Between theory and reality: Teachers' perspective on

evaluating websites for teaching purposes

Neny Isharyanti & Anne I. Timotius

Satya Wacana Christian University

TEFLIN 2006

Outline

• Introduction• Review of Literature• Research Questions• Methodology• Results and Discussions• Recommendation• Question and Answer

Introduction•Ease of the Internet

–Access–Creation–Materials for teaching

•Credibility of sources? •Teachers’ responsibility•Research vs. experiences

Review of Literature

•General Website Evaluation Guidelines

–content-related criteria (more emphasized)

–style-and-functionality-related criteria

Review of Literature (con’t)•content-related criteria

–authority–accuracy–comprehensiveness/coverage –objectivity/bias–currency–domain name–links/further information

Review of Literature (con’t)

•style-and-functionality-related criteria–website interface–ease of navigation–speed of download– the use of multimedia– requirements of the website–browser compatibility

Review of Literature (con’t)

•Criteria for CALL Learning Tasks Appropriateness–Chapelle (2001)–Egbert (2005)–Davies (2005)

Review of Literature (con’t)

•Chapelle (2001) & Egbert (2005)–Language learning potential–Learner fit–Meaning focus–Authenticity–Positive impact–Practicality

Review of Literature (con’t)

•Davies (2005)– Interface –Credibility–Currency

Research Questions

• Based on the criteria suggested by research, which criteria are of teachers’ consideration when they select a website for teaching purposes?

• Among those criteria, which criteria which the teachers consider to be more important?

• Is there a difference between the research criteria and the teachers’ criteria?

Subjects

•22 teachers in Round Table Discussion (RTD) Program

•All but one are computer literate

•Frequency of computer and internet usage

Frequency of Computer Usage

Computer Usage

10; 47%

6; 29%

4; 19%

1; 5%

Everyday

2-4 times a week

once a week

2-4 times per month

Frequency of Internet UsageInternet Usage

3; 19%

3; 19%

6; 37%

4; 25%

Everyday2-4 times a weekonce a week2-4 times per month

Methodology

•Questionnaire –Background of Subjects–Preferred Criterion–Criterion Importance

•Before RTD•Descriptive Statistics

Results and Discussions

• Preferred Criterion• Importance of the Criterion• Comparison

Preferred Criterion

No Criteria Number of responses

1 learner fit 10

2 practicality 10

3 authenticity 8

4 meaning focus 8

5 interface 7

6 language learning potential 7

7 credibility 6

8 positive impact 5

Importance of the Criterion

Order of Importanc

e Criteria

Absolutely not

important

Not importan

t

Quite importan

t ImportantVery

important

Total responses/crit

eria1 2 3 4 5

1 language learning potential 0 0 0 6 5 11

2 meaning focus 0 0 3 2 6 11

3 authenticity 0 0 2 4 3 9

4 learner fit 0 1 0 4 5 10

5 practicality 1 0 0 4 5 10

6 credibility 0 1 1 3 5 10

7 interface 0 2 1 4 3 10

8 positive impact 0 3 4 2 1 10

ComparisonOrder of No. of Response Preferred Criteria

Order of Importance Criteria Importance

1 learner fit 1 language learning potential

2 practicality 2 meaning focus

3 authenticity 3 authenticity

4 meaning focus 4 learner fit

5 interface 5 practicality

6 language learning potential 6 credibility

7 credibility 7 interface

8 positive impact 8 positive impact

Top vs. Bottom List

• Consistent– Top list

• learner fit• Authenticity• meaning focus

– Bottom list• interface• credibility• positive impact

• Not consistent– Language learning potential– practicality

Conclusion

•Research vs. study–Preferred criterion

•Research: all criteria•Study: Practicality and learner fit most preferred

– Importance of criterion•Language learning potential most important

Conclusion (con’t)

•Easier to spot–Practicality–Learner fit

•More subtle features–Language learning potential–Meaning focus

Conclusion (con’t)

•Two levels of search and evaluation?–Search Results (short listing)

•Easier features to spot

–Deeper evaluation (actual selection)•More subtle features

Recommendation

•Further study– Interview–Behavior tracking

Questions?

Thank you!

Contact us:

•Neny Isharyanti–neny@staff.uksw.edu–http://neny.edublogs.org

•Anne I. Timotius–Anne.timotius@gmail.com–http://annei.edublogs.org