Are EFL Learners’ Attitudes to Online Learning Environment Related to the Actual Test Performance?

Узданица XXI II (2024) (стр. 145-158)

АУТОР(И) / AUTHOR(S): Danica M. Jerotijević Tišma

Download Full Pdf   

DOI: 10.46793/Uzdanica21.2.145JT

САЖЕТАК / ABSTRACT:

The history of teaching has frequently underscored the significance of classroom environment on the outcomes of learning. With the introduction of mandatory distance learning in university settings during the pandemic, the issue of online learning efficiency became more resonant than ever in educators’ minds. The current study aimed at analyzing the connection between Serbian English-major students’ attitudes towards online learning environment and their actual performance on a knowledge test. A total of 52 students took part in the specifically designed questionnaire and the examination following an online course in English Phonetics. The results pointed to a strong positive and statistically significant correlation between students’ attitudes and scores on the knowledge test. This led to a conclusion that a learning environment might strongly affect not only students’ motivation and engagement, but the very outcomes of learning as well. The findings have important pedagogical implications, especially when it comes to English language teaching, considering the fact that relatively simple alterations to the existing learning environments could yield positive results in terms of knowledge acquisition and retention.

КЉУЧНЕ РЕЧИ / KEYWORDS:

learning environment, online learning, test performance, attitudes, ELT.

ЛИТЕРАТУРА / REFERENCES:

  • Alphonse et al. (2019): A. Alphonse, A. Orellana, E. Kanzki-Veloso, How online students describe their physical learning environment, Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 20, 29–54.
  • Wong, Fraser (1996): A. F. L. Wong, B. J. Fraser, Environment–attitude associations in the chemistry laboratory classroom, Research in Science & Technological Education, 14(1), 91– https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514960140107
  • Beckers et al. (2016): R. Beckers, T. van der Voordt, G. Dewulf, Learning space preferences of higher education students, Building and Environment, 104, 243–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.05.013
  • Ching, Hsu (2013): Y. H. Ching, Y. C. Hsu, Peer feedback to facilitate project-based learning in an online environment, International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(5), 258–276. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i5.1524
  • Choy, Quek (2016): J. L. Choy, C. L. Quek, Modelling relationships between students’ academic achievement and community of inquiry in an online learning environment for a blended course, Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2500
  • Dabbah, Kitsantas (2012): N. Dabbagh, A. Kitsantas, Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: a natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning, Internet and Higher Education, 15, 3–8.
  • Dean (2000): J. Dean, Improving children’s learning (Educational management series), London: Routledge.
  • Dhawan (2020): S. Dhawan, Online learning: A Panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49, 5– https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
  • Entwistle (2003): N. J. Entwistle, V. McCune, J. Hounsell, Investigating ways of enhancing university teaching-learning environments: Measuring students’ approaches to studying and perceptions of teaching, In: E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, J. van Merrienboer (Eds.), Unravelling basic components and dimensions of powerful learning environments, Oxford, UK: Elsevier, 89–108.
  • Goh, Fraser (1995): S. C. Goh, B. J. Fraser, Learning environment and student outcomes in primary mathematics classrooms in Singapore, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April 1995. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED389627.pdf
  • Gray, DiLoreto (2016): J. A. Gray, M. DiLoreto, The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments, International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103654.pdf
  • Hansen, Childs (1998): J. M. Hansen, J. Childs, Creating a school where people like to be, Educational Leadership, 56(1), 14–17.
  • Harper (2018): B. Harper, Technology and teacher-student Interactions: A review of empirical research, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50, 214–
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1450690
  • Heck (2000): A. Heck, Coach: An environment where mathematics meets science and technology, In: W. Maull, J. Sharp (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings of ICTMT 4, Plymouth: University of Plymouth (CD-ROM).
  • Hicks (2012): S. Hicks, Self-efficacy and classroom management: A correlation study regarding the factors that influence classroom management, Doctoral Dissertations and Projects, 562. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/562
  • Jerotijević Tišma (2023): D. Jerotijević Tišma, English-major students’ attitudes to language learning apps – is there room for pronunciation practice?, Uzdanica, XX/1, 53‒68. https://doi.org/10.46793/Uzdanica20.1.053JT
  • Khoo, Fraser (1997): H. S. Khoo, B. J. Fraser, Using classroom environment dimensions in the evaluation of adult computer courses in Singapore, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, March 1997.
  • Lozanov (1978): G. Lozanov, Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedy, New York: Gordon and Breach.
  • Moser et al. (2021): K. M. Moser, T. Wei, D. Brenner, Remote teaching during COVID-19: Implications from a national survey of language educators, System, 97, 102431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102431
  • Mpya (2007). G. N. Mpya, Managing inclusive education in the classroom with reference to the Nkangala region in Mpumalanga(Doctoral dissertation). https://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/2294
  • Ortagus (2017): J. C. Ortagus, From the periphery to prominence: an examination of the changing profile of online students in American higher education, International Higher Education, 32, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.09.002
  • Roddy et al. (2017): C. Roddy, D. L. Amiet, J. Chung et al. (Eds), Applying best practice online learning, teaching, and support to intensive online environments: an integrative review, Frontiers of Education, 2017(2). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00059
  • Sabarinath, Quek (2020): R. Sabarinath, C. L. G. Quek, A case study investigating programming students’ peer review of codes and their perceptions of the online learning environment, Education and Information Technologies,25(5), 3553–3575.
  • Sağlam, Sali (2013): G. Sağlam, P. Sali, The essentials of the foreign language learning environment: Through the eyes of the pre-service EFL teachers, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1121–
  • Tiffiany, Winkelmes, Shegog (2020): O. H. Tiffiany, M. A. Winkelmes, M. Shegog, Transparency teaching in the virtual classroom: Assessing the opportunities and challenges of integrating transparency teaching methods with online learning, Journal of Political Science Education, 16(2), 198–https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1550420
  • Tootoonchi (2016): N. Tootoonchi, The importance of students’ perceptions of the online learning environment in mathematics classes: Literature review, International Journal of Education and Research, 11(1), 1–14.
  • Wang (2017): Y. H. Wang, Integrating self-paced mobile learning into language instruction: impact on reading comprehension and learner satisfaction, Interactive Learning Environments, 25(3), 397–411. https://doi.org/1080/10494820.2015.1131170