The Effects of Differentiated Instruction in an Online Classroom on the Levels of Willingness to Communicate of Thai EFL Undergraduates
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article aimed to study (1) the needs of students in the Foundation English 1 course in an online classroom regarding their interests in topics and the learning styles of the students, and (2) the effects of differentiated instruction in an online classroom on the levels of willingness to communicate in English. The sample group consists of 30 students who enrolled in Foundation English 1 but are not English major students. The sampling method used is simple random sampling. These students are from an educational institution in Bangkok from the third semester of the academic year 2022. The research tools used in this study include a needs analysis questionnaire to identify needs, lesson plans, a willingness to communicate questionnaire in the Linkert scale, and semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed by using Mean, Standard Deviation (SD) values, a Paired Sample T-Test to compare the pre-test and post-test, and content analysis applied to interview results. The results indicated that students' interests in lesson topics, including self-introduction, eating out, traveling, and fashion, in terms of learning styles exhibit characteristics of images, symbols, and sounds. The pre-test mean score was 2.08, SD = 0.97 which indicated a low level of willingness to communicate. The post-test mean score was 3.80, SD = 0.94, which indicated a high level of willingness to communicate. When comparing the means using the Paired Sample T-Test, it was found that there was a statistically significant difference at the .05 level. This research suggests that the findings can be utilized as a guideline for designing English lessons aiming at developing a willingness to communicate, thus assisting in enhancing speaking skills in the future.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Views and opinions appearing in articles in the Journal of Arts of Management It is the responsibility of the author of the article. and does not constitute the view and responsibility of the editorial team I agree that the article is copyright of the Arts and Management Journal.
References
Bailey, K. M. (2005). Practical english language teaching: speaking. McGraw Hill.
Chaisiri, P. (2023). Promoting Thai EFL learners’ willingness to communicate in the virtual classroom through technology-mediated oral tasks. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 16(1), 97-120. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1380762.pdf
Chotipaktanasook, N. (2014). Enhancing learners’ willingness to communicate in English with social media. DPURDI. https://www.dpu.ac.th/dpurdi/upload/public/jemq7fsotjk80s48ck.pdf
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education.
Eikeland, I., & Ohna, S.E. (2022). Differentiation in education: a configurative review. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 3(8), 157-170, https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2022.2039351
Grasha, A. F., & Reichmann, S. (1975). Workshop handout on learning style. The University of Cincinnati.
Kamprasertwong, T. (2010). Willingness to communicate in English speech as a second language: a study of Thai, Chinese, and Dutch samples[Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Groningen].
Kang, S. J. (2005). Dynamic emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second language. System, 33(2), 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.10.004
Khan, S. M. (2015). Influence of speech anxiety on oral communication skills among ESL/EFL learners. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(6), 49-53. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1127504.pdf
Farouck, I. (2016). A project-based language learning model for improving the willingness to communicate of EFL students. Journal on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 14, 11-18. https://www.iiis.org/CDs2016/CD2016Spring/papers/EB193TO.pdf
Farrelly, M. J., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2021). Strategies used and challenges faced by Thai EFL teachers when eliciting talk during classroom interactions in high school contexts. SAGE Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211050385
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2000). How to design and evaluate education research (8th ed.). McGraw Hill.
Hanifah, F., & Nainggolan, E. E. (2021). University students’ willingness to communicate in virtual classrooms. ADJES, 8(1), 68-82. https://doi.org/10.26555/adjes.v8i1.20108
Havwini, T. (2019). Investigating the interaction patterns in EFL virtual classroom: a case study. [Conference Session]. 1st International Conference on Applied Economics and Social Science 2019 (ICAESS 2019). https://doi.org/10.2991/icaess-19.2019.36
Heacox, D. (2002). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: how to reach and teach all learners, grades 3-12. Free Spirit.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in an L2: a situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb05543.x
MacIntyre, P. D., Babin, P. A., & Clement, R. (1999). Willingness to communicate: antecedents & consequences. Communication Quarterly, 47(2), 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379909370135
MacIntyre, P. D., & Wang, L. (2021). Willingness to communicate in the L2 about meaningful photos: application of the pyramid model of WTC. Language Teaching Research, 25(6), 878-898. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13621688211004645
Melvina, M., Lengkanawati, N., Wirza, Y., Alicia D., & Yulmiati, Y. (2020). EFL learners’ view on online learning implementation during COVID-19 outbreaks. [Conference Session]. 4th Sriwijaya University Learning and Education International Conference (SULE-IC 2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201230.130
Muthuprasad, T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K.S., & Jha, G.K. (2021). Students-perception and preference for online education in India during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100101
Pattapong, K. (2010). Willingness to communicate in a second language: a qualitative study of issues affecting Thai EFL learners from students’ and teachers’ point of view[Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney].
Pattapong, K. (2015). Complex interactions of factors underlying Thai EFL learners' willingness to communicate in English. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 49(1), 105-136. https://www.culi.chula.ac.th/Images/asset/pasaa_journal/file-18-202-x5saeb137825.pdf
Princeton University. (2018). Strategic review of online education. Report of the Faculty Council on Teaching and Learning Princeton University. https://www.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2023/05/task-force-report-on-online-education.pdf
Prior, M.T. (2019). Elephants in the room: an “affective turn”, or just feeling our way?. The Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 516-527. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45172015
Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2014). Can I say something? The effects of digital gameplay on willingness to communicate. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 101-123. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/188bd396-0ff3-4d66-bc48-21785b5e9777/content
Rizvić E., & Bećirović, S. (2017). Willingness to communicate in English as a foreign language in bosnian-herzegovinian EFL context, European Researcher, 8(3), 224-235. https://doi.org/10.13187/er.2017.3.224
Sankaburanurak, S., & Sankaburanurak, A. (2016). Curriculum management in 21st century: a classroom as wide as the world. Social Sciences Research and Academic Journal, 10(28), 1-14. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JSSRA/article/view/32040
Shishkovskaya, J., Bakalo, D., & Grigoryev, A. (2015). EFL teaching in the e-learning environment: Updated principles and methods. In Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 206. 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.007
Sözen, E., & Guven, U. (2019). The effect of online assessments on students’ attitudes towards undergraduate-level geography courses. International Education Studies, 12(10). https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n10p1
Sripongplerd, P. (2017). Learning style and teaching style. Thaksin University Library Journal, 6(1), 64-86.
Tamara, T., & Warschauer, M. (2022). Equity in online learning. Educational Psychologist, 57(3), 192-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2062597
Tomlinson, C. A. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms (3rd ed.). Alexandria, Virginia, ASCD.
van Geel, M., Keuning, T., & Safar, I. (2022). How teachers develop skills for implementing differentiated instruction: helpful and hindering factors. Teaching and Teacher Education: Leadership and Professional Development, 1(1), 100007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tatelp.2022.100007
Wannaprapha, T., & Todsapim, A. (2019). Online learning environment in 21st century education. E-Journal of Education Studies, 1(1), 1-10. https://so01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ejes/article/View/209407/145048
Wongwanich, S., & Wiratchai, N. (2003). Guidelines for thesis counseling. Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University.