=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2828/article_5
|storemode=property
|title=Writing Online Dialogue Journals and Penzu for Student-Teacher Interaction and Autonomous
Learning: A Research Plan
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2828/article_5.pdf
|volume=Vol-2828
|authors=Serpil Meri-Yilan
}}
==Writing Online Dialogue Journals and Penzu for Student-Teacher Interaction and Autonomous
Learning: A Research Plan==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2828/article_5.pdf
Writing Online Dialogue Journals and Penzu for Student-Teacher
Interaction and Autonomous Learning: A Research Plan
Serpil Meri-Yilana
a
Agri Ibrahim Cecen University, Agri, Turkey
Abstract
Technology has been integrated into education for decades, and some issues such as interaction
and learner autonomy have been raised in order to design an effective teaching environment.
Besides these two issues, pedagogy of care has been another concern as learners that are
possibly isolated in an entirely online learning environment may need emotional support. This
study plan, thus, focuses on these three issues by investigating a group of students’ perceived
benefits and drawbacks regarding their online writing experiences. 60 participants who were
attending an elementary writing course for their preparatory class in a state university took part
in the study. Both students and their teacher first sent letters back and forth to each other, which
aims to see how writing dialogue journals facilitates student-teacher interactions. All students
then kept an online journal through Penzu, which enabled them to write their exchanges
privately. The purpose of the research to understand how writing journals through Penzu
impacts learner autonomy. Data were collected through a mixed-methods research design. The
study was informed by qualitative data from semi-structured interviews as well as quantitative
data from questionnaires that include items on the aforesaid three issues (interaction, autonomy
and pedagogy of care). The study intends to shed light on the course in order for designers to
reconsider elements of online education, especially in terms of language education.
Keywords
Interaction, learner autonomy, dialogue journal, Penzu
1. Introduction
In the 21st century, the shift from classroom to online learning has required teaching and learning
models to focus on interaction and autonomy [1, 2] as well as pedagogy of care [3]. One aspect of this
requirement is that learning needs to take place in interactive learning environments, and learners need
to collaborate with other learners and a teacher as well as a learning content [4] in order to sustain
learning. The second aspect is that learners should take responsibility for their own learning to maintain
the learning process. The final aspect is that learning should be caring, which occurs through student-
teacher interaction. This is especially important in online learning environments where students are
sometimes supported remotely by educational resources and their teacher and a significant attribute is
given to the integration of these aspects into the learning setting. Although there have been a few studies
on interaction and learner autonomy [5], a further examination is necessary to see student-teacher
interaction and students’ autonomy in line with pedagogy of care, in particular, in remote learning
settings [2, 3]. Therefore, the focus of this paper is to report on a research design for a writing course
and to see how students of English in a university-level preparatory class interact with their teacher and
regulate their learning autonomously in online learning environments.
The present research took place in a higher education institution of Turkey, where education has
moved to entirely online learning since the beginning of the academic year. In this regard, this study is
also crucial to see students’ interaction and autonomy in a context where they have not met their lecturer
face-to-face but have been taught completely online. The aim of this study is two-fold, first to
investigate how writing an online dialogue journal impacts students’ interaction with their teacher, by
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
which students can communicate and share their feelings with their teacher and second to explore how
keeping an online journal affects students’ autonomous learning and enables them to handle their
learning on their own. Initially, the participants in this study contacted their teacher, and both students
and their teacher sent emails back and forth to each other in order to establish ongoing interaction. After
this, they kept journals through Penzu, which is different from email dialogues in that Penzu enables
users to take notes flexibly and privately. In this sense, this paper seeks out to answer the following
research questions (RQs):
1. According to students, what are the benefits and drawbacks of writing online dialogue journals?
2. According to students, in what ways does writing online dialogue journals facilitate student-
teacher interaction?
3. According to students, what are the benefits and drawbacks of Penzu?
4. According to students, in what ways does Penzu promote autonomous learning?
This paper will first give some details of the related literature and research on interaction, learner
autonomy and pedagogy of care. Then, it will provide information on research methodology.
Ultimately, it will present expected outcomes based on the research design.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Interaction
The Merriam-Webster dictionary [6] describes interaction as mutual or reciprocal action or
influence. Wang, Elston and Zhu [7] relate this definition of interaction to social interaction and
biological interaction. Furthermore, they indicate that “it is generally preferable to couple the term
‘interaction’ with other descriptive words or phrases” (p. 270). In this regard, Lear, Ansorge and
Steckelberg [4] list interaction types in e-learning environments into three groups: Learner-to-learner
interaction, learner-to-instructor interaction, and learner-to-content interaction. Through learner-to-
learner interaction, students’ engagement and community of practice are enhanced [8]. Forums,
videoconferencing and chatting are examples of digital means to foster this type of interaction. Learner-
to-instructor interaction should be learner-centered and can be provided through feedback and group
work created in wikis, Skype, Twitter, YouTube etc. [9, 10]. Learner-to-content interaction can be
formed through “watching instructional videos, interacting with multimedia, and searching for
information” (p. 209) [11]. This type of interaction is very crucial for learner autonomy. For example,
learners encounter new information, opinions and experience in an online learning environment, which
leads to interaction between the learners and content in such a way that they can improve their learning
on their own.
2.2. Learner autonomy
The common definition of learner autonomy is the ability and capacity to take responsibility for
one’s own learning [12, 13, 14, 15]. In this sense, autonomous learners are the ones who decide what
and how to learn, implement their decision or decisions, build their own capacity, and adapt themselves
to new situations or learning spaces. According to Holec [14], these learners can easily apply their
abilities outside the context not just in school contexts. Furthermore, Dickinson [13] highlights
teachers’ and contents’ role in fostering learner autonomy. Little [14] also adds that the most common
misconception about autonomy is to disregard teachers’ involvement in learning. Moreover, Benson
[12] claims that autonomy focuses on a learning process rather than a particular teaching or learning
style on the one hand and autonomy is likely to be promoted well through innovative learning tools on
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
the other. Additionally, Meri-Yilan [16] points out the interrelationship between learner autonomy and
its dimensions, such as self-regulation, self-management, self-efficacy, attribution theory, and learning
strategies. However, these interrelationships are beyond the scope of this paper.
2.3. Pedagogy of care
Pedagogy of care is identified as caring for one’s self and others’ selves [17]. Busteed [18] links it
to emotional engagement. According to Noddings’s [19] pedagogy of care framework, four components
are necessary for a properly emotional help in education. These components are modelling, dialogues,
practice and confirmation. A study by Burke and Larmar [3] confirms Noddings’s [19] framework in
e-learning environments. In modelling, teachers behave in a caring way rather than stating that they
care for their students. Dialogue occurs through the interaction and engagement between teachers and
their students in a caring way. As practice, students apply or show what they have learned, namely,
learning that has occurred during the pedagogy of care, into new learning settings. They may also show
it through their exam results or presentations. Confirmation takes place through “a caring relationship
cultivated between the teacher and student” (p. 5) [3]. In this sense, each student and teacher asserts
that the pedagogy of care has an impact on them to fulfil learning and teaching goals.
3. Methodology
This section presents a methodological aspect of the planned research in terms of the sample size;
data collection procedures, instruments and analysis; and ethical considerations.
3.1. Sample
The project is currently in the stage of analyzing the qualitative data and writing findings. 60 first-
year students who were attending an elementary writing course for their preparatory class in a Turkish
state university took part in the study voluntarily. Their ages were varied from 18 to 30. They were
chosen because they were attending virtual classes entirely online during the academic year, and they
had not met their teachers face-to-face since the beginning of the academic year.
3.2. Data collection procedures and instruments
Before collecting data, the participants’ teacher asked them to send an email to her in order to
communicate and exchange information with them. The purpose of this email exchange was to help the
researcher understand how writing online dialogue journals can affect student-teacher interaction, for
instance, whether it facilitates them to contact their teacher and motivate them to learn better. After this
email exchange, the teacher asked them to keep an online journal through Penzu, which was chosen for
this study because it enables users to write their texts privately as well as share with others, namely,
their teacher in the context of the present study. This way, keeping online journals through Penzu,
intends to assist this study to see how writing online journals privately can impact students’ autonomous
learning, for example, how they choose topics to write about.
Table 1 illustrates data collection procedures.
Table 1
The timeline of data collection, and procedures
Procedure Time Aim
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
Training - Orientation Week 1 To help students create an
account and familiar with
sending emails
Writing online dialogue Week 2 to Week 6 To facilitate student-teacher
journals interaction (RQs 1 & 2)
(Teacher and students send
emails back and forth to each
other)
Introducing Penzu and making Week 7 to Week 12 To promote learner autonomy
them write their diaries there (RQs 3 & 4)
(Students will send the
screenshots to their teacher
each week.)
Data Collection Week 13 to 15 (before the end To answer the RQs
of the academic semester)
This study is a mixed methods research project. For the quantitative research instrument, a
questionnaire which has three parts was distributed to the students. The first part includes items on
students’ learning through writing dialogue journals prepared based on the literature on interaction [4,
8]. The items are about whether the process of writing dialogue journals has enhanced their learning
and helped them to interact with their teacher and what its benefits and drawbacks are. The second part
consists of items on students’ learning through Penzu drawing on scales of learner autonomy by Meri-
Yilan [16] and Orakci and Gelisli [20]. The last part contains items on students’ views on pedagogy of
care and has been designed based on four elements of pedagogy of care drawn from Noddings [19]. For
the questionnaire items, a 5-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly
disagree) was used. The qualitative research instrument, semi-structured interview was conducted
asking questions to elaborate on the questionnaire items and RQs. For example,
1. What do you think of your learning through writing an online dialogue journal?
2. Has this affected your interaction with your teacher?
3. What do you think of your learning through Penzu?
4. Has this affected you to take responsibility for your own learning? Etc.
3.3. Data analysis
Data from the questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively. The percentages and frequencies of each
item were automatically calculated by the Google form. Data from the interviews have just started being
analyzed through NVivo, qualitative data analysis software. The study is based on grounded theory that
helps discover ‘uncharted territories’ (p. 155) [21] where codes will be generated after analyzing data
and linked to the RQs and aims of the study.
3.4. Ethical considerations
Participants were asked to participate in the study voluntarily. In their first email, they stated that
they accepted to be part of the study. In other words, informed consent was established. Before data
collection, both instruments were reviewed by two experts who will also give their review on codes.
The agreement between reviewers must be at least 80 % [22], which will be ensured in the study.
4. Expected outcomes
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
This paper presumes some outcomes based on the preliminary research steps: First, this study might
contribute to the understanding of interaction and learner autonomy in learning environments where
education is transferred to entirely online. Second, a pedagogy of care might be highlighted to show
how important caring is, especially in online learning. Third, students might differ in preferences
regarding interaction with their teacher (i.e. some students might not wish to write an online dialogue
journal) and show their autonomous learning (i.e. some students might not wish to use Penzu and share
their writings with their teacher). Last, it may shed light on administrators’ and teachers’
implementation and design of online education to some extent that they may construct interactive and
autonomous learning settings supported with caring.
However, there are some challenges that need to be addressed. There are some insufficient data to
understand student-teacher interaction, learner autonomy and pedagogy of care as this study collected
data through just two instruments such as questionnaires and interviews. Also, the participants were not
accustomed to this kind of interaction. Additionally, sharing their writings in Penzu with their teacher
might have shaped their topic choices as well as their decision on how to write. Therefore, future
research should look at related issues such as understanding teachers’ intentions and discursive
strategies used in the interactions as well as understanding the possible impact of the dialogue journals
on learners’ future action and autonomous learning.
5. References
[1] M. G. Moore, Theory of transactional distance, in: M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance
Education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 2007. pp. 89-103.
[2] A. Fotiadou, A. Christina, M. Ilias, Learner autonomy as a factor of the learning process in distance
education, European journal of open, distance and e-learning 20.1 (2017) 96-111.
[3] K. Burke, S. Larmar, Acknowledging another face in the virtual crowd: Reimagining the online
experience in higher education through an online pedagogy of care, Journal of further and higher
education, (2020) 1-15.
[4] J. L. Lear, C. Ansorge, A. Steckelberg, Interactivity/community process model for the online
education environment, Journal of online learning and teaching 6.1 (2010) 71-77.
[5] W. Peeters, C. Ludwig, ‘Old concepts in new spaces’: A model for developing learner autonomy
in social networking spaces, In T. Lewis, A. Rivens Mompean, M. Cappellini (Eds.), Learner
autonomy and Web 2.0., Equinox, Sheffield, 2017. pp.117-142.
[6] Merriam-Webster, Interaction, 2020 URL: https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/interaction?src=search-dict-hed#other-words
[7] X. Wang, C. E. Robert, Z. Xiaofeng, The meaning of interaction, Human heredity 70.4 (2010) 269-
277.
[8] J. Banna, M. G. Lin, M. Stewart, M. K. Fialkowski, Interaction matters: Strategies to promote
engaged learning in an online introductory nutrition course, Journal of online learning and
teaching/MERLOT 11.2 (2015) 249.
[9] L. Revere, V. K. Jamison, Online technologies for engaged learning: A meaningful synthesis for
educators, Quarterly review of distance education 12.2 (2011) 113–124.
[10] C. C. Robinson, H. Hallett, New benchmarks in higher education: Student engagement in online
learning, Journal of education for business 84.2 (2008) 101-109. doi: 10.3200/joeb.84.2.101-109
[11] F. Martin, U. B. Doris, Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement
strategies in the online learning environment, Online learning 22.1 (2018) 205-222.
[12] P. Benson, Teaching and researching: Autonomy in language learning, 2nd. Ed., Routledge, New
York, NY, 2013.
[13] L. Dickinson, Self-instruction in language learning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1987.
[14] H. Holec, Autonomy in foreign language learning, Pergamon, Oxford, 1981.
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
[15] D. Little, Learner autonomy. 1: Definitions, issues and problems, Authentik, Dublin, 1991.
[16] S. Meri-Yilan, ‘Take your Time’ to ‘Find yourself!’: An Exploration of Scaffolded Autonomous
E-learning Environments amongst International Students in a UK University (Applied Linguistics
for Language Teaching), Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton, Southampton. 2017. Local
EPrints ID: 414201
[17] M. Heidegger, Being and time, in: G. L. Ormiston, A. D. Schrift (Eds.), The Hermeneutic
Tradition: From Ast to Ricoeur, State University of New York Press, Albany NY, 1990. pp. 115-
144.
[18] B. Busteed, A Nobel Laureate’s mind-blowing perspective on the ultimate outcome of an
education. Forbes, 2019. URL: https://www.forbes.com/sites/brandonbusteed/2019/12/23/a-
nobel-laureates-mind-blowing-perspective-on-the-ultimate-outcome-of-an-
education/#1f9cd8dd6cd5
[19] N. Noddings, Moral education and caring, Theory and research in education 8.2 (2010) 145–151.
[20] S. Orakci, Y. Gelisli, Learner autonomy scale: A scale development study, Malaysian online
journal of educational sciences, 5.4 (2017) 25-35.
[21] Z. Dörnyei, Research methods in applied linguistics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2007.
[22] M. Miles, M. Huberman, Qualitative data analysis, Sage, London 1994.
Harnessing the Potentials of Technology to Support Self-Directed Language Learning in Online Learning Settings, October 15–16, 2020,
Stockholm, Sweden and Chiba, Japan.
EMAIL: serpilmeri@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1132-568X
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR
Wor
Pr
ks
hop
oceedi
ngs
ht
I
tp:
//
ceur
-
SSN1613-
ws
.or
0073
g
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)