U A T I O N

Page

Integrating/uploading materials

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

A teacher was assigned as a facilitator, especially in the chat sessions in the Chat room and discussion session in the Forum. The teacher also answered questions from the students when they had language problems in the model or some technical problems due to internet connections. The students have passwords and could access the materials outside the school hours.

The Study Recently there are many teaching and learning materials available in the internet, started from the downloadable conventional materials to interactive materials. This study tries to find out the students‟ respond toward Web-based materials, ranging from downloadable materials in pdf format to interactive video and how autonomous the students are.

Research Questions The key research questions under investigation in this study are as follows: 1. What are the responses of the students toward web-based materials? 2. How autonomous are the students?

Participants The participants were 56 students of Talenta College Junior High School grade VIII. The experiment was conducted the first semester for two classes, each class consisted of 28 students. The experiment was conducted in the school computer room and connected to the schools website (www.talentacollege.com/elearning).

Method The methodology employed included both quantitative and qualitative techniques. The former is used to explore „„what are the responses of the students toward web-based materials‟‟ (appendix 1) whilst the latter allows for a focus on „„processes and meanings that are not rigorously examined or measured in terms of quantity, amount, intensity, or frequency‟‟ (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998, p. 8). The qualitative element involved asking quick open-ended questions (appendix 2). Data generated in this way arguably affords „„a good deal of precision and clarity‟‟ (McDonough and McDonough, 2004, p. 171) and allows quick and simple answers

Interviews gave participants „„some power and control‟‟ (Nunan, 2005, p. 150) and observations

Page

overcome this semi-structured interviews and snap-shot observations were also employed.

(Oppenheim, 2001). However, as such techniques only allow for limited responses and to

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

opened up possibilities for discovering new and important realities by accident (Adler and Adler, 1998).

The Questionnaire The questionnaire was divided into four parts; the first part of the questionnaire was about general opinion about the Web-based materials covered two questions. The second part of the questionnaire covered 13 questions and dealt with learning activities. The third part of the questionnaire covered 5 questions and dealt with benefit of the learning activities. The fourth part of the questionnaire covered 5 questions and dealt with help and navigation of the Webbased materials.

The Observations A snap-shot or „„impressionistic approach‟‟ (Wallace, 2003, p. 109) was employed to note the issues that seemed the most important and relevant to the objectives of the study. The ethics of data collection required subjects‟ permission (Richards, 2003) and this potentially threatened the validity of the data because when people know they are observed, they may modify their behavior. For this reason, instead of observing each student for a long period of time, this descriptive observational data was gathered by taking snap-shots of the students in the computer room roughly every ten minutes. Such snap-shots provided the researcher with a glimpse of what activities the students were really engaged in while using Web-based materials. Before the observations began, the subjects had been given a brief explanation of the study and had been asked to give their consent to be observed. During each observation session notes were taken every 10 minutes of what the students were doing. The snap-shots were then transcribed into the field notes which are analyzed and discussed here together with the data from the questionnaires and the interviews. A total of 56 students were observed working with Web-based materials; most of these participants had responded to the questionnaire and some were observed in more than one session, but there was no explicit attempt to observe different students since our intention was simply to „„get a feel‟‟ for what was going on by watching and noting. During each session 5–10 students were observed at one time for at least 40 minutes and every 10 minutes we took snap-shots of what they were doing; altogether 180 snap-shots

Page

were obtained.

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

The Interviews Information gained from the two sources above served as a basis for the interviews. The data already collected helped the researchers choose the interviewees and design some possible questions. As suggested by Nunan (2005), during the interviews I made notes, and with the subjects‟ permission the conversations were recorded. For ethical reasons, before the interview began, the learners were given a brief explanation of the purpose of the study. The interviews were semi-structured which allowed for learners‟ answers, rather than the list of predetermined questions, to determine the course of the interview. However, as interviews of this kind may not always result in triangulation with the questionnaire items, a list of key possible questions was prepared which helped keep a sense of direction throughout the process – I referred to these as required during the interview process.

Results and Discussion (1) What are the responses of the students toward web-based materials? The students‟ responses as reflected in responding to the questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire about general opinion about the Web-based materials covered two questions. 20% of students strongly agreed that they like learning English with Web-based materials and 75% chose agree and 5% disagree. 30% of the students strongly agreed and 70% responded agree to the statement that the Web-based materials increased their English ability.

The second part of the questionnaire covered 13 questions and dealt with learning activities. From the questionnaire, 20% of the students chose strongly agree, 80% to the statement that the pictures and external links in the Web-based materials were interesting. In regard to reading

Page

agreed and 10% disagreed. 30% of the students strongly agreed that web-based listening

materials, 40% strongly agreed that Web-based reading materials were interesting, 50 %

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

materials were interesting, 65% agreed and 5% disagreed. In regards to the writing materials, 30% of the respondent strongly agreed, 70% agreed that the web-based writing materials were interesting. 20% of the students strongly agreed that Web-based quizzes provided were interesting, 75% agreed and 5 % disagreed. Regarding to tasks, 35% of the students responded strongly agree, 60% agree and 5% strongly disagree to the statement that the Web-based tasks were interesting. 15% of the students strongly agreed that the discussions in the forum were enjoyable, 60% agreed and 25% disagreed. With regards to discussions in the chat room, 25% of the students strongly agreed that the discussions were enjoyable, 70% agreed and 5% disagreed. Regarding to reading materials, 80% of the students disagreed that the reading materials were difficult and 20% strongly disagree with the statement. 5% of the students agreed that the listening materials were difficult, 75% disagreed and 20% strongly disagreed. 5% of the students responded agree to the statement that the writing materials in the model were difficult, 80% responded disagree and 15% responded strongly disagree. With regards to the difficulty of the quizzes in the model, 5% responded disagree, 70% strongly disagree and 25% strongly disagree to the statement that the quizzes were difficult. With regards to tasks in, 40% of the students responded disagree and 60% strongly disagree to the statement that the tasks in the TEFL Web-based Model were difficult.

The third part of the questionnaire covered 5 questions and dealt with benefit of the learning activities. 35% of the students responded strongly agree and 65% agree to the statement that activities in the Web-based materials were useful. 20% of the students responded strongly agree, 70% agree and 10% disagree to the statement that reading activities in the Web-based materials increased their reading ability. With regards to writing activities, 5% strongly agree,

listening activities in the model increased their listening ability. With regards to grammatical

Page

writing ability. 20% of the students responded strongly agree, 80% agree to the statement that

80% agree and 15% disagree to the statement that writing activities in the model increased their

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

activities, 20% of the students responded strongly agree, 70% agree and 10% disagree to the statement that grammar activities increased their understanding of grammar.

The fourth part of the questionnaire covered 5 questions and dealt with help and navigation of the Web-based materials. 40% of the students responded strongly agree and 60% agree with the statement that the function of navigation icons was easily understood. 20% of the students responded agree, 70% disagree and 10% strongly disagree to the statement that pictures and illustrations help in understanding the materials. Regarding to quiz navigation, 50% of the students responded strongly agree and 50% agree to the statement that the navigation icons in doing the quizzes and tasks were easily understood. 20% of the students responded strongly agree and 80% agree with the statement that the feedback icons in doing the quizzes and tasks were easily understood. 25% of the students responded strongly agree, and 75% agree to the statement that icons to check score, message, discussion forum and other activity were easily understood. From the interviews, they students responded that they did not have any significant problem with the navigation. Table 4.3 summarizes the Talenta studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; respond towards the Web-based materials.

I. Computer and Web-based materials. SA= Strongly Agree, A=Agree, D=Disagree, SD=Strongly Disagree

D 5%

I like learning English using Web-based materials.

20%

75%

Learning English using Web-based materials increases my English proficiency.

30%

70%

II. Activity

Page

Statement

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

Statement

Pictures and „Links‟ to external sites in the Web-based materials are interesting.

20%

80%

Web-based reading materials are interesting.

40%

50%

10%

Web-based listening materials are interesting.

30%

65%

Web-based writing materials are interesting.

30%

70%

Quizzes in the Web-based materials are interesting.

20%

75%

Tasks in the Web-based materials are interesting.

35%

60%

Discussions in the „discussion forum‟ are interesting.

15%

60%

25%

10.

Discussions in the „chat room‟ are interesting.

25%

70%

11.

Web-based reading materials are difficult.

12.

Web-based listening materials are difficult.

13.

5% 5%

80%

20%

75%

20%

Web-based writing materials are difficult.

80%

15%

14.

Quizzes in the Web-based materials are difficult.

70%

25%

15.

Tasks in the Web-based materials are difficult.

40%

60%

III. Benefit of the activity.

Statement

16.

Activities in the Web-based materials are useful.

35%

65%

17.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my reading ability.

20%

70%

10%

18.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my writing ability.

80%

15%

19.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my listening ability.

20%

80%

20.

Activities in the TEFL Web-based materials increase my understanding of English grammar.

20%

70%

IV. Help button and navigation

Page

10%

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

Statement

21.

Function of navigation icon in Web-based materials can be easily understood.

40%

60%

22.

Pictures and illustration helps in understanding the learning materials.

20%

70%

23.

Navigation in doing tasks and quizzes are easily understood.

50%

24.

Feedback icons in doing tasks and quizzes can be easily understood.

20%

80%

25.

Icons to see scores, message, discussion forum and other activities are easily understood.

25%

75%

10%

From the observation, the external links ranked the highest, 60 snap-shots and followed by listening to audio and video materials, 28 snap-shots. From the interviews, the students enjoyed the most of the activities from the external links provided. They also responded similarly to the listening materials. They enjoyed the activity compared to listening in class using tape or CD player. The third was quizzes with 25 snap-shots and followed by reading with 19 snap-shots. The result of the interviews showed that they like to do the quiz to find out their level of understanding. They said that the scores given after the quizzes gave them motivation. They also reported that the reading materials were more interesting compared to the reading materials in the English book. Both chatting and assignments/tasks were in the fifth rank with 15 snap-shots. In the interview the students responded that chatting was done mostly at home and had nothing to do with the web-based materials and they chatted in Indonesian. From the interviews the students reported that they preferred uploading the tasks from school due to the slow connection at their home. The lowest rank was writing with 10 snap-shots. (2) How autonomous are the students? From the interviews, all of the students have access to the internet from their homes, and they spent 2 hours on average and 30 minutes devoted to English sites, checked difficult words in the online dictionary (http://kamus.itb.ac.id) and mostly

in English. All of these activities done, reflected that the students are autonomous learner in

Page

they were connected to the internet; they chatted, played games, sent email and joined forums

they noted down new vocabularies. From the interviews revealed that they used English when

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

term of learning English, even they said that they were not learning English directly but more using English.

Conclusion The students in this study generally demonstrated reasonable levels of autonomy. It is worth to investigate more about their learning strategies. Data generated by the questionnaires and the interviews clearly show that by and large students enjoy learning with web-based materials and the web-based materials contribute towards their language studies. However, the snap-shots show that the external links which are not intended for language learning were visited most. A challenge for content developer would seem to be to create interesting and interactive web-

Page

based materials and to find ways of encouraging more social interaction in the target language.

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

Appendix 1 Anda diajak untuk berpartisipasi dalam riset tentang bagaimana murid merespon materi ajar berbasis web (bahasa Inggris) yang digunakan di kelas. Data yang diperoleh dari kuesioner ini tidak akan mempengaruhi nilai pelajaran bahasa Inggris dan hanya akan digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Baca setiap pernyataan berikut dan beri tanda  pada kolom yang disediakan sesuai dengan pendapat Anda; Ss = Sangat Setuju

S = Setuju

Ts = Tidak Setuju Sts = Sangat Tidak Setuju

I. Computer and Web-based Materials.

Statement

I like learning English using Web-based materials.

Learning English using Web-based materials increases my English proficiency.

Sts

Pictures and „Links‟ to external sites in the Web-based materials are interesting.

Web-based reading materials are interesting.

Web-based listening materials are interesting.

Web-based writing materials are interesting.

Quizzes in the Web-based materials are interesting.

Tasks in the Web-based materials are interesting.

Discussions in the „discussion forum‟ are interesting.

10.

Discussions in the „chat room‟ are interesting.

11.

Web-based reading materials are difficult.

Page

Statement

II. Activity

A study of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x; responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

12.

Web-based listening materials are difficult.

13.

Web-based writing materials are difficult.

14.

Quizzes in the Web-based materials are difficult.

15.

Tasks in the Web-based materials are difficult.

III. Benefit of the activity.

Statement

16.

Activities in the Web-based materials are useful.

17.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my reading ability.

18.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my writing ability.

19.

Activities in the Web-based materials increase my listening ability.

20.

Activities in the TEFL Web-based materials increase my understanding of English grammar.

Sts

21.

Function of navigation icon in Web-based materials can be easily understood.

22.

Pictures and illustration helps in understanding the learning materials.

23.

Navigation in doing tasks and quizzes are easily understood.

24.

Feedback icons in doing tasks and quizzes can be easily understood.

25.

Icons to see scores, message, discussion forum and other activities are easily understood.

Page

Statement

IV. Help button and navigation

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

Appendix 2 Interview Questions Do you have a computer with access to the internet at home? How much time on average do you spend on the computer? How much time do you devote to English sites on the computer? Do you read in English on the computer? Do you note down new words from English sites? Do you use online dictionary? Do you chat in English? Do you play online game in English? Do you send email in English? Do you practice reading, writing, listening on the computer? What do you read on the internet?

References

Page

Groß, A., Wolff, D., 2001. A multimedia tool to develop learner autonomy. Computer Assisted Language Learning 14 (3), 233–249. Hamid, Fuad Abdul. 1987. Prosedur Belajar-Mengajar Bahasa. Jakarta: Depdikbud, Dikti PPLPTK.

Adler, P.A., Adler, P., 1998. Observational techniques. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Sage Publishers, California. Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 2003. Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-Dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: PT Kiblat Buku Utama. Benson, P., 2001. Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning. Pearson Education Limited,Harlow. Blin, F., 2004. CALL and the development of learner autonomy: towards an activity-theoretical perspective. ReCALL 16 (2), 377–395. Chapelle, C., Mizuno, S., 1989. Student’s strategies with learner-controlled CALL. CALICO Journal 7 (2), 25–47. Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), 1998. Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials. Sage Publishers, California. Dickinson, L., 1987. Self-instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Dickinson, L., 1996. Learner Training for Language Learning. Authentic Language Learning Resource, Dublin. Egbert, J., 2005. CALL Essentials: Principles and Practice in CALL Classrooms. TESOL, Inc, Alexandria. Freiermuth, M., Jarrell, D., 2006. Willingness to communicate: can on-line chat help? International Journal of Applied Linguistics 162, 190–213. Gardner, D., Miller, L., 1999. Establishing Self-access. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Page

Hurd, S., 2005. Autonomy and the distance language learner. In: Distance education and languages: evolution and change. New perspectives on language and education. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, UK, pp. 1–19. Jarvis, H., 2001. Internet usage of English for academic purposes courses. ReCall 13 (2), 206– 212. Jarvis, H., 2004. Investigating the classroom applications of computers on EFL courses at higher education institutions in UK. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3 (2), 111–137. Kitade, K., 2000. L2 learners’ discourse and SLA theories in CMC: collaborative interaction in Internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning 13 (2), 143–166. Levy, M., 1997. Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Oxford University Press, New York. Liou, H., 1997. Research of on-line help as learner strategies for multimedia CALL evaluation. CALICO Journal 14 (2–4), 81–96. Little, D., 1991. Learner Autonomy Definitions Issues and Problems. Authentik Language Learning Resource. McDonough, J., McDonough, S., 2004. Research Methods for English Language Teachers. Arnold, London. Motteram, G., 1998. Learner Autonomy and the Web. INSA (National Institute of Applied Sciences), Lyons https://ltsc.ph-karlsruhe/Motteram.pdf (accessed 15.08.08). Nesi, H., 1998. Using the Internet to teach English for academic purposes. ReCall 10 (1), 109– 117. Nunan, D., 2005. Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. O‟Malley, J.M., Chamot, A.U., 1990. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Oppenheim, A.N., 2001. Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. Continuum, New York. Oxford, R., 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Heinle and Heinle Publishers, Boston. Oxford, R., 2001. Language learning strategies. In: Carter, R., Nunan, D. (Eds.), Teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Palfreyman, D., Smith, R. (Eds.), 2003. Learner Autonomy Across Cultures. Language Education Perspectives. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. Payne, J.S., Whitney, P.J., 2002. Developing L2 oral proficiency through sychronous CMC: output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal 20 (1), 7–32. Pujola, J., 2002. CALLing for help: researching language learning strategies using help facilities in Web-based multimedia program. ReCALL 14 (2), 235–262. Richards, K., 2003. Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. Palgrave Macmilan, London. Scharle, A., Szabo, A., 2000. Learner Autonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Schwienhorst, K., 2002. Evaluating tandem language learning in the MOO: discourse repair strategies in a bilingual Internet project. Computer Assisted Language Learning 15 (2), 135–145. Schwienhorst, K., 2003. Learner autonomy and tandem learning: putting principles into practice in synchronous and asynchronous telecommunications environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning 16 (5), 427– 443. Sheerin, S., 1997. An exploration of the relationship between self-access and independent learning. In: Benson, P.,Voller, P. (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning. Longman, London.

A study of students‟ responds towards Web-based Materials and learners autonomy A. Gumawang Jati (gumawang.jati@gmail.com)

Page

Shield, L., Weininger, M.J., Davies, L.B., 1999. MOOing in L2: constructivism and developing learner autonomy for technology-enhanced language learning. Calling Japan 8 (3) http://jaltcall.org/cjo/10_99/mooin.htm . Smidt, E., Hegelheimer, V., 2004. Effects of online academic lectures on ESL listening comprehension, incidental vocabulary acquisition, and strategy use. Computer Assisted Language Learning 17 (5), 517–556. Smith, B., 2003. The use of communication strategies in computer-mediated communication. System 31 (1), 29–53. Sturtridge, G., 1997. Teaching and language learning in self-access centres: changing roles? In: Benson, P., Voller, P. (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning. Longman, London. Wallace, M.J., 2003. Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Warschauer, M., 1995. E-mail for Language Teaching. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc, Alexandria. Warschauer, M., Kern, R. (Eds.), 2000. Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Wenden, A., 1987. Conceptual background and utility. In: Wenden, A., Rubin, J. (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Prentice-Hall International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead. Wenden, A., 1991. Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy. Prentice-Hall International Ltd, Hemel Hempstead. Zhao, Y., 2003. Recent developments: a literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal 21 (1), 7–27.