IMPROVING DESCRIPTIVE
WRITING THROUGH FACEBOOK USING THE COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY (COI) MODEL TO PROMOTE
LEARNERS’ AUTONOMY
Paper assignment on Principle of Language Teaching,
lectured by Dr. Aswandi
Eka Sugeng Ariadi
Kemenag Class 2015 – NIM. 157835408
The State University of Surabaya
Abstract
Learning language is aimed not only to be able
to speak but also to write. Learning writing for L2 learners always needs a lot
of practices, whether guided practice or autonomous practice. Recently, the latter practice
has to be concerned much by teachers. Maximizing the use of facebook as a familiar
media to improve learners’ autonomy in writing descriptive is necessary. This
paper investigated how 12 students who worked as community (closed group) writing
descriptive text project online through Facebook. They are students grade 9 at Islamic Junior High School Pasuruan. Thus,
the qualitative data was employed to draw the online interactions among the students. The interactions were signed based on
descriptors in the Community of Inquiry (CoI) Model by Garrison (Annamalai
& Tan, 2014). After the autonomous practice, the participants then were interviewed
to know their perceiving experiences while they were involved. The findings
of this paper indicated that the participants excited much
to use facebook as a media to improve their descriptive writing. While the CoI
model revealed that there were positive interactions
during students’ learning activities with the
online descriptive writing through facebook.
Keywords: Online descriptive
writing, Community of Inquiry (CoI)
model,
facebook,
learner’s autonomy
1.
Introduction
Since
1970s, Indonesia has shifted his teaching and learning paradigm, from teacher
centered to leaner centered. As Mistar (2000) said that “after enjoying its
popularity in the 1950s to 1960s, research focus on various approaches to
second/foreign language (L2/FL) teaching decreased with a shift in research
emphasis in the 1970s from the teacher to the learner”. Additionally, our national
curriculum which has been designed,
including the textbooks and
students’ workbooks which are written by governments,
are mostly proposed to
promote learners’ autonomy. An
autonomous learner, itself, is described as
someone who possess the ability to take charge of
his/her own learning of L2/FL (Mistar, 2000).
Nowadays,
autonomous learning might be generated by online
media, such as Facebook. Among Indonesian leaners, they have
already familiar with Facebook application as social media networking. Anand
Tilak, as Facebook’s Indonesia head, reported that the world’s dominant social
network now has some 69 million monthly active users in populous Indonesia (The
Wall Street Journal, 2014). Indonesian Facebook users trend younger, too. 45.2%
of women are between the ages of 18 – 25, and 31.8% are between 13 – 17. For
men, 45.9% are between the ages of 18 – 25 and 23.5% are between 13 – 17.
Overall, users under 25 make up 72.5% of all Facebook users in that country,
with more women in the younger categories than men.
Eventhough there are huge
number of Indonesian leaners using Facebook, this application has not been used
much in the ELT area (Cahyono, B.Y, 2011). Since then, English as a foreign language, is
only used in formal situation or taught at school. Time thus becomes one of the
most precious resources and a constraint at the same time (Cahyono &
Widiati, 2011). Yet, some researchers belief that teaching English using Facebook
can be interesting as well as challenging (Sahdan, 2012). According to Noordin,
N & Wei, D. T. S. (2014, p.30),
“After all, Facebook is not only about interacting with
friends, it can also be utilized as a medium for language learning.” Moreover, it can be made
fun by taking advantage over the fact that it is an extremely convenient
application where students and educators can access anywhere. Annamalai, N
& Tan, K. E. (2014) findings showed
that
the students’ engagement with the online narative writing by using the Community
of Inquiry (CoI) Model.
In
term of fostering learners’ English skills through Facebook
as an online application in writing skill
by
using CoI Model, this study is ultimately aiming at reporting students’
interactions while engaging in the online descriptive writing skill to built up greater
autonomy in learning.
2.
Online
Descriptive Writing in The Facebook Application
According
to Oliveira, Camacho and Gisbert, Information Communication
and Technology (ICT) is rapidly evolving in education but pedagogical
practices have not (Annamalai, N & Tan, K. E, 2014). Due to that problem,
a teacher is absolutely insisted to
create teaching and learning innovation as appropriate as possible.
The innovation in this study means the pedagogical practices about Facebook and
descriptive writing to built students’ skill in order to promote their
autonomous learning.
There
are many features offered in Facebook environment, such as Profile, Wall
Application, Photo Application, Friend Application, Latest Headline
Application, Group Application, Note Application, And Gift Application (Sahdan,
2012). In the case of this study, the students are encouraged to use Facebook
to construct descriptive texts. It is limited
to use Groups Application (closed group), Comments and the Walls. A closed
group work is mainly hold to
minimize unexpected comments from another students who are not involved in. Further, the aim of this study was guided by a
research question, “What are the students’ and teacher’s experiences of using
the online descriptive writing?”
3.
The
Community of Inquiry (CoI) model
The
CoI model suggested by Garrison et al (2000) discusses three important
presences. They are cognitive, teaching and social presences. In this study,
the social presence is primary emphasized
in
order to paint the
interaction among the participants (a teacher and 12 students). Three important
indicators of social presence are emotional expression, open communication and
group cohesion. Rourke, Anderson, Garrison and Archer relabelled these three indicators to suit
their study (Annamalai, N & Tan, K. E, 2014). The indicators for social
presence are illustrated in Table 1.
Table
1. Indicators of social presence
|
Indicators
|
Definition
|
Example
|
|
Affective
Expression
of Emotions
|
conventional
expression of emotion, or unconventional expressions of emotion, includes repetitious
punctuation
|
“I
just can’t stand it when”. “ANYBODY OUT THERE”
|
|
Use
of Humour
|
Teasing,
cajoling, irony, understatements, sarcasm
|
The
banana crop in Edmonton is looking good this year!
|
|
Self-
disclosure
|
Present
details of life outside of class or express vulnerability
|
“Where
I work, this is what we do…
|
|
Interactive
Continuing
a Thread
|
Using
reply features to quote others entire message or cutting and pasting
selection of others’ messages
|
Software
dependent, e.g. “Subject: Re” or “Branch from”
|
|
Quoting
from
others’
messages
|
Using
software features to quote others entire message or cutting and pasting
selection of other’ messages.
|
Software
dependent, e.g. “Martha writes” or text prefaced by less- than symbol <
|
|
Referring
Explicitly to
others’
messages
|
Direct
references to contents of others’ posts
|
“in
your message you talk about Moore’ definition between…”
|
|
Asking
questions
|
Students
ask questions of other
students
or the moderator
|
“Anyone
else had experience with WEBCT?”
|
|
Complementing
expressing appreciation
|
Complementing
others or contents of others’ messages
|
“I
really like your interpretation of your reading”
|
|
Expressing
agreement
|
expressing
agreement with others or content of others’ messages.
|
“I
was thinking the same thing. You really hit the nail on the head”.
|
|
Cohesive
Vocatives
|
Addresses
or refers to the group inclusive pronouns
|
“I
think John made a good point”
“John
what do you think?”
|
|
Addresses
or refers to the group using inclusive pronouns
|
Addresses
the group as we, us, our, group
|
“Our
textbook refers to … “Oh think we
veered off track…”
|
|
Phatics,
salutations
|
Communication
that serves a purely social function; greetings, closures
|
“Hi
all” “That’s it for now”
We’re
having the most beautiful weather here”.
|
There
have been calls for more studies related to the CoI model in areas related to
collaborative learning in an
undergraduate setting to
investigate the differences
that might appear (Annamalai, N & Tan, K. E, 2014). Some indicators have been occupied by many researchers. Additionally,
in an attempt to explore social presence in language learning, the current
study observed the closed group and
comments found in the Facebook environment while participants were involved in
completing their descriptive writing tasks.
In
the Indonesian context, learning to write in English as a foreign language is still a difficult task for most
students to tackle. Even with simple
writing exercises, students often lose interest and do not complete them
(Faisal & Suwandita, 2013). One way to get them interested in writing is by
providing a virtual “third place” where students
have the opportunity to interact and write outside the classroom at their own
pace (Annamalai, N & Tan, K. E, 2014).
4.
Methodology
and Data Collection
The
participants were 12 students at grade 9 and one English teacher (as the
researcher) in an Islamic Junior High School Pasuruan. The sampling was
employed to select the participants with the criteria; they must be able to
access Internet and Facebook either at home or at school and of course, they
have gotten their parents’ permission.
A
qualitative design was adopted in this study. Basic interpretative study is
choosen in order to provide descriptive accounts targeted to understanding a
phenomenon using data that might be collected in a variety of ways, such as
interviews, observations, and document review (Ary, et al. 2010). A Facebook
group account named DESTING (Descriptive Writing) was created.
The students and
teacher interacted in
this closed group to accomplish the writing tasks. The
students were given two writing tasks by the teacher.
The researcher used Writing
Handout E-7: Descriptive Essay (Structuring a Descriptive Essay) as it is assumed
as a productive model for the teaching of descriptive writing. According to this
handout, the basic steps to write an effective descriptive essay consist of five steps; select a subject, select
dominant details, organize details, use descriptive words, draw a logical
conclusion. The handout systematically helped students to develop their better
writing and filled the criteria for good descriptive writing. Students were provided
with teacher’s explanation about the topic.
For
the tasks, the students
were required to
write an essay
before and after
the interactions in the Facebook group. Therefore, beyond 3 weeks each
student was engaged in writing 2 essays. 12 essays were collected before the online
descriptive writing as the initial task and another 12 essays after the online discussion
as the final task. A total of 24 essays were collected from the students. To recognize
improvement, the initial task were given to the participants entitled with ‘My
School Garden’ before they are involved in the online writing. Thirty minutes were
allocated to complete their essays. The students were not allowed to have discussion
and collaboration. The final tasks was announced after a week of online
collaboration was completed. The title of the final tasks was ‘My School Yard’.
The
data collection was generated from
the
closed-group online interactions. Interviews were
used in order to answer the research question. The closed group and the individual
were interviewed. The interview data collections were then interpreted.
5.
Findings
and discussion
The
three indicators of social presence emerged in the interactions. The most prominent
indicators were related to the interactive domain in which the complementing
expressing appreciation took the lead. In the affective domain, expression of
emotions occurred frequently than others. In the cohesive domain, vocatives and
addresses or refers to the group using inclusive pronouns were not available. The
table below shows the number of social presence rooted from the virtual interaction.
Table
2. The number of social presence
|
No
|
Indicators
|
Initial
task
|
Final
task
|
Total
|
|
1
|
Affective
Expression
of Emotions
|
5
|
7
|
12
|
|
2
|
Use
of Humour
|
3
|
5
|
8
|
|
3
|
Self-
disclosure
|
2
|
6
|
8
|
|
4
|
Interactive
Continuing
a Thread
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
5
|
Quoting
from
others’
messages
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
6
|
Referring
Explicitly to others’ messages
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
7
|
Asking
questions
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
8
|
Complementing
expressing appreciation
|
7
|
12
|
19
|
|
9
|
Expressing
agreement
|
2
|
5
|
7
|
|
10
|
Cohesive
Vocatives
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
11
|
Addresses
or refers to the group using inclusive pronouns
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
12
|
Phatics,
salutations
|
-
|
3
|
3
|
Within
the initial task under the
affective domain, the expression of
emotions descriptors can be seen
like the examples; “coz so many humworks, i’m late to post my writing” (Windi R Nabila)
and “sorrrrryyyyyy...
i could not meet the schedule” (Ravena Sofi). Students’ humour were
appeared in responding to their friend’s essays with comments such as “i can sleep well after reading it… hehe!” (Af’h). The teacher was also interested to
give comments. He commented, “Af’h,
Izzatun Najibah, Ikhwaniatus Silvia...i could have a nice dream after read
all... J”.
For the self-disclosure descriptor,
the students shared their feelings and ideas. For
example, “Thanks for the suggestions” (Mara Qoneta),
“Hmmm...i’ll make it better
tomorrow” (Nurul Fauziah).
In
the final task, the interactive category, in
complementing
expressing appreciation were frequently commented, such as “Good, not bad” (Ainur
Rohmah) and “good job” (Aisyah). Continuing a thread and quoting
from others’ messages were not applicable in this study. Phatics and salutation
were mentioned by the students, for example
“thanks for reminding me!! Bye bye” (Windi R Nabila) and “Thank you, Sir. I’ll remember it for next writing!! See you!” (Af’h).
Overall,
based on comments in this closed-group virtual interactions, the teacher noted
that the students felt happy and enjoy very much the activities. Likely, they
awared that their descriptive texts need a lot of corrections from their
friends and the teacher. Afterwards,
having some comments and corrections, they could post another descriptive writing
texts better than before. Table 3 shows some examples of the students’ online interaction
style.
Table
3. Students’ online interaction style
|
Descriptors
|
Example
|
|
Affective
Expression of
Emotions
|
|
|
Use
of Humour
|
|
|
Self-
Disclosure
|
|
|
Interactive
Continuing a Thread
|
-
|
|
Quoting
from others’ Messages
|
-
|
|
Referring
Explicitly to others’ Messages
|
-
|
|
Asking
Questions
|
|
|
Complimenting
Expressing
Appreciation
|
|
|
Expressing
Agreement
|
|
|
Cohesive
Vocatives
|
-
|
|
Addresses
or Refers
to
the group using
inclusive
Pronouns
|
-
|
|
Phatics,
Salutations
|
|
Hence,
to recognize students’ writing skill improvement,
the scores of the
initial and final tasks are provided in Table 4. It tells that there is an improvement in the
final essays
that were written after the online
interactions comparing with the initial essays.
Table
4. Students’ average scores for initial and final tasks
|
Students
|
Average
Score for ...
|
|||||||||||
|
Initial
Task
|
Final
Task
|
|||||||||||
|
TS
|
C
|
D
|
G
|
O
|
T
|
TS
|
C
|
D
|
G
|
O
|
T
|
|
|
S1
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
14
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
19
|
|
S2
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
17
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
20
|
|
S3
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
15
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
20
|
|
S4
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
16
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
21
|
|
S5
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
16
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
20
|
|
S6
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
17
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
19
|
|
S7
|
5
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
16
|
5
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
19
|
|
S8
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
16
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
18
|
|
S9
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
16
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
19
|
|
S10
|
5
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
15
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
20
|
|
S11
|
5
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
16
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
20
|
|
S12
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
18
|
5
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
20
|
Thus,
the researcher finds
that the online collaborative learning trough closed-group in Facebook has assisted the students to enhance their
writing skill, especially in term of Text Structure, Cohesive,
Diction, Grammar and Originality
(Kemendikbud, 2013).
6.
Participants’
experiences
It
was interesting to read the participants’ experiences using the online writing during accomplishing the tasks. They could share that their
involvement in the online descriptive writing project was exciting
and enriching learning experiences
within and beyond the discussion in a particular group of Facebook.
They were able to expose different
ideas and opinions from their partners. It can be seen from the following
comments of “Thanks for your comments and
I know the correct ones” (Sakyna Pratiwi)”.
The interviewed-teacher concluded that the online interaction fruitfully produces positive
impacts on the teaching and
learning activities on
descriptive writing. Furthermore, it
was a convenient medium that allowed students to share opinions and ideas not
only in formal environment (at school) but also in informal environment (beyond the school).
7.
Conclusion
There are some positive effects in this study, e.g. inside
the students’ skills flourishment in
the descriptive writing, the teacher saw that each student tried to help each
other. At the same time, the teacher was
pleased knowing the students had worked actively
and collaboratively. A worthy point to note is that the
online descriptive writing platform affected
the teaching learning process positively. This writing strategy is better than the
traditional strategy in a classroom.
Hence,
Indonesian English teachers should consider the use of online writing,
especially in Facebook as modern strategy
to enhance and to encourage students’
writing skill autonomously. The researcher realized that the study was limited on
a small participants, and thus, it is difficult to generalize. Next studies are expected to study on other language learning skills in spite of writing skill and
of course in bigger amount of participants.
REFERENCES
Annamalai, N &
Tan, K. E. (2014). Social presence of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) model
on an online descriptive writing
platform via Facebook. Indonesian Journal
of ELT
Research, 10(2), 1-18.
Ary, Donald.,
Jacobs, Lucy Cheser., Sorensen, Chris., & Razavieh, Asghar. (2010).
Introduction
to Research in Education (8th edition). USA: Wadsworth, Cengage
Learning
Cahyono, B.Y.
(2011). Using Facebook to Enhance
English Department Students’ Skill in
Writing English Essay. In Bambang Y.
C & Nur Mukminatien (Eds), Techniques
and
Strategies to Enhance English
Language Learning (pp. 147-160). Malang: State
University of Malang Press.
Cahyono, B.Y.,
& Widiati, U. (2011). The Teaching of
Language as a Foreign Languge in
Indonesia. Malang: State University
of Malang Press.
Faisal &
Suwandita, K. (2013). The Effectiveness of FRESH Technique to Teach Descriptive
Paragraph. Journal of Education and
Learning. Vol.7 (4) pp. 239-248
Garrison, D.
R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W.,
(2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based
Environment: Computer Conferencing
in Higher Education. The Internet and
Higher
Education 2(2-3): 87±105
http://www.indabook.org/d/Writing-Handout-E-7-Descriptive-Essay-Indian-River.pdf
Kemendikbud.
(2013). Bahasa Inggris, When English
Rings the Bell. Jakarta; Kementerian
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Mistar, Junaidi.
(2000). Maximing Learning Strategies To
Pomote Learner Autonomy. A
paper presented at the 48th
International TEFLIN Conference hosted by Indonesia
University, Jakarta.
Noordin, N &
Wei, D. T. S. (2014). Facebooking
In Today’s Net
Generation: Prospects
And Challenges. The English Teacher Vol. XLIII (1), 19-32.
Sahdan. (2012).
Using Facebook to Teach Students to
Write Descriptive Texts. In Bambang
Y. C (Eds), Teaching English by Using Internet Resources (pp. 183-188). Malang:
State University of Malang Press.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar