The Impact of the E-Collaborative and Traditional Learning Styles on Learning Outcomes and Anxiety

The Impact of the E-Collaborative and Traditional Learning Styles on Learning Outcomes and Anxiety

Yu Zhonggen (School of Foreign Languages, Hohai University, Nanjing, China & Zhejiang Yuexiu University of Foreign Languages, Shaoxing, China & Post Doctoral Research Station of Psychology of Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China & Tongda College of Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Nanjing, China)
Copyright: © 2016 |Pages: 21
DOI: 10.4018/IJeC.2016040103
OnDemand PDF Download:
$30.00
List Price: $37.50

Abstract

Nowadays, information technologies are catching growing attention and their application to English language learning is also prospering. Using a Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale and College English Test Band 4, this study explored the different impacts of the e-collaborative learning via QQ group and the traditional multi-media learning on learning outcomes and anxiety among tertiary students. Around 70 participants were involved in different styles of learning and instruction and received both surveys and tests. The results showed that the QQ group-based e-collaborative learning could significantly decrease anxiety but no significant gain was found in learning outcomes compared with the traditional multi-media learning. Correlation between learning outcomes and variables of anxiety was also studied, which resulted in no significant findings. Both disadvantages and advantages of this study were discussed and future research and advice to practitioners were recommended as well.
Article Preview

Literature Review

Powerful instant messaging (IM) features QQ group, which consolidates collaborative learning. Farmer (2007) argued that IM was actively used by millions of people who were connected from anywhere such as home, office, mobile, providing increasing collaborative opportunities. IM supported learning could be especially placed in three contexts: workplace, school and home (Deng, 2008).

Numerous studies explored IM. Some studies (e.g. Klavins, 2005; Snyder and Field, 2006) addressed how to design an IM, while others focused on how teenagers used IM, (e.g. Ribak et al., 2002; Klavins, 2005; Snyder and Field, 2006) or the use of away messages (Baron et al., 2005). Grinter and Palen aimed to compare the similarities and differences of SMS and IM and the impact of communication technologies on the pursuit of independence (Grinter and Palen et al., 2006). Grinter and Palen (2002) found teenagers dealt with school work with the aid of IM. The frequency of using IM increased as they became more mature. But they did not provide details on how participants finished the assignment with the aid of IM. It could be generally acknowledged that IM, as a feature of QQ group, might facilitate the e-collaborative learning.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Open Access Articles: Forthcoming
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2017): 2 Released, 2 Forthcoming
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2005)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing