Pre-service teachers’ opinions on cloud supported social network
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Pre-service teachers are expected to use new technologies such as Google+ which facilitates contacting, sharing in certain environments and working collaboratively with the help of cloud support in their lessons effectively. This study aims to examine pre-service teachers’ opinions regarding the use of Google+ to support lesson activities. In this study the data was collected using semi-structured interview techniques carried out with pre-service teachers (n=15) chosen by purposeful sampling. The purposes of using Google+ were sharing, chatting and communication, whereas Google Docs was mostly used for its efficiency, interaction, the prudential purpose of use and to support teaching. When the views of the pre-service teachers regarding the use of Google+ were examined it was found that interface being thought to be more complex than other social networks affected the teachers’ first impressions negatively. As the negative first impression towards Google+ changed in time, it was stated to have provided a number of teaching opportunities. Some suggestions regarding the opportunities Google+ offers were also made.
Keywords: Google+, social networks, pre-service teachers’ opinions, cloud computing.
Downloads
Article Details
World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues is an Open Access Journal. The copyright holder is the author/s. Licensee Birlesik Dunya Yenilik Arastirma ve Yayincilik Merkezi, North Nicosia, Cyprus. All articles can be downloaded free of charge. Articles published in the Journal are Open-Access articles distributed under CC-BY license [Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)].
Birlesik Dunya Yenilik Arastirma ve Yayincilik Merkezi (BD-Center)is a gold open-access publisher. At the point of publication, all articles from our portfolio of journals are immediately and permanently accessible online free of charge. BD-Center articles are published under the CC-BY license [Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)], which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and the source are credited.
References
Al Hazmi, S., & Schofield, P. (2007). Enforced revision with checklist and peer feedback in EFL writing: The example of Saudi University students. Scientific Journal of King Faisal University, 8(2), 237-267.
Berg, C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 215-241.
Carson, J., & Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of EFL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1- 19.
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edwards, J. E. (2003). The transcription of discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 321-349). Oxford: Blackwell Publication.
Ehlich, K. (1993). HIAT: A transcription system for discourse data. Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research, 123-148.
Fathman, A. K., & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: Focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing (pp.178-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-87.
Guénette, D. (2007). Is feedback pedagogically correct? Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 40- 53.
Kepner, C. G. (1991). An experiment in the relationship of types of written feedback to the development of second-language writing skills. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 305-313.
Kroll, B. (1991). Teaching writing in the ESL context. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 245–263). New York: Newbury House.
Leki, I. (1990). Coaching from the margins: Issues in written response. In B. Kroll, (Ed.), Second language writing (pp. 25-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Li, C. (2006). The impact of teacher involved peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Sino-US English Teaching, 3(5), 28-32.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30–43.
Mangelsdorf, K. (1989). Parallels between speaking and writing in second language acquisition. In D. M. Johnson & D. H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp. 134–145). White Plains, NY:Longman.
Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46, 274–284.
Mendonça, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: Revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-769.
Nunan, D. (2001). English as a global language. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 605-606.
Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2003). Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 519. Abstract retrieved June 20, 2011 from: www.jstor.org/stable/1192801
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Riddle, D. (2003). Teaching English as a foreign/second language. London: Teach Yourself.
Smalley, R. L., Ruetten, M. K., & Koshered, J. R. (2001). Refining composition skills: Rhetoric and grammar (5th ed.). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be more effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 217-233.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in second language acquisition, 15, 165-179.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
White, R. and McGovern, D. (1994). Writing: A Student’s Book. English for Academic Study Series. Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe.
Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to students' writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 79-101.