http://iteslj.org/Articles/Warschauer-Internet.

html

Current Issue - Previous Issues - Activities for ESL Students - Things for ESL Teachers - TESL/TEFL Links - Search - Copyright
The Internet TESL Journal

The Internet for English Teaching:

Guidelines for Teachers
Mark Warschauer
markw [at] hawaii.edu
http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/markw
University of Hawaii at Manoa

P. Fawn Whittaker
whittakf [at] byuh.edu
Brigham Young University - Hawaii

Originally published in the TESL Reporter 30,1 (1997), pp. 27-33

Teachers have been using online communication in the language classroom for more
than ten years now. From an investigation of the experiences of dozens of teachers
around the world who have used the Internet in language teaching (Warschauer,
l995a; l995b; 1996c; 1996d), a few common guidelines emerge that can assist
teachers in successfully planning and implementing network-based learning projects.

Guidelines
Readers will note that these guidelines are independent of the particular technological
tools being used. As has been noted elsewhere, "technology is developing so rapidly
that it can often be difficult or even overwhelming to harness, somewhat like trying to
get a drink of water from a gushing fire hydrant" (Warschauer, l995b. p. xv). In order
to make effective use of new technologies, teachers must thus take a step back and
focus on some basic pedagogical requirements. The following guidelines are designed
to help teachers implement computer network-based activities into the second
language classroom.

#1: Consider Carefully Your Goals

There are several possible reasons for using the Internet in language teaching. One
rationale is found in the belief that the linguistic nature of online communication is
desirable for promoting language learning. It has been found, for example, that
electronic discourse tends to be more lexically and syntactically more complex than
oral discourse (Warschauer, 1996a) and features a broad range of linguistic functions
beneficial for language learning (Chun, 1994; Kern, 1995; Wang, 1993). Another
possible reason for using the Internet is that it creates optimal conditions for learning
to write, since it provides an authentic audience for written communication (see, for
example Janda, 1995). A third possible reason is that it can increase students'
motivation (Warschauer, 1996c). A fourth possible reason is the belief that learning
computer skills is essential to students' future success; this reason suggests that it is
not only a matter of using the Internet to learn English but also of learning English to
be able to function well on the Internet.

None of these reasons are more or less legitimate than any of the others. However,
since there are so many ways to integrate the Internet into classroom instruction, it is
important for the teacher to clarify his or her goals. If, for example, one of the
teacher's goals is to teach students new computer skills, the teacher may want to
choose Internet applications which will be most useful to them outside of the
classroom, with activities structured so that students steadily gain mastery of more
skills. If the immediate goal is to create a certain kind of linguistic environment for
students, once again, the teacher should consider what types of language experiences
would be beneficial and structure computer activities accordingly. If the goal is to
teach writing, Internet activities should be structured so that they steadily bring about
an increase in the types of writing processes and relationships essential to becoming a
better writer (see, for example, seven activities by Janda in Warschauer, 1995b).

As will be discussed further below, little is usually gained by just adding random
online activities into a classroom. Clarifying course goals is, thus, an important first
step toward successful use of the Internet.

#2: Think Integration

Most teachers who have used the Internet have started out with some kind of simple
key pal (computer pen pal) exchanges. And most teachers who have used these
exchanges have felt something lacking. Simply put, there is no more reason to except
a significant educational outcome from simply creating a pen pal connection than
there is from simply bringing two students into a room and asking them to talk. Over
time, greater involvement on the teacher's part in creating learning activities that
create sufficient linguistic and cognitive demands on the student is needed to get
maximum benefit from Internet exchanges. And, as a number of people have noted,
this teacher intervention is most successful when it brings about activities and projects
that are well-integrated into the course curriculum as a whole.

Bruce Roberts, the coordinator of the Intercultural E-Mail Classroom Connections

(IECC) program, explained this point well:

There is a significant difference in educational outcome depending on whether a

teacher chooses to incorporate e-mail classroom connections as (1) an ADD-ON
process, like one would include a guest speaker, or (2) an INTEGRATED process, in
the way one would include a new textbook. The e-mail classroom connections seems
sufficiently complex and time-consuming that if there are goals beyond merely having
each student send a letter to a person at a distant school, the ADD-ON approach can
lead to frustration and expected academic results‹the necessary time and resources
come from other things that also need to be done. On the other hand, when the e-mail
classroom connection processes are truly integrated into the ongoing structure of
homework and classroom interaction, then the results can be educationally
transforming (in Warschauer, 1995a, p. 95)

Of course there are many ways that Internet activities can be integrated into the
overall design and goals of a course (see Sayers, 1993 for a good overview). The
teacher can work with students to create research questions which are then
investigated in collaboration with foreign partners. Students and long-distant partners
can work collaboratively on publications. Or students can use exchange partners as
experts to supply information on vocabulary, grammar, or cultural points which
emerge in the class. Again, the choice has to be made by the classroom teacher,
preferably in ongoing consultation with the students. Nevertheless, as Roberts
suggests above, it does behoove the teacher to think about how to integrate online
connections into the class rather than adding these connections on top of the rest of
the classroom activities in a disconnected fashion.

#3: Don't Underestimate the Complexity

Most English teachers, even those who consider themselves computer novices, have
several relative advantages when learning to use the Internet. They are, in most cases,
skilled at English, experienced at typing or keyboarding, and have some basic
computer literacy (i.e., they probably have at least used a computer for word
processing). ESL students, on the other hand, at least in some cases, may lack these
basic prerequisites. Though we have had students who are quite experienced with
computers, we have also had students who had seldom used a computer; lacked basic
knowledge such as how to operate a mouse or open a folder; and lacked the
vocabulary, reading, and listening skills to follow instructions for using the computer

Beyond these issues of learner preparation, there are a number of other complexities
in introducing Internet-based activities in the ESL classroom. Activities in a single
class may be dependent on scheduling the computer lab, and on students finding
computers outside the class time to continue their activities. Hardware and software
can malfunction and computer systems can be down. Students' schedules might not
permit them to return to the computer lab at a time when computers are available to
complete their assignments.

Exchanges between classes are even more complex. The partner class might have
absent students, or might not meet in a particular week due to holidays or other
activities in that location. The partner teacher might not have the same understanding
of the nature of the exchange, and working through differences can cause further
delays. The students might have differences in background, language, and experience
which can cause further complications.

None of these potential problems mean that Internet based activities shouldn't be used.
But in attempting to integrate online teaching, it is best not to be overly ambitious in
the beginning. A situation which overwhelms both students and teacher in technical
difficulties is not likely to bring about the desired results. It is better to start small and
to create the kinds of activities which have a direct purpose and are well-integrated
into classroom goals. If these activities prove successful, you can build from there and
attempt a more ambitious plan the following semester.
#4: Provide Necessary Support

Mindful of the complexities which can arise in Internet usage, teachers need to
provide support sufficient to prevent students from being overwhelmed by difficulties.
This kind of support can take numerous forms: creating detailed handouts that
students can refer to when class is finished and the teacher's personal help is not
accessible; building technology training sessions into the class schedule, not only in
the beginning but on an ongoing basis; working with the computer center to set up
log-on systems and other procedures which are as simple and intuitive as possible;
assigning students to work in pairs or groups, both in and out of the lab, so that they
can provide assistance to each other; providing details to the students about how and
when they can get assistance from technology specialists or others on campus outside
of class; and being available to help students at times when they are most likely to
need it.

#5: Involve Students in Decisions

The concept of a learner-centered curriculum (Nunan, 1987) predates, and has broader
significance, than the Internet enhanced classroom. However, this concept seems
particularly important when considering network-based teaching.

First of all, as indicated above, network-based teaching involves a number of special

complexities. It will be difficult, indeed, for a teacher to be fully aware of the impact
of these complexities without regular consultation with students. This might involve
anonymous surveys, class discussions, or similar means of involving students in
expressing their opinions about the process of implementing technologies.

Notably favorable is that the nature of computer-mediated communication creates

opportunities for more decentered interaction (for summaries, see Warschauer, 1996b;
Warschauer, Turbee, & Roberts, 1996). To fully exploit these opportunities, the
teacher must learn to become a "guide on the side" rather than a "sage on the stage".
A situation which is based on communication between students but in which the
students have little say over the topics or outcomes of that communication is not
likely to lead to the kind of atmosphere optimal for language learning.

As pointed out elsewhere (Warschauer, Turbee, & Roberts, 1996), involving students
in determining the class direction does not imply a passive role for teachers. Teachers'
contributions in a learner-centered, network-enhanced classroom include coordinating
group planning, focusing students' attention on linguistic aspects of computer
mediated texts, helping students gain meta-linguistic awareness of genres and
discourses, and assisting students in developing appropriate learning strategies.

Conclusion
A paper of this length can not completely cover the topic of network-based language
teaching. Further information on this topic is available in books (see for example
Warschauer, 1995a; Warschauer, 1995b) and on the Internet itself (see for example
NETEACH-L at http://thecity.sfsu.edu/~funweb/neteach.htm). In the end though,
each teacher will have to find her or his own way, based on the goals of the teacher
and the program, the needs of the students, and the materials and technology
available. It is hoped that the guidelines outlined in this paper can provide some
assistance to teachers attempting to optimally combine their own goals, their students'
needs, and the power of the technology-enhanced classroom.

References
Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of
interactive competence. System, 22(1), 17-31.

Janda, T. (1995). Breaking the ice: E-mail dialogue journal introductions and
responses. In M. Warschauer (Eds.), Virtual Connections: Online Activities and
Projects For Networking Language Learners (pp. 57- 58). Honolulu, HI: University
of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers:

Effects on quantity and quality of language production. Modern Language Journal,
79(4), 457-476.

Nunan, D. (1987). The Learner Centered Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Sayers, D. (1993). Distance team teaching and computer learning networks. TESOL
Journal, 3(1), 19-23.

Wang, Y.M. (1993). E-mail Dialogue Journaling in an ESL Reading and Writing
Classroom. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon at Eugene.

Warschauer, M. (1995a). E-mail For English Teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL

Publications.

Warschauer, M. (1995b). Virtual Connections: Online Activities and Projects For

Networking Language Learners. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i Second
Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Warschauer, M. (1996a). Comparing face-to- face and electronic communication in

the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2), 7-26.

Warschauer, M. (1996b). Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and

Practice (Research Note No. 17). University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching
and Curriculum Center.

Warschauer, M. (1996c). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and

communication. In M. Warschauer (Eds.), Telecollaboration in Foreign Language
Learning: Proceedings of the Hawai'i Symposium. Honolulu, HI: University of
Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
Warschauer, M. (1996d). Telecollaboration in Foreign Language Learning:
Proceedings of the Hawai'i Symposium. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i, Second
Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and
student empowerment. System, 14(1), 1-14.

About the Authors

• Mark Warschauer is a researcher at the University of Hawaii investigating

new technologies in language learning. He has trained teachers in computer
assisted language learning in Europe, Asia, and the United States. His
published books include E-Mail for English Teaching, Virtual Connections,
and Telecollaboration in Foreign Language Learning.
• P. Fawn Whittaker is Language Center Director and ESL Instructor at
Brigham Young University-Hawaii Campus. She has integrated ESL reading
and writing studies with computer and accompanying internet support in
several of her intermediate and advanced ESL courses. She advises Center
(http://lc.byuh.edu) and student web page development
(http://lc.byuh.edu/EIL_WORLD/EILW.html).

The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. III, No. 10, October 1997
http://iteslj.org/
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Warschauer-Internet.html