Learners attitude towards learning the causeware funtioning in business through dyned software a survey evalution by the second year non english major students at hanoi university of business and technology

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI THE UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES THE FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE- STUDIES **********************************************NGUYỄN THỊ N

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI THE UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES THE FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE- STUDIES **********************************************

NGUYỄN THỊ NHƯ QUỲNH TÓM TĂT LUẬN VĂN

LEARNERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEARNING THE COURSEWARE

“FUNCTIONING IN BUSINESS” THROUGH

DYNED SOFTWARE:

A SURVEY EVALUATION BY THE SECOND YEAR ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT HANOI UNIVERSITY

NON-OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY

(Thái độ của sinh viên đối với việc học giáo trình “Functioning in Business” bằng phần mềm DynED: Một khảo sát đánh giá đối với sinh viên năm thứ hai của trường Đại Học Kinh Doanh và

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY THE UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACUTY OF

POST GRADUATE- STUDIES

****************************************

NGUYỄN THỊ NHƯ QUỲNH

LEARNERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEARNING THE COURSEWARE

“FUNCTIONING IN BUSINESS” THROUGH

DYNED SOFTWARE:

A SURVEY EVALUATION BY THE SECOND YEAR ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS AT HANOI UNIVERSITY

NON-OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY

(Thái độ của sinh viên đối với việc học giáo trình “Functioning in Business” bằng phần mềm DynED: Một khảo sát đánh giá đối với sinh viên năm thứ hai của trường Đại Học Kinh Doanh và

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PART I: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale of the thesis 1

2 Aims of the thesis 1

3 Significance of the thesis 2

4 Scope of the thesis 2

5 Design of the thesis 3

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT 4

Chapter 1: Literature Review 4

1.1 Courseware in Language Teaching and Learning 4

1.1.1.Definition of Courseware 5

1.1.2.Reasons for Courseware Evaluation 6

1.1.3.Role of Teaching Courseware in General English 6

1.1.4.Types of Courseware Evaluation 7

1.2 Courseware Evaluation Framework 10

1.2.1 Presentation and Organization of the Content 12

1.2.2 Evaluation of Learning 16

1.3 Dynamic Education 17

1.3.1.Introduction of Dynamic Program 17

1.3.2.Pegagogical Framework of DynED 17

1.3.3.“Functioning in Business” Courseware of DynED Program 21

1.3.4.The Role of DynED as CALL 23

1.3.5.Related Studies 23

1.4 Summary 23

Chapter 2: Research Methodology 25

2.1 An overview of current English Teaching and Learning at HUBT 25

2.2 Research Methods 26

2.2.1 Research Questions 26

2.2.2 Research Design 26

2.2.3 Research Instrument 26

2.2.4 Participants 27

2.2.5 Data collection procedures 27

2.3 Summary 27

Chapter 3: Data Analysis and Discussion 28

3.1 Results of the Content in “Functioning in Business” Courseware 28

3.2 Results of the Interactivity in “Functioning in Business” Courseware 30

3.3 Results of the Navigation in “Functioning in Business” Courseware 31

3.4 Results of the Feedback in “Functioning in Business” Courseware 32

3.5 Results of the Screen Design in “Functioning in Business” Courseware 33

3.6 Results of the Students’ Learning to“ the Courseware 35

3.7 Results of the Students’ Preference to the Courseware 38

3.8 Recommendations for material improvements 39

3.9 Summary of major findings 41

PART 3: CONCLUSION 43

3.1 Conclusions 43

3.2 Implications 44

3.3 Limitations 45

3.4 Suggestions for further study 46

REFERENCES I APPENDIX V

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

HUBT : Hanoi University of Business and Technology

CALL : Computer-Assisted language learning

ICT : The advent of Information and Communication Technology

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figures

Figure 1: Diagram of the Evaluation Framework

Figure 2: Video Interaction in DynED

Figure 3: Sample of Vocabulary question in DynED

Figure 4: Sample of sentence construction in DynED

Figure 5: Record Manager in DynED

Tables

Table 1: Analysis on the Content in the “Functioning in Business” CoursewareTable 2: Analysis on the Interactivity of the “Functioning in Business” CoursewareTable 3: Analysis on the Navigation of the IMM Courseware

Table 4: The analysis of the feedback of the “Functioning in Business” coursewareTable 5: Analysis on the Screen Design of the Courseware

Table 6: The analysis on the students’ learning towards the courseware

Table 7: Analysis on Students’ Preferences towards the Use of “Functioning in

Business” Courseware Compared to Traditional Methods of Learning

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the thesis

In the past, English lessons were normally taught through conventional classroominstruction, in which, most often than not, the teacher would be teaching in front of theclassroom, while students were passive recipients of knowledge However, presentlytechnology has had a great influence on the educational practices in the classrooms inwhich computer-based technology is very much in use to enhance instruction and transferthe focus from the teacher to the students in the learning process (Bork, 2001; Ertmer,Gopalakrishnan & Ross, 2001)

Incorporating technology in the classroom is beneficial to the students in a number ofways: assisting students‟ understanding of concepts, enhancing students‟ motivation inexploring, investigating, conjecturing, creating and discovering principles, and makinggeneralization and connections (Wertherimer, 1990); engaging students involvement in thelearning process (Guha, 2003) and motivating them

The advent of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has brought the concept

of Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) into the classroom CAI is a kind of instructionthat exploits computer software to assist teachers to teach information or skills related to aparticular topic (Roblyer, 2004), and students can interact directly with lessonsprogrammed into the computer system (Smaldino, Russell, Heinich & Molenda, 2005).There are many types of software that teachers can use to develop their own teachingcourseware

Studies demonstrate that the DynED software can be used to help improve students‟achievement in English hence, to eradicate much English anxiety and fear of usingcomputer software and learning English

2 Aims of the thesis

The purpose of this study is to evaluate a courseware for the Business Communicationscourse The courseware is specifically known as “Functioning in Business” It consists of

additional information on the subject and quizzes to complement the BusinessCommunications course The objective is the evaluation of the courseware by the studentsand that of the researcher on its strengths and weaknesses of the courseware The study isconducted primarily to find out the attitude of students towards the use of the BusinessCommunications courseware as a supplementary teaching/learning material in HUBT.

3 Significance of the thesis

Many teachers often face problems and difficulties in teaching English namely due toshortage of instructional media, students‟ lack of understanding of the basic concepts ofEnglish, students‟ incomplete work and negative learning attitude Researchers have

shown that students also tend to „find school much less interesting than the myriad of devices they carry in their pocket and backpacks‟ (Prensky, 2005) Thus, teachers need to find interesting strategies and tools to make teaching and learning more effective and

interesting to the students

Practically, the findings of the thesis will be of great use not only to the researcher but also

to the teachers who are teaching DynED software to students at HUBT Furthermore, thefindings of the thesis will form a foundation toward improving the quality of thecourseware which is currently in use for the students at HUBT

4 Scope of the thesis

In courseware evaluation, there has been a great number of criteria that should be takeninto consideration such as: the content, the organization and presentation, the designfactors, the pedagogical parameter, and so on In this study, the researcher focuses on thefollowing criteria: content, interactivity, screen design, navigation, feedback, students‟learning and preference towards the courseware Due to the limited scope of a minor thesis,research subjects are primarily confined to English students who have been learning thecourseware for 1 year However, to ensure the validity and reliability of the giveninformation, teachers‟ views, which are collected in an informal way through theirobservation and experience in working/talking with students, is also taken into account

5 Design of the thesis

There are three main parts in this thesis: introduction, development, and conclusion

The introduction provides the rationale, the aims, the significance, the scope, and design ofthe thesis

The development consists of three chapters:

Chapter one presents a review of literature concentrating on the issues related tocourseware evaluation It discusses the definition of courseware, the roles and types ofcourseware evaluation in language teaching and learning, and presents major issues incourseware evaluation including purposes for courseware evaluation, types of coursewareevaluation, and courseware evaluation framework

Chapter two focuses on the methodology employed in this thesis including an overview ofcurrent English teaching and learning at HUBT, research methodology, and the datacollection procedures

Chapter three discusses the findings of the study; points out the strengths, weaknesses ofthe courseware, and suggests the recommendations for the courseware improvement.The conclusion provides a brief summary of all the major parts being present in the study,the conclusions drawn out and suggestions for further research

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1: Literature Review 1.1 Courseware in Language Teaching and Learning

As technology improves, computers are becoming more and more common, and in anincreasingly diverse number of applications Moreover, not only have computers becomecommonplace, they have also become indispensable Without the computer, for example,many recent scientific researches would not have been possible Furthermore, thedemanding on high-speed communication and the immediate accessibility to information indifferent ways has fostered the advance for the development of computer technology

“These demands and technological advances have worked hand in hand to propel the art and science of multimedia to a new level, resulting in products that weave together text, graphics, animation, audio and video.” (Norton Peter, 2001: 419) Therefore, computer is

considered as a tool to improve the quality of teaching technology Recently, the process ofteaching with assistance of computer is known as Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI).The philosophy of CAI is that the lessons allow the learners to learn their own usingstructured and/or unstructured interactive lessons

The use of computer as a teaching media provides several advantages, as stated by Sudjana

& Rival (2009:137) They are:

i) The role of computer will stimulate students’ motivation in learning process

ii) Color, sound, and graphic increase the students’ impression of realism

iii) Students’ individual responses in learning activities will produce long term memory.

They also add that computer as teaching media provides audio and visualization whichhelps students to recognize, enrich, and clarify the concept of the learning materials theyare learning

In line with them, Mc Donough, et al (1994:211) stated that there are several advantages

by using computer as learning media, such as:

i) Computer gives stimulus to the students’ learning process

ii) Computer provides audio and visual effect which can catch students’ interest and attention

iii) Computer helps to recall and rebuild the concept of previous material

iv) Computer activates students’ responses

v) Computer triggers interactive learning process, and computer also provides

learning sources which are easy to be modified.

However, besides those advantages, Sudjana & Rival (2009:138) also explain several constraints of the use of computer as learning media as follows:

- The program, especially for teaching goal, is still less developed if it is

compared with other goal.

- The digital software used is usually not flexible to be used in every computer by comparing with the benefit itself.

- Because the role of human user is still strongly demanded, the teacher should have high-technology skill, at least to operate the system and program of the computer itself.

1.1.1 Definition of courseware

The term „courseware‟ was introduced by “SCORE! Educational Centers”, the pioneeringdeveloper that coined the term by combining the words 'course' and 'software' It wasoriginally used to term any computerized packages of teaching-learning material thatinstructors could supplement to the main lessons Criswell (1989) distinguishes betweentwo different definitions of the term, asserting that, in a narrow sense, courseware refers toprograms that administer instructions, and in a wider sense, in addition to such programs, itrelates to all handbooks, performance aids and course materials A courseware is regarded

in a wider sense as “any educational package including a number of lessons or courses appended with tests, teacher's/ learner's manuals and guidelines available online and/or

on CDs and/or DVDs” (Mukundan & Nimehchisalem, 2008: 72).

According to Gueulette‟s view, an educator refers courseware as “the actual instruction involving both content and technique need in a CAI system; not to be confused with the software, the actual program that directs a computer’s operation.”(1982) Thus, there are

many ways to define a courseware because the objective and applicability can vary fromone situation to another

1.1.2 Reasons for courseware evaluation

According to Haugland (1992), the type of courseware that brings impacts to students‟computer experiences and even seems to determine whether they have developmental gainsfrom these experiences Therefore, the courseware like any other resources must have adevelopmental approach to teaching and learning

It is very important to know whether the suitability of a particular courseware could meetthe students‟ needs, its contribution to the students‟ performance and achievement, and itcould act as a motivation tool

1.1.3 Roles of Teaching Courseware in General English Courses

Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) originates from Computer – AssistedInstruction (CAI) CALL means using computers to support language teaching andlearning in some ways (Egbert, (2009)) The current philosophy of CALL puts a strongemphasis on students-centered material that allows learners to work on their own.Therefore, CALL is purposed to facilitate language learning by using technology ofcomputer More specifically, Levy (1997) states that CALL is digital software tool which

is designed to develop language learning and it also covers the application of the computer

in language teaching and learning Moreover, Ihsanudin (2009:8) in his research states that

“CALL is not focused on technology but on language learning The word assisted indicates that technology only facilitates the language learning process A more accurate term for using technology in language learning might be language learning through technology reflecting the true position of language in such activity”.

Soe (1998) says that there are three main roles of CALL in interacting with students:

 Drill and Practice.

Computer provides practice to strengthen the learning material, and gives feedback directlyfrom the students‟ scores In this case, CALL plays a role as complement media inteaching-learning language process in classroom Moreover, this is very useful whenteacher cannot interact with students individually

 Tutorial

Computer provides some information; moreover explains some addition concept tostudents through practicing In this case, CALL plays a role as material providers whichhave been adjusted to each student‟s proficiency individually

In this case, students are more active in interacting with the computer Computer provideslearning material, practice, and some feedback CALL in this role has been trusted asreplacement enclosed traditional method which provides more effective

1.1 4 Types of Courseware Evaluation

When considering possible approaches to educational evaluation, there are four generaltypes that are described in the literature Evaluation of language teaching materials/CAL(computer assisted learning) is in fact intimately linked with the authoring anddissemination process Thus approaches to evaluation reflect either what the authoringprocess seems to be before evaluation is considered, or else what the evaluators think itought to be in order to make evaluation useful Another way of putting this is thatevaluation can be designed for different purposes or roles:

 Formative evaluation: to help improve the design of the CAL

 Summative evaluation: to help users choose which piece of CAL to use and for what

 Illuminative evaluation: to uncover the important factors latent in a particular situation of use

 Integrative evaluation: to help users make the most of a given piece of CAL

Summative evaluation

The default "common-sense" view that tends to occur spontaneously to many people is thatevaluation of CAL is rather like consumer reports on goods: the manufacturer designs andsupplies them, then someone else does tests and produces reports to help purchasers decidewhich to buy This view of evaluation is linked to a view that CAL is produced liketextbooks and other goods, and that evaluation is not expected to have any direct effect onthe CAL itself by telling the authors how to improve it Nor is it expected to helpconsumers in how to use the product: only which to buy Thus this is a common view forperhaps these reasons: it fits the fact that a lot of CAL is produced like a lot of textbooks

by a very small team of authors with no spare resources for testing; it fits with a tradition inthe literature for comparative experimental testing (which can compare two sets of teachingmaterials well); it fits the needs of new CAL users to decide what to buy; and more broadly

it is analogous to consumer reports and how we encounter most of the things we buy,which we are offered without being consulted about how we would like them designed

is After all, testing is part of all engineering, and feedback from students is also used byalmost all lecturers to adjust their lectures and handouts The key point to realise whenusing it for CAL, is that such testing must be done in time to allow changes to the material

in the light of the results before the end of the development period This kind of testing iscalled formative evaluation, as it is used to modify ("form") the material

The most realistic, and so most helpful, formative evaluation would use real students intheir normal learning situation This is likely to increase the time for the whole cycle of

production, testing, and modification Feedback to developers from sites who are earlyusers of the material is a helpful substitute that gets round this constraint Although thispractice really means that users are running poorly tested software, and in effect doing thetesting that producers should have done themselves, it is better than having no way ofcatching problems and improving the software It, in fact, corresponds to commonprocesses in commercial software production, where producers keep track of users andcollect performance reports in order to improve later releases of their software.

More information on planning this kind of evaluation can be found in Alessi & Trollip(1991), and in McAteer & Shaw (1994) As noted above, the key constraint is planning to

do the testing early enough that changes can be made The reward is a significantimprovement in quality of the end product Thus the main added result will not be a report,but the modifications to the design actually done

Illuminative evaluation

"Illuminative evaluation" refers to what might now be called loosely, and perhapsincorrectly, ethnography The basic idea is for the investigator to hang out with theparticipants (students, teachers, etc.) to pick up how they think and feel about the situation,and what the important underlying issues are Its importance is as an open-ended methodthat can detect what the important issues are, without which other methods often ask thewrong questions and measure the wrong things For instance most studies still fail tomeasure motivation in any way, yet much CAL would never be used if it were not madecompulsory by teachers or experimenters However this is not a universal truth: in somecases students have a strong desire to use the CAL independent of coercion, in others theyare indifferent and use it only under compulsion but without disliking it, in yet others theycontinue to express strong revulsion (even though educational tests show educationalbenefits) Illuminative evaluation is in effect a systematic focus on discovering theunexpected, using approaches inspired by anthropology rather than psychology

Integrative evaluation

The evaluation has done many classroom studies of CAL The kind of the study is of thereal use of CAL as part of university courses, but with evaluators who can gather more andfuller information than a teacher alone can do through student verbal questions andstandard course feedback questionnaires They began to argue that these evaluations served

a rather different purpose than was first envisaged They argue that for many teachers inpractice, the question is no longer whether to use CAL or which package to use: this hasoften been decided already Instead, for them the question is how to make the best use ofCAL material they are already committed to using Classroom evaluations typically givemuch information that can be used for this For instance if all students complain aboutsome issue, or score badly on a quiz item corresponding to an issue, then teachersimmediately respond to the evaluation report by adjusting in some way e.g making anextra announcement, or producing a supplementary handout Thus a major use ofclassroom evaluations in practice is to be formative, not of the CAL itself, but of theoverall teaching and learning situation This of course can be and is responsive to localvariations in how the CAL is used, and for whom It can be a significant help in integratingCAL material into varying local situations and courses

1.2 Courseware Evaluation Framework

The efficiency of a courseware depends on many issues In order to build up the evaluationinstrument the authors attempted to integrate in a framework a number of important issuesemerged from researches on instructional design and system evaluation the past fifteenyears, and which should be considered from evaluators of hypermedia courseware (H.C.)(Georgiadou & Economides, 2000) It has to be acknowledged that this framework isrelatively limited as there are numerous articles in the literature on instructional design andsystem evaluation However, the authors, in order to develop the framework, tried toreview a large number of them and then to focus on the most often cited authors andarticles Moreover, the framework is not rigid and therefore new parts could be added orexisting ones could be altered as research advances in the area of educational hypermedia

This framework is concerned with both social and practical acceptability of hypermedia

courseware, based on Nielsen‟s idea that “the overall acceptability of a computer system is

a combination of its social and practical acceptability” The term social acceptability is

related with the social basis of an educational system In cases when the basis is centred, then the software that provides high levels of learner control and undermines theteacher‟s authority is possibly socially unacceptable On the other hand, when the basis isstudent-centred, then a courseware that limits the student‟s potential for independentdiscovery is socially unacceptable Although computer-based education may not be able toadapt to every cultural norm, they should be designed to be as culturally sensitive aspossible (Powell, 1993)

teacher-Given that a piece of hypermedia courseware is socially acceptable, its practicalacceptability is examined through the evaluation of the following four sectors:

ii) Presentation and organization of the content

iii) Technical support and update processes and finally

iv) Evaluation of learning

All sectors are equally important, as hypermedia courseware has to be simultaneouslypedagogically and technically sound Moreover, each sector includes a number of criteriathat are incorporated in the evaluation instrument, which should be met in a satisfactorylevel, in order to characterize a piece of hypermedia courseware of high quality.Furthermore, cost-effectiveness should always be examined when similar products seem tohave the same educational value Figure 1 presents in a diagram the sectors included in theframework and the factors that are associated with them

Figure 1 Diagram of the Evaluation Framework

Before presenting the evaluation instrument it is necessary to discuss the underlying theory

of the criteria used for the „presentation and organization of the content‟ and the

„evaluation of learning‟ sectors

1.2.1 Presentation and Organization of the Content

The factors associated with this sector are the pedagogical ones that are concerned withlearning and instructional design theories and the interface design factor

i) Pedagogical Factor: This is a complicated factor as there are different beliefs of howhumans learn However, cognitive theories stress that learning is an active, constructive,cumulative, self-regulated process in which the learner plays a critical role Moreover, currentinstructional theory focusing on learner-centred approaches depends on information access andlearning environments that encourage free interaction with information The agreement with theprinciples of an instructional design theory depends

heavily on the subject matter In addition, teachers‟ belief is of great importance, especially

in cases when the hypermedia courseware is part of the curriculum

Nevertheless, the two core elements that are important in all educational settings are

„motivation‟ and „structure‟, which largely define the instructional nature of aninformation environment A typical way to motivate the learner is to inform him/her whatshe/he will achieve at the end of the instruction by stating the aims and objectives (Gagné,Briggs, Wager, 1988) As far as the structure of the hypermedia courseware is concerned,that is how to organise instructional information, this again depends on the subject matter.However, in cases when the instructor wants to permit the learners to advance, review, seeexamples, repeat the unit, or escape to explore another unit, Jonassen (1992) suggested thenetwork type or structured hypermedia as most appropriate Structured hypermediaconsists of sets of nodes, each set accessible from any other set The node sets can bestructured in any number of ways, such as node-link, hierarchical, network, depending onthe nature of the processing the designer wants to elicit from the user The structure of eachnode set with the various options available within each set needs to be conveyed on everyscreen Another method for structuring the node sets is to combine related concepts, tiethem together in an introductory block, and then permit access within the set only toconcepts contained within the set

In hypermedia learning systems, another important element is „learner's control‟, which isprimary in the design of interactive learning as it allows students to tailor the learningexperience to their own individual needs However, there are dangers in surrendering toomuch control to the user, as low-ability students may get confused when control depends

on a wide range of options (Gray, 1989; Litchfield, 1993) The high level of learner controlmay result in disorientation and distraction The amount and type of learner controldepends on the learner characteristics (age and cognitive capabilities), content, and thenature of the learning task (Poncelet & Proctor, 1993) Content that must be mastered andunfamiliar tasks often requires more program control, compared to content with noqualified mastery levels or familiar learning tasks Learner control is more appropriate thanprogram control when learners are more capable and are familiar with the learning task.Moreover, advice is provided to assist learners in making decisions and control is used

consistently within a lesson (Ross & Morrison, 1989) In general, the more control is given

to the learners, the more feedback about their decisions should be given (Mcateer & Shaw,1995)

Moreover, the issues of „accommodation of individual differences‟, and „cooperativelearning‟ are highly important in the effectiveness of hypermedia-based learning In mosteducation contexts learners are not homogeneous in terms of prerequisite knowledge,motivation, experience, learning styles and cognitive styles Also evidence suggests thatwhen hypermedia-learning systems are structured to allow cooperation, learners benefitboth instructionally and socially

ii) Interface Design Factor: Interactivity - Navigation - Feedback:

Interactivity in instruction comprises the nature of the activity performed by the technologyand the learner, as well as the ability of the technology to adapt the events of instruction inorder to make that interaction more meaningful (Reigeluth, 1987) It is important to design

as much meaningful interactivity as possible into instructional software (Orr, Golas, &Yao, 1994) The amount of navigational assistance needed is a function of the size of theknowledge base; the usefulness of navigational aids that are already part of the authoringsoftware, and the types of links the software allows (Locatis, Letourneau & Banvard,1989) Guidelines for increased interactivity were produced from researchers (Shneiderman

& Kearsley, 1989; Tessmer, Jonassen & Caverly, 1989) and are used in the instrument asevaluation items in the relevant section

The basic factors that can determine the effectiveness of feedback are the type andfrequency of feedback given and the delay between feedback and instruction (Jonassen &Hannum, 1987) Feedback is closely related with the issue of interaction, as action withoutfeedback is completely unproductive for a learner Laurillard (1993) identifies two types of

feedback, „intrinsic‟ and „extrinsic‟ Intrinsic feedback is what given as a natural consequence of an action To illustrate the concept of intrinsic feedback Laurillard uses

examples of a child's actions while playing with water as the physical world responds to

the child's actions of filling, pouring, etc On the other hand extrinsic feedback does not

occur within a situation but as an external comment on it: right or wrong She suggests that

extrinsic feedback is not a necessary consequence of the action, and therefore is notexpressed in the world of the action itself, but at the level of the description of the action.

In computer-based instruction, however, the intrinsic feedback relates to navigation and interactivity with the instructional program, and the extrinsic feedback relates to the

feedback on user's performance Schimmel (1988) identifies three types of extrinsicfeedback:

a) Confirmation feedback that simply confirms whether a learner's answer is correct

or incorrect

b) Correct response feedback that presents the correct answer

c) Explanatory feedback, such as a step-by-step solution to an incorrectly answered question.

Many actions require more extended extrinsic feedback than confirmation feedback.

Simple answers such as right or wrong cannot provide any information about how learnersshould correct their performance A more helpful form of extrinsic feedback would givethe learner information about how to adapt and correct their performance, such as correctresponse and explanation feedback

iii) „Screen design‟ is also an important evaluation factor Different screen elementsshould be used to present stimulating information that will motivate and assist the learners inretaining and recalling the information The psychological limitations to consider whendesigning hypermedia learning systems include:

a) Memory load: i.e how many different control icons is it reasonable for learners to remember at any one time?

b) Perception: i.e what colours and fonts provide the best readability?,

c) Attention: i.e how can the users' attention be drawn to information that is relevant, when there is a lot of different information on the screen?

A large number of screen design guidelines produced from several researchers on

educational technology exist in the literature and the relevant items on the evaluation

instrument are based on these (Morris, Owen & Fraser, 1994; Cox & Walker, 1993;Clarke, 1992; Mcateer & Shaw, 1995).

1.2.2 Evaluation of Learning

Marchionini (1990) argued that the interactivity of hypermedia systems provides learnerswith access to vast amount of information in varied forms, control over the process oflearning, and the potential for collaboration with the system and other people Suchempowerment of learners forces evaluators of learning to adopt a broad-based set ofmethods and criteria to accommodate 'self-directed' learning He proposes a 'multi-faceted'approach to the evaluation of hypermedia based learning that addresses both the outcomesand the processes of learning

The learning outcomes are evaluated through performance tests typically used to judge the

quality and the quantity of learning, which usually have the form of „pre-tests‟ used todetermine learning outcomes prior to the intervention and „immediate‟ and „delayed post-

tests‟ to examine learning outcomes after the intervention The learning process refers to

the usability of a product and should be evaluated by observing and measuring the users attitudes Usability is usually associated with five parameters (Nielsen, 1990):

end-a) Easy to learn: Users can quickly get some work done with the system

b) Efficient to use: Once the user has learnt the system, a high level of productivity is possible

c) Easy to remember: The casual user is able to return to using the system after some period without having to learn everything all over

d) Few errors: Users do not make many errors during the use of the system or if they

do so they can easily recover them

e) Pleasant to use: Users are subjectively satisfied by using the system.

1.3 Dynamic Education (DynED)

1.3.1 Introduction of Dynamic Education Program

Dynamic Education or DynED was founded in 1987 by the former director of theLanguage Institute of Japan (LIOJ), Lance Knowles, and a team of engineers DynEDcreated the world‟s first interactive multimedia language learning in 1988 and received aU.S patent for this invention in 1991 DynED focused on combining the multimediatechnology and classroom activities Moreover, DynED mission is to help students developthe English skills they need to succeed in school and career

Overall, it can be concluded that DynED is multimedia language software and serviceswhich may be used by schools, universities and business worldwide

1.3.2 Pedagogical Framework of DynED

Fundamentally, DynED courses are based on research based approaches to languagelearning and curriculum design, extensive classroom experience, and advanced humaninterface design The effectiveness of its courses is based on over twenty-five years ofexperience in programs from around the world and on recent findings in the neurosciences

In addition, DynED has access to and actively utilizes the real-time study records ofthousands of students from around the world

What makes DynED different is its unique approach to the design and use of technology in

a blend with teacher-led classroom activities To make the learning process effective,DynED also provides feedback from placement Test, Courseware updates, Mastery Test,and Record Manager

 DynED Placement Test

In classroom learning situation, the initial skills of students must be various Studentsshould learn based on their level of proficiency, moreover they cannot be equated Because

of this, DynED program provides placement test to enable to students learn based on theirlevel of proficiency

 DynED Courseware

In this study, the courseware selected is Functioning in Business which is suitable forelementary to advance level in DynED program Functioning in Business features severaltypes of lessons, each of which keeps learners engaged with the language in different ways,promoting long-term learning This courseware supports students develop theirpronunciation and oral fluency, listening and reading comprehension, sentence structureand effective sequencing of ideas, oral presentation and summarization skills, and ability toexpress abstract ideas and relationships

The pronunciation and oral fluency are combined with speech Recognition exercises; theVideo Interactions review key concept and grammar, and introduce useful situationlanguage For instance, there is a situation which students must have conversation intelephone with the computer as shown below:

Figure 2: Video Interaction in DynED

Here, students not only practise speaking but also listening As listening and speakingfluency develop, the students can then focus on text, both reading and writing It isinteresting to note that in comparison with listening and speaking, reading and writingprocessors are relatively slow Listening and speaking fluency can support the learning of

reading and writing skills, but reading fluency can slow down and interfere with the

development of listening skills (Knowles, 2004)

 DynED Mastery Test

DynED Mastery Test is computer-assisted achievement test designed to evaluate students‟progress and confirm mastery of the language skills developed in the course Test items arerandomly selected from a database of test items to ensure variation for each learner andfrom one test session to another There are several types of questions in each Mastery Test,ranging from multiple-choice, listening comprehension questions, to sentence constructionitems which require click and drag manipulation Lexical/ Grammar Question, this multiplechoice type of question generally focuses on vocabulary or grammar points, such as whichform of a verb to use The sample of grammatical question in DynED program is asfollows:

Figure 3: Sample of Vocabulary question in DynED

A second type of question focuses on listening comprehension For example, the studentsmay hear a question or statement and have to answer or complete it with the correct choice

In the third type of test item, students are asked to move a set of words into the correct

places within a sentence The sample of sentence construction in DynED program is as follows:

Figure 4: Sample of sentence construction in DynED

 DynED Records Manager

Well-designed program can assist teachers, both in providing coaching and in pointing outpractice strategies and materials that are useful at various stages of the learning process Agood records management system can also analyze the study data to identify students whoare practising in inefficient ways, such as not recording or using speech recognitionexercises often enough, or those who have other problems that need early intervention.This can be a big time saver for overworked teachers who deal with large numbers ofstudents

The Records Manager of DynED of DynED tracks, controls, and provides feedbackregarding the study activities of classes and individual students The password-protectedsystem details each learner‟s activities and study history It includes test scores, study timeand frequency, learning path, and detailed information about how the student is using studyfeatures such as voice record, speech recognition, and repetition For instance, it is shown

by the Figure below:

Figure 5: Record Manager in DynED

1.3.3 Functioning in Business Software of DynED Programme

Functioning in Business of DynED programme consists of nine increasingly advancedunits Students click on the appropriate unit and a screen appears with five choices for

study: Presentation Video, Interactive Listening, Variation, Functional dictation, and Function Grid lessons.

Each Functioning in Business unit is divided into several lessons, beginning with a Presentation Video lesson, which is for preview and review purposes This is a linear play

through of the video without interruption The other lesson types are as follows:

Interactive Listening: This is the key lesson for each unit In this lesson, text, translation,

and glossary support are available, as well as comprehension questions Students should gothrough this lesson several times and in several ways, with the aim of mastering thelanguage, not just understanding it After listening to each section of the video withoutlooking at the text, students should begin to focus on the language details To do this, theyshould focus on key phrases and practise saying them Students should record these

phrases and compare their recordings with the speakers in the video By the time theycomplete the lesson, students should be able to summarize the entire scene with confidenceand fluency If not, they have not completed the lesson.

Variations: This section gives additional examples of how important language is used in

different situations In the first part, learners may view the dialogues without interruption

In the second part learners will interact with the characters by making language choices,

both for comprehension and for speaking practice The Speech Recognition exercises will

allow learners to take turns with the characters in the video, working their way through thedialogue, just like in a real conversation Once the language of the lesson is familiar,learners should review it on a regular basis until it is mastered and can be spoken fluently

Functional Dictations: These exercises focus on important phrases from the video In each

lesson there are a number of dictations which learners may choose First, select a dictation.Learners will then see a video which includes the sentences from that dictation When this

is finished, the screen will change, and learners will see a group of words at the top of thescreen, and the dictation sentences with a number of blank spaces where words aremissing These dictations should be done on a regular basis until the “CompletionPercentage” is 80% or more This kind of regular repetition will help learners internalizethe language

Function Grid: These exercises focus on important language functions from the video.

Learners may select a function, such as Request, and see several examples Learners may

also select the (?) symbol, which will play a portion of the video and ask learners toidentify the language function being illustrated As with the dictations, the function gridshould be done and reviewed on a regular basis until the language becomes automatic

The Mastery Tests for each disc cover 2-3 units These should be taken after students have

studied and reviewed all the lessons in the covered units A good indicator of this is when

students have an 80% or more “Completion Percentage” in all lessons in the Units to be

tested At this point students should be confident that they can understand and use thelanguage with ease, and they should easily pass the Mastery Test, which requires at least an80% score

1.3.4 The Role of DynED as CALL

In this study, the role of DynED program in the implementation of CALL is concluded asmaterial provider which has been adjusted to each student‟s proficiency Moreover, itprovides some information and explanation of some additional concept to students throughpractising

1.3.5 Related Studies

Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is an emerging force in languageeducation Despite its awkward beginning and the on-going resistance of many in thelanguage teaching community, it is maturing and showing that it can be a powerful tool inthe hands of experienced teachers (Knowles, 2004)

Previous research conducted by Knowles (2004) concludes that the implementation oftraditional approaches to language teaching does not develop students‟ languageproficiencies as significantly as the implementation of CALL does It is also supported byEgbert (2005) who states that the use of computer to support language teaching andlearning can promote all language learning skill areas and contents Agreed with them,Beatty (2003) states that the learning process in which learner uses a computer and as aresult his or her language has been improved

Moreover, Ihsanudin (2009) who has conducted research about the implementation ofCALL in the classroom concludes that CALL provides wide exposures to hear the use oftarget language which can improve students‟ listening skills and creates the class moreactive, moreover students are more interested in learning process

1.4 Summary

This chapter has provided a brief review of literature on courseware evaluation It includesthree sections The first section addressed major issues reflecting the courseware inteaching and learning English, the definition of courseware, the roles of the courseware inlanguage learning - teaching; and types of courseware evaluation, purposes of courseware

evaluation The second section presented major issues in courseware evaluation:courseware evaluation framework in terms of the content, the organization and presentation

of the content, the design factors and the students‟ learning The last section also includedsome theoretical discussions about DynED software in general, and the courseware

“Functioning in Business” in particular Therefore, the chapter can be seen as thetheoretical foundation for the applications for the study in chapter III and theimprovements that should be made to the courseware “Functioning in Business” for non-English major students at HUBT