The Impact of Collaborative

learning through ICT -

Action Research on

classroom activities in

English Reading

Comprehension Lessons

Mr Billy Chan Wai Kei,

Ms Alice Leong Ka Wai,

Ms Daisy Li Iok Meng,

Ms Deolinda Lei Sok Ling

Teachers of Colegio de Santa Rosa de Lima,

English Secondary, Macao

Introduction

• Background Information

– Importance of English

– 13 English-medium schools (DSEJ, 2012)

– Students are from Chinese kindergartens

– English is their second language

– Reading literacy plays an important role in their learning

Reference: Statistics and Census Service. (2010). Education survey 2009/2010. Macao: Government Printing Bureau.

• Action Research

– Measures the students’ performance on their reading literacy through the use of ICT and collaborative learning

– Results help to know the strengths and weaknesses of the students so that remedial can be made

• Target Groups

– one Primary 2 class and one Primary 5 class are chosen

– English is their second language

– Primary 2 students

• do not have enough vocabulary, grammar and

syntactic skills to interpret the written passage

• have short attention span

– Primary 5 students

• have better vocabulary and grammar knowledge

• have difficulties in analyzing text and show low

interests in reading comprehension

Methodology

• A class of Primary 2 and a class of

Primary 5 were chosen for the studies

• Assessments were made throughout

the first semester

plan

act

observe

reflect

Reference: McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action Research Principles and Practice. London: Routledge Falmer.

Action-reflection cycle

• Procedures

– preliminary assessment done individually

using paper

– assessment done in groups of four using

ICT

– assessment done in pairs using ICT

– assessment done individually using paper

– assessment done individually using ICT

• To be eligible, the research met the

following criteria:

1. Conducted with students at a junior

primary and a senior primary level.

2. Done in a classroom setting.

3. Compared the collaborative learning

with the traditional one.

4. Did not include students with

learning disabilities.

5. Same amount and similar question

types were set.

Findings

• Primary 5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)

A1_ipad 預測為 A1_ipad Predicted Score Score

Before

Sample Size 34

Y - intercept 0.857

P Value 0.000465

Gradient -0.0105

Equation Y=-0.0105X+0.857

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (After)

A5_ipad 預測為 A5_ipad Predicted Score Score

After

Sample Size 34

Y - intercept 0.797

P Value 0.0670

Gradient -0.00438

Equation Y=-0.00438X+0.797

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40

Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40

Correlation between Rank and Score (After)

Before After

Sample

Size

34 34

Y -

intercept

0.857 0.797

P Value 0.000465 0.0670

Gradient -0.0105 -0.00438

Equation Y=-0.0105X+0.857 Y=-0.00438X+0.797

Primary 2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)

A1_score Predicted A1_score

Before

Sample Size 34

Y - intercept 0.739

P Value 2.143E-07

Gradient -0.0142

Equation Y = -0.0142X+0.739

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (After)

A4_score Predicted A4_score

After

Sample Size 34

Y - intercept 0.759

P Value 0.00145

Gradient -0.00859

Equation Y=-0.00859X+0.759

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (After)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 20 40Rank

Correlation between Rank and Score (Before)

Before After

Sample Size 34 34

Y - intercept 0.739 0.759

P Value 2.143E-07 0.00145

Gradient -0.0142 -0.00859

Equation Y = -0.0142X+0.739 Y=-0.00859X+0.759

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 10 20 30 40Rank

Comparison of Predicted Score Before and After Collaborative Learning through ICT

score 預測為 score Predicted Score Score

After

Before

0.119

P Value : 0.000913

• Changes in teaching practices

– More time is needed in the beginning when setting the paper. After a few practices, preparation time is shortened

– Save a lot of time in checking the paper

– Correct open-ended questions online

• Learners’ progress is closely

monitored

– Learners know the result immediately

– Teachers could give comments right after the assessment

– The result could be analysed immediately

• Slow learners are motivated

– Improvement is shown on slow learners.

– They learned with other learners.

• Lesson is more fun

– They are excited and happy.

– Learners like competitions. Assessments become games in their mind.

– Stress free

• The Control of the tool

– Work well in multiple choice and fill in the blanks

– For answering questions, it is more convenient to use paper and pen. They may forget what they want to answer during the typing process.

• Encourage learners to share

knowledge

– The quiet learners are more willing to communicate in small groups.

– Could help each other when there are some difficult questions

– When there are different opinions, answers are foundthrough different resources

• Restructuring the classroom

– Different settings could be made

Reference: Zhao, J., & Kanji, A. (2001). Web-based collaborative learning methods and strategies in higher education.

Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and

Training. Kumamoto: Japan.

Implications

• “Collaboration does not just happen. It

takes planning and coordination on the

part of the instructor to carry out

collaborative activity

successfully…”(Raloff & Pratt, 2005, p19)

• It gives them opportunities to brainstorm

ideas and consolidate data.

• Students may have new approaches in

solving problems.

• They can improve their interpersonal

communication skills and relationship.

• The ICT assists in their learning and

build up confidence and enthusiasm.

• This further encounters a higher

level of learning style, thus increases

their self-esteem.

• This also allows teacher working

more closely and personally with

collaborative groups.

Process of Collaboration with ICT

• “Set the Stage

• Create the Environment

• Model the Process

• Guide the Process

• Evaluate the Process (Raloff & Pratt, 2005)”

Template Provided By

www.animationfactory.com

References

Ieong, S. L. (2003). English language teaching in Macau: Sharing, reflecting

and innovating. Journal of Macau Studies. 16. 212-228.

Leong, S. M. (2009). The Impact of Intergroup Attitude on Language: A

Survey Study of Macau High School Students. Journal of Macau Studies,

51. 146-154.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action Research Principles and Practice.

London: Routledge Falmer.

Raloff & Pratt, (2005). Collaborating Online. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Education and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2013).Retrieved from www.dsej.gov.mo

on 03/01/2014.

Young, M.Y.C. (2006). Macao students’ attitudes toward English: a post-1999

survey.World Englishes, 25( 3/4), 479–490.

Young, M.Y.C. (2009). Multilingual education in Macao. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(4), 412-425.

Zhao, J. & Kanji, A. (2001). Web-based collaborative learning methods and

strategies in higher education. Paper presented at the International

Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and

Training. Kumamoto: Japan.