日本大学歯学部紀要 38，53‑61，2010

Introducing an EFL course website and blog
to extend student engagement and learning
Grant Mitchell

Abstract
This article describes an EFL course website and blog for a Global Issues communicative
English course for first year dentistry students at a university in Tokyo. The rationale for,and benefits of,establishing an online component are explained.An analysis of the studentsʼcomments on the blog, as well as the result of a student survey, is also explored. Finally,
future extensions to the online component are discussed.
Key words: blended learning, communicative English, course website, global issues,
student blog, student forum

Introduction
As with most language courses at Japanese universities, the time students allocate to learn
and practice English is largely inadequate,and greater opportunities to practice output outsideclassroom time are necessary. Current ESL theories emphasize the overriding importance ofproviding opportunities to learn and practice in communicative and meaningful contexts(Larsen‑Freeman 2000). Contributing carefully considered opinions to an online blog in full
expectation that people will respond, provides such contexts. This article describes a course
website and corresponding student blog that was established in the 2010 academic year toenhance a Global Issues communicative English course for first year students at the School of
Dentistry,Nihon University,Tokyo.The rationale for establishing an online component will be
explained and the benefits for such an innovation will be argued. Over the first semester, thestudentsʼcomments on the blog, as well as the results of a student survey about the online
components of the course,were recorded and analyzed,and these results will also be discussed.
Finally, future extensions to the online component will be explored in detail.

BackgroundThe course is one of two compulsory English curricula set for 130 first year students, split
into 4 classes of mixed levels.Students attend two 50‑minute classes,back to back,each week.
The approach to this communicative and collaborative 8‑cycle course is designed to give equal

日本大学歯学部

英語

Nihon University School of Dentistry
1‑8‑13 Kanda‑Surugadai, Chiyoda‑ku, Tokyo 101‑8310, Japan〒 101‑8310 東京都千代田区神田駿河台１‑８‑13（受理：2010年９月 30日）

53

日本大学歯学部紀要 38，53‑61，2010

weight to all language skills. Each segment of a cycle emphasizes a single skill while eachactivity within that segment allows the student to incorporate practice of all language skills.
The course designers believe that this approach is beneficial in preparing students for the ESP
courses they will take in future years,and helping them develop the communication skills they
will need attending conferences,in reading and publishing research or attending graduate study
overseas (Chretien & M itchell 2009).The goal is to encourage the development of well‑rounded
students who can communicate adequately in English, not only in Japan, but worldwide, andcreating future graduates who can participate in the international dental community. A fulldescription of the structure and the philosophy behind the activities and themes of this course
can be found in Chretien & M itchell (2009).
This is the second year of the course but the first year of using a course website and student
blog. The website is hosted by Apple Inc.ʼ
s Mobile Me service, and has been constructed andadministered by the author using Appleʼ
s iWeb software. The site is password protected tomaintain privacy and security. Cycle booklets, edited articles for further reading,instructions
for homework and extended activities are uploaded to the website by the course coordinators
each cycle. Students can read and/or download and print any items, and can add comments
about the topic on the blog for each cycle, according to instructions.
For each cycle,students were generally required to go the website,read a short introduction
to the topic, follow any instructions for activities and download to read a short article.Every
article is carefully chosen to provide various sides to a contentious issue as a springboard into
further student led discussion. For one topic we invited two ʻ
special native speaker guestsʼtovoice their opinions on the blog to increase authenticity. However, care needs to be taken
tapping into the wealth of authentic,but unedited,information available on the internet (Hess2001). For this course, all text is heavily edited beforehand to place it at just above what themedian level student in the course would find challenging,but where the higher‑level students
could still learn some new vocabulary and expressions.Additionally,ideas for successful study
that were brainstormed and discussed bythe students during the course orientation were postedon the website for students to return to if they needed to refocus on their goals.

Rational for an online component
Online discussion spaces are increasingly being used to provide a more natural language
learning environment by facilitating authentic interactions and discourse communities (Zha,etal 2006).Furthermore,teachers gain more control by creating learning environments targeting
their specific local needs, either their syllabus or their students, without having to rely on
structured textbooks (Hess 2001).

54

Introducing an EFL course website and blog

Research has long shown the benefits of incorporating an online component into language
study (Owston 1997, Phillips 1998) and effective online components have been successfully
developed in some Japanese university courses (e.g.Miyazoe & Anderson 2010,MacKenzie,etal 2010). Encouraging students to express themselves in an online peer forum context complements goals of building confidence to engage with others in their L2.Bower,et al (2009)show
how web 2.0 technologies, such as blogs, provide opportunities for constructionist and co‑constructive learning,and they outline helpful suggestions where these technologies can assist
the transmission of knowledge, within the various knowledge dimensions. But in short, theprocess can be summarized thus: any text posted on the website by the course coordinators
provides a transmissive pedagogy while the interactive blog component assists in dialogic,
constructionist and co‑constructive learning (Bower, et al 2009).
Essentially, what we are creating with this syllabus is a ʻ
blended learningʼenvironment(Garrison & Vaughan 2008) where a traditional classroom component is mixed with online
learning systems of some kind.It is important to note neither dominates at the otherʼs expense.
They should be coherent, and operate in tandem. An online component of a course should notjust exist for its own sake. And it is important to remember the role of the teacher andclassroom still remains fundamental to language learning, and it is a mistake to consider the
online components and the teacher/classroom to be in opposition to each other (Knowles 2002).
Instead, they should be thought of as the perfect complement. In this kind of curriculum,
technology is only a mediator for student collaboration and representation. It is the type oftasks and thinking processes in which students engage that continues to determine the qualityof learning (Bower, et al 2009).
Furthermore,research has found that students are open to quality online learning programs
if it complements face‑to‑face teaching, and does not substitute it (Felix 2002, Hess 2006).
Computer‑mediated communication via the internet has been found to lead to more participation,enjoyment,an improvement in attitudes toward target language and an increased qualityof writing,as well as encouraging a sense of community as written work is shared in a ʻpublicʼforum (Ware 2004).Contributing to an online blog is practicing regular written expression,butwith an additional value: the authenticity of the posted message for their learning community,
their teacher and the outside world (M ompean 2010).But online learning will only be useful tostudents if it provides relevant information and activities quickly and efficiently and also ifthese are ʻconvincing and demonstrably linkedʼto learning goals (Hess 2001, p41).
Additionally, the non‑inhibiting mediation of the internet decreases student anxiety about
negative appraisals (Blake & Zyzik 2003).Students feel the online world is a safe environment
to experiment with language and perhaps make mistakes (Felix 2002).It is a haven for shyand/55

日本大学歯学部紀要 38，53‑61，2010

or less motivated learners to interact (Warshauer, 1996). They also have more time to review
and edit their conversations, and time to reflect on the structures peers are using (Lee, 2002).
But most learning activities should avoid being individual and isolated exercises,and mostly bea part of a group activity with a goal that should be co‑operatively reached (Hess 2006).

Blog contributions
Contributions to the blog were not compulsory,but students were advised that the more theywrote,the more points they could earn for their final evaluation.Exactly how much more wasdeliberately kept vague as the coordinators wanted to rely on the intrinsic motivation of theenjoyment in engaging with the target language in a process‑orientated, non‑competitive
learning environment. The focus on contributions as a way to practice and gain confidence inEnglish was consistently re‑enforced. Students were asked for their opinions on the issues
raised in the readings and why they felt that way.Over the period of the first semester (Cycles
1 to 4)contributions were quantitatively recorded and are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 : Data of student blog entries during four cycles of the first semester
Cycle

Total numberof entries

Total Words

Average word
length of entries

Longest entry

Entries over
50 words

１

90

2963

33

92

11

２

87

3639

42

151

23

３

99

7739

78

211

61

４

38

3139

83

150

31

The total amount of single student entries for each cycle was consistent at about 70‑80% of
the class body the exception being the 4 cycle for which the instructions to contribute were
not sufficiently communicated to 2 of the 4 classes during the final week before the summer
holidays. Consequently contributions dropped to 30% for that cycle,however the coordinators
believe the overall trend will continue up during the second semester.More interesting are thegradual increases in total words contributed during those first 3 cycles: 23% and 112%
increases on the previous weeksʼcontributions.Remarkably,even taking into account the poor
number of entries for cycle 4,the average entry length has increased 150% from 33 to 83 words
over the semester. Again, the number of students making entries of adequate length (at least
50 words) have increased dramatically from 11 (Cycle 1) to 61 (Cycle 3), with ＋150‑word
contributions not uncommon. Clearly these figures show that, during the semester, students
have been gaining in interest, confidence and motivation with their expression of opinions on
the blog.

56

Introducing an EFL course website and blog

Unfortunately,there are some limitations to the conclusions we can draw from these figures.
Firstly, they only cover one semester of four cycles therefore trends are indicative at best.
Secondly,it could be argued there is some bias in the figures that needs to taken into account.
In Cycle 3 students were encouraged to write a lot however it also attracted the highest numberof entries,perhaps reflecting a greater inherent interest in that topic and activity.Furthermore,
Cycle 4 figures are affected bythe communication issues coinciding with end of semester,which
saw the figures fall across the board. Finally, although it would be more illuminating,a morecomprehensive, qualitative analysis of the writing remains to be undertaken.

Student survey
At the end of the first term,a student survey was taken to measure the effectiveness of using
a website and class blog with this course,with 123 responses received.The following questions
were asked, with students to circle the answers that most closely reflected their feelings:
1.

Have you ever commented in English online, before this course?

2.

Do you feel more confident commenting online in English after this course?

(never/once/a few times/often/many times)
no/yes, a little confident/yes, confident/yes, very confident
3.

Does the website make this course more enjoyable?
no/yes, a little enjoyable/yes, enjoyable/yes, very enjoyable4.

Did you have any major problems using the website?
yes/no5.

If you had problems using the website, please tell me why:
・I didnʼt have computer or printer access・I didnʼt have internet access・I couldnʼ
t make a comment from my computer―I got an error message
・I didnʼt know how to use a computer・I didnʼt understand how to use the website, download a file, or make a comment・other problems:
The results were recorded and are shown in Table 2.
The results show that 91% of respondents feel that they gained in confidence in using English

online and that for 94% of respondents,the use of a website and blog increased their enjoymentof studying English. M ore important are the results for students with limited experience ofusing English online before (those students categorized as having answered ʻ
neverʼ
,ʻonceʼor ʻa
few timesʼto questions 2 or 3). Analysis of their responses showed 86% of this group feel anincrease in confidence in commenting online, and 89% feel an increase in enjoyment with thecourse because of the online component.

57日本大学歯学部紀要 38，53‑61，2010

Table 2 : Data of student survey responses to four questions

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

never

once

few

often

many

Total

32

８

26

29

28

123

no

little

yes

very

Total

32

８

26

29

123

no

little

yes

very

Total

７

44

59

13

123

yes

no

Total

59

64

123

no PC/print

no internet

unable tomakecant use PC

didnʼtunderstand

other

３

１

５

comment
Q4(reasons)

11

11

42

N.B. Some students claimed multiple reasons

Challenges
Without a doubt, the biggest challenge to establishing the online component for the course
was familiarity with navigating the online world, and some studentsʼlack of access to computers,printers or internet facilities (see Table 2,Q4).Surprisingly,some university students inJapan,even within one the nationʼ
s most competitive tertiaryeducation programs,seem to havevery little experience using the internet or computers. While most of the obstacles were
overcome during the semester through mini‑training sessions, workarounds or alternative
arrangements (e.g.writing out ʻblogʼcomments by hand),there still remain some students who,
for one reason or another, cannot fully take part in the online component.
Additionally, there are compatibility issues with the website and some older versions ofoperating systems and/or internet browsers some students are using.In most cases,these older
systems wont allow students to add comments to the blog and in rare cases they are unable todownload documents we have prepared. Until students update their systems or find a way toaccess more modern systems for their studies, unfortunately these problems will persist.
Ware (2004) has found that the quality of online writing is sometimes less than word‑
processed texts,and this is also evident in our course as well.While pleased with the improvement over the semester,we had hoped that more students had taken the opportunity to express
themselves more fully. A thorough discussion of the overall student writing in this course can58Introducing an EFL course website and blog

be found in Chretein (2010)in this issue.
Finally,the time and cost involved in establishing the website,monitoring and evaluating theblog entries and providing student feedback has been significant.In future,sufficient administrative recognition or support with adequate resources for the satisfactory completion of thesetasks will be required for anyone contemplating similar innovations in their curriculum.

Future extensions
With this course, we are trying to create an environment where students are encouraged toengage in greater intercultural encounters.Up until now,students have been just scratching thesurface of what this online component can offer. Students have rarely posted more than one
comment,and have rarely responded to comments.The important authentic interactive aspectremains, but for now its just beyond their reach. However the coordinators intended the firstsemester to be an introduction to the online component and a chance to iron out any technicalissues, before encouraging a second stage of greater interaction in the second semester.
For this environment to be truly interactive, students need to apply sustained and focusedinteraction through an authenticʻ
forumʼof multiple turns,instead of onlysingle blog comments.
The move to this second stage will lead to an extension of interaction which will require greater
instances of negotiated meaning to occur, mostly through repair moves such as clarification
requests and comprehension checks (Ellis 1994). As the participants engage with each other,
opportunities to clarify ideas,elaborate on them,evaluate existing knowledge for accuracyand
then reorganize present themselves (Dekhinet 2008). When learners are involved in peer
discussions in forums, this interaction helps them acquire new strategies and strengthen theirown ideas through peer dialogue.Also they are able to correct lexical mistakes by comparing
differences in use (Zha,et al 2006).The asynchronous writing in a forum allows more composing time, leading to improved syntactic performance. In addition, the database of writing canbe drawn upon in the classroom to facilitate metacognitive reflection on their writing (Ware2004). M oreover, forum responses are an extension of the forms of peer feedback explored in
the blog that push students to write balanced comments with an awareness of the audienceʼsneeds.It is hoped that time will be found for face‑to‑face class discussion to clarify comments
in question as a way to maximize the effect of online peer feedback (Guardado & Shi 2007).
The online component of this course also requires greater authentic native speaker voices.
Already NS guests have been invited to comment, but plans are being made to incorporate
podcasts of short interviews with other native speakers on selected topics,either in lieu of text
or as a complement. Ideally if the forum is open to native speakers, it has the potential for
language and culture to be even more tightly intertwined,as the learners will be informants of59

日本大学歯学部紀要 38，53‑61，2010

their own culture, as well as learners of others (Liaw 2007). Forum interactions are opportunities to allow students to participate in a cultural practice with (and on the same terms as)
native speakers (Hanna & de Nooy 2003). Yet it should be remembered that successful
participation in a forum depends on awareness of cultures and writing genres and an ability towork within them. After all, participation is not only linguistic training, but also cultural
engagement (Hanna & de Nooy 2003).The next logical step would be to encourage students tobegin contributing to outside open forums, particularly for higher year students who have theskill and confidence to engage in such autonomous practice.
The studentsʼinteractions online will continue to be monitored during the second semesterand be analyzed along with student surveys at the end of the academic year. It is hoped that
this will reveal more conclusive trends and results as to the effectiveness of including online
components in a curriculum.

Conclusion
This paper has described a course website and corresponding student blog for a Global Issues
communicative English course. The rationale for establishing this online component and thebenefits for such an innovation has been explained.Analysis of the studentsʼcomments on theblog,as well as a student surveyclearlyindicate improvement in learner confidence and output,
and increased motivation to study and practice.It is hoped that future extensions to the online
component will ensure this trend continues.
References
Blake,R.and Zyzik,E.(2003).Whoʼs helping whom?Learner/Heritage speakersʼ
networked discussions
in Spanish. Applied Linguistics, 24 (4)p519 ‑544.
Bower, M., Hedberg, J. & Kuswara, A (2009). Conceptualizing Web 2.0 enabled learning designs. In
Same places, different spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009 . Retrieved Sept 23 2010 from :http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09 /procs/bower.pdf
Chretien, J.P. & M itchell, G. (2009). An integrated skills‑communicative English course for university
students majoring in subjects other than English. Transactions of Nihon University School of
Dentistry 37 p43‑52.
Chretien,J.P.(2010).Writing in an integrated skills communicative EFL course for non‑English majors.
Transactions of Nihon University School of Dentistry 38 p63‑78.
Dekhinet, R. (2008). Online enhanced corrective feedback for ESL learners in higher education.
Computer Assisted Language Learning 21 (5)p409 ‑425.
Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Felix, U (2002). The web as a vehicle for constructivist approaches in language teaching.ReCALL 14(1)p2‑15.
Garrison, D.R. & Vaughan, N.D. (2008). Blended Learning in Higher Education : Framework, Princi-

60

Introducing an EFL course website and blog

ples, and Guidelines. San Francisco : Jossey‑Bass.
Guardado, M & Shi, L. (2007). ESL studentsʼexperiences of online peer feedback. Computers &Composition 24 (4)p443‑461.
Hanna, B.E. & de Nooy, J. (2003). A funny thing happened on the way to the forum : Electronic
discussion and foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology 7 (1)p71‑85.
Hess,H.V.(2001).Online Learning Systems as Mediation between Cyberspace and Learner: Why(andhow)teachers (and not primarily students)should become ʻautonomousʼ. GFL‑Journal 1 p29 ‑42.
Hess, H.V. (2006). Beyond the Rhetoric of the ʻAutonomous Learnerʼ
: Combining E‑Learning and theClassroom. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 3 (1), p102‑120.
Knowles, L. (2002). Combining M ultimedia and Classroom Activities. www.jalt‑publications.org/tlt/
articles/2002 /07 /knowles Retrieved Sept 25, 2010.
Larsen‑Freeman, D (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Lee,L (2002).Enhancing learnersʼcommunicative skills through synchronous electronic interaction andtask‑based instruction. Foreign Language Annals 35 p16‑23.
Liaw, M.L. (2007). Constructing a ʻ
third spaceʼfor EFL learners: Where language and cultures meet.
‑
ReCALL 19 (2)p224 241.
MacKenzie,D.,Promnitz‑Hayashi,L.,Jenks,D.Geluso,J.,Delgado,R.,& Castellano,J.(2010).Blended
learning spaces: Patterns of use.In A.M .Stoke (Ed.),JALT2009 Conference Proceedings.Tokyo :JALT.
Miyazoe, T. & Anderson, T (2010) Learning outcomes and studentsʼperceptions of online writing :Simultaneous implementation of a forum,blog,and wiki in an EFL blended learning setting.System
38 (2), p185‑199.
Mompean, A.R. (2010). The development of meaningful interactions on a blog used for the learning ofEnglish as a Foreign Language. ReCALL 22 (3), p376‑395.
Owston, R.D. (1997). The World Wide Web : A technology to enhance teaching and learning?Educational Researcher 26 (2), p27‑33.
Phillips, V. (1998). Virtual Classrooms, Real Education. Nationʼ
s Business 86 (5), p41‑45.
Ware,P.D.(2004).Confidence and competition online: ESL student perspectives on web‑based discussions in the classroom. Computers & Composition 4 p451‑468.
Warschauer, M . (1996). Comparing face‑to‑face and electronic discussion in a second language classroom. CALICO Journal 13 p7‑23.
Zha,S.,Kelly,P.,Park,M .A.K.& Fitzgerald,G.(2006).An Investigation ofCommunicative Competenceof ESL Students Using Electronic Discussion Boards. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education 38 (3), p349 ‑367.

61