Examining Critical Thinking Through the Use of Webquest

Examining Critical Thinking and Language Use through the Use of WebQuests in an EFL Reading Class       Nunthika Puthikanon            

Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Literacy, Culture, and Language Education, School of Education Indiana University December, 2009

UMI Number: 3390298

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMI 3390298 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Doctoral Committee

__________________________________ (Larry Mikulecky, Ph.D.)

__________________________________ (James Damico, Ph.D.)

_________________________________ (Sharon Pugh, Ph.D.)

_________________________________ (Bill Johnston, Ph.D.)

Date of Oral Examination November 17th, 2009 ii  

© 2009 Nunthika Puthikanon ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

iii  

In loving memory of my father

To my mother

iv  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am deeply grateful to my advisor, committee chair, and director of the dissertation, Dr. Larry Mikulecky, for his guidance, support, and belief in me throughout my academic journey at Indiana. He inspires me to “push the edge of knowledge” and learn to become a good researcher. My dissertation committee – Dr. Sharon Pugh, Dr. Bill Johnston, and Dr. James Damico – have been helpful, patient, and generous throughout this process as well. This work bears the imprint of their assistance, both direct and indirect, as I have learned from them over the years in various ways. I am grateful to all those who participated in my study. I am especially indebted to the two teacher participants for their tireless participation and involvement. This study would not have happened without their efforts. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues in Thailand and the United States, who provided support and assistance to me in one way or another throughout my doctoral studies. Thanks to Malinee Prapinwong for her support and helpful suggestions. Nattada Chompusri and Warinda Patibhanthewa have also provided continual support and encouragement, which have been invaluable to me. I am also greatly thankful to Sampan Ampaiwan. In addition to being a wonderful listener, he has provided love, encouragement, personal advice, and the invaluable certainty that I could do this. Without him, I would likely have never passed all the challenges at crucial times in this process.

v  

Finally, I could not begin to express in a few lines how grateful I am to my mother, my brothers, my grandparents, and my aunts. Without their love and support, none of this would have been possible. I also wish that my father could have been with me today to see my accomplishments.

vi  

NUNTHIKA PUTHIKANON EXAMINING CRITICAL THINKING AND LANGUAGE USE THROUGH THE USE OF WEBQUESTS IN AN EFL READING CLASS Several studies have demonstrated the advantages of WebQuests as a potential tool to promote critical thinking skills in L1 contexts. Yet, in EFL classrooms, inquiry into WebQuest use as an activity to promote critical thinking skills and language learning is extremely scarce. Given the positive results from the studies of WebQuests in L1 contexts, it is necessary to pursue the investigation of WebQuest use in an EFL course. The study presented investigates how students used critical thinking in a college-level EFL reading course in Thailand. It also examines how the teacher played a role in supporting students’ use of critical thinking. The use of English language during the WebQuest activity is also explored. A case study approach with mixed methods research design was employed in this study. The data were collected from two classroom sections of an intermediate English reading course at a university in Thailand. Two WebQuests were implemented as a supplementary reading activity in the class. A rubric adapted from the Washington State University Critical Thinking Rubric was used to evaluate how students used critical thinking skills during the activity. Through classroom observations, student group discussions, student written products, interviews, and questionnaires, the role of the teacher and the English language used during the class were also examined. The results indicate that students used critical thinking during the WebQuest activity at a relatively high level. Students at both higher and lower levels of English proficiency actively analyzed, synthesized, evaluated, and reflected on information pertaining to the topic of the WebQuest. However, although higher proficiency students were able to transfer their thoughtful opinions and reasoning into the end products of the WebQuest, students with lower proficiency seemed to struggle with such tasks. The study also found that the role of the teachers in supporting students’ use of critical thinking varied depending on their level of involvement in the process of student WebQuest activities. In addition, the

vii  

students primarily used English reading and writing skills, which were the stated objectives of this course; they rarely used oral skills. The results of this study indicate that WebQuests can be a useful activity to promote critical thinking and English language use in an EFL reading course.

________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________

viii  

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................v ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... ix TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................... xiii List of Tables ................................................................................................................... xiii List of Figures .................................................................................................................. xiv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................1 Background of the Study .....................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................4 Statement of the Problem .....................................................................................................5 Significance of the Study .....................................................................................................6 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ..............................................................................8 Critical Thinking ..................................................................................................................8 WebQuests .........................................................................................................................11 WebQuests and Critical Thinking ......................................................................................15 WebQuests and Collaborative Learning ............................................................................18 WebQuests and Language Learning in EFL Contexts .......................................................19 Theoretical Frameworks for Data Analysis of Critical Thinking ......................................24 Bloom’s Taxonomy ...............................................................................................24 The Three-dimensional Model ...............................................................................26 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................32 Research Questions ............................................................................................................33 Context ...............................................................................................................................33 ix  

Participants .........................................................................................................................35 Students ..................................................................................................................35 Teachers .................................................................................................................38 Research Procedures ..........................................................................................................39 Instruments and Materials ..................................................................................................43 WebQuests .............................................................................................................43 Classroom Observation and Field Notes................................................................49 Group Work Observation.......................................................................................50 Interviews ...............................................................................................................56 Interviews with the Students ......................................................................56 Interviews with the Teachers .....................................................................56 Student PowerPoint Presentations .........................................................................58 Student Written Assignments ................................................................................58 Questionnaires........................................................................................................59 Other Documentation .............................................................................................59 Data Collection Strategies for Each Research Question ....................................................60 Research Question #1 ............................................................................................60 Research Question #2 ............................................................................................62 Research Question #3 ............................................................................................63 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS (1) ..............................................................................................66 Research Question #1 ........................................................................................................66 Students’ Use of Critical Thinking at the Group Level .....................................................66 Analysis of Types of Critical Thinking .................................................................67 Analysis of Critical Thinking by Proficiency of the Students .............................102 x  

Students’ Use of Critical Thinking at the Individual Level .............................................106 Summary of Students’ Critical Thinking Use during WebQuests ...................................114 CHAPTER 5 RESULTS (2) ............................................................................................115 Research Question #2 ......................................................................................................115 The Role of the Teacher in Facilitating Text Comprehension .........................................120 The Role of the Teacher in Encouraging Student Discussion .........................................128 Role Change .....................................................................................................................139 A Summary of the Role of the Teacher in Supporting Critical Thinking in a WebQuest Class ..........................................................................................................................................144 Research Question #3 ......................................................................................................145 English as the Language of Instruction ............................................................................145 The Amount of English Used during the Discussion.......................................................150 The Amount of English Used in the End Products ..........................................................158 Summary of the Amount of English Used during the WebQuest Activity......................164 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .......................................................166 Discussion of the Results .................................................................................................166 Students’ Use of Critical Thinking during the WebQuest Activity .....................166 The Role of the Teacher in Supporting Critical Thinking in a WebQuest Class .178 The Amount of English Used during the WebQuest Activity .............................182 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................185 Suggestions for Future WebQuest Implementation .........................................................187 Limitations of the Study...................................................................................................190 Suggestions for Future Study ...........................................................................................191 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................193 xi  

APPENDIX A: A Rubric for Evaluating WebQuests that Promote Critical Thinking ...203 APPENDIX B: Student Interview Questions ..................................................................206 APPENDIX C: Pre-project Interview Questions for Teachers ........................................207 APPENDIX D: Post-project Interview Questions for Teachers ......................................208 APPENDIX E: The Writing Rubric .................................................................................209 APPENDIX F: Student Pre-project Questionnaire ..........................................................210 APPENDIX G: Student Post-project Questionnaire ........................................................211 APPENDIX H: Results of Student Post-project Questionnaires .....................................213 APPENDIX I: Summary of the Results from the Written Assignments .........................214 CURRICULUM VITAE

xii  

TABLES AND FIGURES LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 The four-dimensional model ..............................................................................29 Table 2.2 The three-dimensional framework .....................................................................30 Table 3.1 Summary of the student numbers and majors ....................................................36 Table 3.2 Detailed information for students observed in group discussions .....................37 Table 3.3 Timeline of the study .........................................................................................42 Table 3.4 List of potential WebQuests for the study .........................................................44 Table 3.5 The Critical Thinking Rubric .............................................................................54 Table 3.6 Summary of data sources and data analysis strategies used for each research Question .............................................................................................................64 Table 4.1 Aspects on the Critical Thinking Rubric ...........................................................67 Table 4.2 Summary of the critical thinking results ............................................................69

xiii  

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 The procedures and reading resources provided on The Right to Die WebQuest ..........................................................................................................15 Figure 2.2 Bloom’s taxonomy ...........................................................................................25

xiv  

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background of the study Even though critical thinking is often recognized as one of the desirable goals for higher education, it is considered a skill not promoted enough in English classrooms in Thailand. Learning English in Thailand is often times associated with learning grammatical rules, in which knowledge is expected to be transmitted from teachers to students. In traditional classrooms, learning English to pass the examinations is often considered the primary goal, where only language skills are emphasized while critical thinking, problem solving, or creative thinking skills are treated as minimal. However, in order to be able to compete in the knowledge-based economy (that is, to use knowledge for economic benefits), Thai teachers have been urged to incorporate critical thinking into their classrooms. An educational reform measure called National Education Act (NEA) was introduced in Thailand in 1999. The NEA’s school reform policy includes three components, namely learning reform, reform of the educational administrative structure, and legal measures. The learning reform component, the core of the educational reform, focused on lifelong learning that “promotes and develops the importance of the learner-centered teaching process, allowing learners to develop learning and thinking skills, with consideration for individuals’ interests, aptitudes, pace and potential” (Atagi, 2002, p. 28). According to this new policy of school reform, “thinking processes such as analytical thinking, creative-thinking, and problem solving, and moral values are to be developed proportionately” (Atagi, 2002, p. 31). 1  

Technology is also identified as a tool that has potential to support the competitiveness of Thailand and its people in the knowledge-based economy. The National Education Act of 1999 specifically mentions the importance of promoting information technology as an integral part of learning and educational reform (Fry, 2002). Teachers are encouraged to use the Internet and information technology generally to provide unlimited resources to students and offer educational opportunities to people in remote areas. The NEA also anticipated that the introduction of technology into classrooms would promote higher order thinking skills for students (Office of the National Education Commission, 2003). These particular efforts resonate with how technology has been promoted in many English classrooms worldwide. Most educational institutions now have access to computers and the Internet, and use them as part of a language classroom. Technology provides students with access to a large number of authentic learning resources and opportunities to interact with other speakers of the language. Consequently, computer-assisted language learning (CALL) has received much attention in recent years. Studies on technology in a second language class have shifted their emphasis from language pedagogy software to the Internet and World Wide Web. Kern (2006) suggests that the Internet is a suitable environment for language learners. Students from cross-cultural classes in different parts of the world can collaboratively create a project by exchanging emails or engaging in online chats. Thus they will not only learn to use the language, they will learn to develop critical thinking skills as they try to express their own cultural and personal experiences through language and other symbolic means (Kern, 2000). Many studies suggest that technology not only provides unlimited resources to students, it is also believed to help develop critical thinking skills among language learners (Arnold & Ducate, 2  

2006; Coster & Ledovski, 2005; Fox & MacKeogh, 2003; Hopson, Simms, & Knezek, 2001; Meyer, 2003). In order for students to find useful information on the Web, they need to read extensively, evaluate content of texts, select relevant information, and synthesize materials to construct meaning. This process can hence develop higher-order thinking among students (Crawford & Brown, 2002; March, 1998). Web-based group projects can also enhance higherorder thinking skills in a similar fashion. These projects enable students to learn critical thinking when they critique, negotiate, challenge or agree with ideas of others (Arnold & Ducate, 2006). Contrary to the traditional ESL classrooms, with the use of technology, students can develop skills in both researching and thinking critically when finding information from resources on the Internet. They also have opportunities to use the target language through reading web pages, writing presentations, listening to peers’ opinions, and discussing ideas on interesting issues. The introduction of information technology into the language classroom thus enables students to learn the language and at the same time develop the critical thinking skills needed in higher education. However, Kern (2000) cautions that it is the teacher, not technology, who is responsible for the degree to which students will benefit from these innovations. Therefore, a well-structured syllabus is needed to make technology in classrooms function effectively. To many EFL teachers, the task of designing a web-based syllabus that promotes critical thinking in an English course may be daunting when appropriate guidelines are scarce. The expansive size of the Internet could also make the task even more intimidating for both teacher and students. A wellstructured web-based activity, such as WebQuest -- an inquiry-oriented activity in which most or all of the information used by learners is drawn from the Web (Dodge, 1998) -- could therefore 3  

provide the teacher with a pre-defined activity equipped with existing databases for the teachers to explore and adapt to suit their students and the class objectives. My preliminary experience with WebQuest began in 2006 when a colleague and I developed a rubric that could be used to evaluate WebQuests for EFL students (Prapinwong & Puthikanon, 2008). We later used this rubric to select a WebQuest deemed appropriate for EFL students and implemented it in an EFL reading course in Thailand in 2007 (Prapinwong & Puthikanon, 2007). In 2008, I had a chance to assist two teachers in implementing two WebQuests as reading supplements in two college-level reading courses. The students seemed to be satisfied with the activity and were motivated to discuss and express informed opinions on controversial issues. As an EFL teacher, I perceived this Web tool as a potential learning activity that motivated students to read extensive authentic texts in English, work collaboratively with their peers, and exercise critical thought. These initial positive impressions of WebQuest use in EFL contexts prompted me to pursue further research on Webquests and critical thinking in EFL classrooms. As a result, I would like to investigate how WebQuest was used in a college-level reading course and how the students used critical thinking during such activity. Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of the study is to investigate the use of WebQuest in EFL classrooms in terms of its potential to encourage critical thinking skills and English language use. The results from this study are aimed to assist the teacher in EFL classes to use and modify this web-based activity to suit their classes. The secondary purpose of this study is to explore the role of the teacher in supporting the use of WebQuests in an EFL reading course. Since the mere use of WebQuests does not guarantee the effective use of critical thinking, I would like to 4  

explore how teachers assist students during the WebQuest activity. The findings of this study could thus provide insights into how teachers can adapt themselves to a web-based learnercentered activity in EFL contexts. Specifically, this study is aimed to answer three research questions: 1) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? 2) What was the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson? 3) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? Statement of the problem Even though many studies have linked WebQuest to the support of critical thinking skills (Bradshaw, Bishop, Gens, Miller, & Rogers, 2002; Kanuka, 2005; Murray, 2006; Vidoni & Maddux, 2002), little attention has been paid to empirical evidence in the process and the extent to which students employ such skills in the WebQuest context. Abbit and Ophus (2008) claim that even though WebQuests have been around for more than ten years and received popular reception among K-12 teachers, little research has been conducted on the effects of this technology-based activity on learning (Abbit & Ophus, 2008). Most studies on WebQuests were either anecdotal or lacked empirical evidence for the support of critical thinking use in the classrooms (Abbit & Ophus, 2008). Many studies focused more on the designing aspect of WebQuest rather than curricular aspects of the design (Sox & Rubenstein-Avila, 2009). In addition, most of these studies focus on students in L1 settings while research investigating the use of WebQuests with L2 learners is limited. For those that have been done, 5  

they seem to be more theoretical than empirical (Koenraad & Westhoff, 2003; Laborda, 2009; Luzon, 2007). Moreover, most empirical studies on WebQuest use in L2 contexts focused on the perceptions of the WebQuest users (Noordin, Samed, & Razali, 2008; Prapinwong & Puthikanon, 2007; Prapinwong, 2008) or effects on English learning (Chuo, 2007; Prapinwong, 2008; Tsai, 2006). If little research has been conducted on WebQuest use in EFL classrooms, even fewer studies have been carried out on the effects of WebQuests on critical thinking use in EFL contexts. However, despite the small body of research directly supporting the use of WebQuests to develop higher order thinking among EFL students, related literature from L1 seems to indicate promising results (Allan & Street, 2007; Bradshaw et al., 2002; Ikpeze & Boyd, 2007; Kanuka, 2005; MacGregor & Lou, 2006; Murray, 2006; Vidoni & Maddux, 2002). A closer look at how EFL students exercise critical thinking while completing WebQuests, as proponents of WebQuest have often claimed, is therefore necessary. This gap in the research literature suggests the need to look at how teachers integrate WebQuest into the EFL classroom as a way to promote critical thinking and language learning. I would therefore like to specifically examine how students use critical thinking and English language during the WebQuest activity, and how teachers support the implementation of WebQuests in the classroom. This study will thus increase our knowledge of how WebQuests can be used to promote critical thinking skills in EFL contexts. Significance of the study Taking the limitations of research studies on WebQuests in EFL contexts into account, I am hopeful that this study will reveal insights into how EFL students use critical thinking during 6  

the WebQuest in a reading course. This study aims to add to the paucity of research on the use of WebQuests to promote critical thinking among L2 learners, particularly EFL college students. It will investigate whether patterns of higher order thinking skills occur among the participants using WebQuests in L2 classrooms. Additionally, this study will explore how teachers in the WebQuest class support students in thinking critically during the activity. Finally, this study will also examine how students use English while completing WebQuest activities, in order to explore how WebQuests can be effectively used in language learning contexts.

7  

 

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This section discusses the existing body of research pertaining to WebQuests and critical thinking. It is organized into six areas: 1) Critical thinking; 2)WebQuests; 3) WebQuests and critical thinking; 4) WebQuests and collaborative learning; 5) WebQuests and language learning in EFL contexts; and 6) theoretical frameworks for data analysis of critical thinking. Critical thinking Critical thinking is often considered one of the main goals in higher education. There are various definitions of critical thinking in academic settings. Ennis (1989) defines critical thinking as “reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” (p. 4). He suggests that it is also related to other concepts of thinking such as higher order thinking. While Ennis views critical thinking as generic, McPeck (1990) believes that critical thinking is subjectspecific with respect to particular knowledge in certain fields. Lipman (1988) further defines critical thinking as “skillful, responsible thinking that facilitates good judgment because it (1) relies upon criteria; (2) is self-correcting; and (3) is sensitive to context” (p. 39). For Paul (1990), critical thinking is not only viewed as analytical and evaluative, it is also considered “the art of thinking about your thinking” (p. 32). In addition, he emphasizes the development of intellectual habits that enhance students’ abilities as critical thinkers, namely intellectual humility; intellectual courage; intellectual empathy; intellectual good faith; intellectual perseverance; faith in reason; and intellectual sense of justice (Paul, 1992). In essence, these researchers regard critical thinking as a teachable practice that can be defined and learned. Following from this, 8  

various strategies are offered to promote the development of critical thinking skills in classrooms (Beyer, 1997; Paul, 1992). In the field of English as a second language (ESL), some researchers in critical thinking and second language learning (L2) believe that critical thinking is a concept difficult to teach in L2 classrooms and was learned among L1 students or Westerners through their upbringing; in this view, critical thinking is considered a “social practice” (Atkinson, 1997; Ramanathan & Kaplan, 1996a; Ramanathan & Kaplan, 1996b; Ramanathan & Atkinson, 1999). Atkinson (1997) defines critical thinking as a social practice; this originated from a set of behaviors that a person was immersed in when being raised in a particular culture. It is tacit and cannot be easily described by its users. Ramanathan and Atkinson (1999) claim that because ESL students come from different cultural backgrounds, attempts to teach them critical thinking skills may not be successful. Along the same line, Ramanathan and Kaplan (1996a, 1996b) state that critical thinking is a socio-cognitive practice that primarily relies on the (mainstream) students’ shared cultural practices and norms and is thus difficult for L2 learners to learn. They suggest that English composition skills are often acquired as part of Western culture and cannot be taught in L2 classrooms. Davidson (1998), on the contrary, argues that part of an ESL teacher’s task is to “prepare learners to interact with native speakers who value explicit comment, intelligent criticism, and intellectual assertion” (p. 121). It follows from this view that critical thinking should be taught in ESL/EFL classes to prepare ESL/EFL students for the world outside their societies. Additionally, Benesch (1993) suggests that when teaching critical thinking skills, the teacher should encourage students to examine the language, politics, and history of the issue in relation to their own experience, in addition to their evaluation of it. Thus, in ESL classrooms critical thinking should be taught dialogically – inviting students to discuss underlying 9  

assumptions about an issue and helping them to learn tolerance and social justice (Benesch, 1999). Specifically to the Thai contexts, Jantrasakul (2004) investigated how the concept of critical thinking is perceived and performed in EFL high-school classrooms in Thailand. The results show that the concept of critical thinking was perceived by the participants as selfexpression, problem-solving, and virtue education. However, in classroom practices, the use of critical thinking was presented minimally. The teachers were struggling to integrate critical thinking into their classrooms but generally geared the class activities toward utilitarian purposes, such as passing the national university entrance examination. In the field of education, critical thinking can be seen as an exercise in higher order thinking skills, associated with the ability to think logically based on evaluated information according to certain criteria. Bloom et al. (1956) proposed a framework which defines cognitive presence in education; this has been widely used among educators. It describes six types of cognitive operations, namely knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The last three levels -- analysis, synthesis, and evaluation -- are considered higher order thinking skills. Higher order thinking can also be thought of as “…the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generalized by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning or communication, as a guide to belief or action” (Scriven & Paul, 2001). Lewis and Smith (1993) propose the term higher order thinking as the type of thinking that “…occurs when a person takes new information and information stored in memory and interrelates and/or rearranges and extends this information to achieve a purpose or find possible 10  

answers in perplexing situations” (p. 136). This definition can be further illustrated by the skills students use when they evaluate whether or not to believe an argument or when they make judgments based on claims or evidence given. On the contrary, lower order thinking requires only memorization of previously learned items (Newman, 1990). However, it should be noted that different learners’ backgrounds and abilities may contribute to differences in a person’s need to use lower or higher order thinking. Therefore, a task that requires lower order thinking for one person may need higher order thinking skills by another (Lewis & Smith, 1993). Since the definitions of critical thinking as a teachable concept seem relevant to the characteristics and purpose of WebQuest, which emphasizes tasks using higher levels of thinking, in this study I will use the term critical thinking to mean the ability to analyze and synthesize information from different sources, solve problems, evaluate information, and make judgments based on evidence presented (Barak, 2005; Bradshaw et al., 2002). This term is intended to distinguish this type of thinking from the type which focuses on memorization and drill practice while neglecting problem solving and creativity. WebQuests Technology has become part of many EFL classrooms. Several studies in L1 settings have explored how the use of technology can facilitate the development of critical thinking. Many online activities have the potential to enhance higher thinking skills, including projects that require the location and evaluation of online resources and participation in online discussions (Fox & MacKeogh, 2003; Hopson, Simms, & Knezek, 2001; Meyer, 2003). Online interactions among learners, such as argumentation, negotiation, construction of understanding,

11  

and proposing solutions, help foster critical thinking practice (Arnold & Ducate, 2006; Fox & Mackeogh, 2003). WebQuest is a tool that seems effective in facilitating higher levels of thinking in a classroom. Kanuka (2005) conducted an action research study that explored five types of webbased teaching strategies, namely nominal group, debate, brainstorming, invited guest, and WebQuest. According to the SOLO (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome) taxonomy, which describes the hierarchy of complexity through which learners show mastery of their academic written work, WebQuest was shown to be a more effective instructional strategy than the other four; results show that students’ writing reflected relational responses and extended abstract responses more than with other instructional strategies. WebQuest is, therefore, a learning tool with the potential to enhance higher thinking skills. WebQuest is a term coined by Bernie Dodge and described as “an inquiry-oriented activity in which some or all of the information that learners interact with comes from resources on the Internet” (March, 2004, p. 2). Tom March, who is the co-creator of WebQuest, later revised WebQuest’s definition and articulated it as “a scaffolded learning structure that uses links to essential resources on the World Wide Web and an authentic task to motivate students’ investigation of a central, open-ended question, development of individual expertise, and participation in a final group process that attempts to transform newly acquired information into a more sophisticated understanding” (March, 2004, p. 3). To further elaborate, the main element of a WebQuest is “a scaffolding structure that encourages student motivation and facilitates advanced thinking with integration of enriched learning resources (March, 2007, p. 2)”

12  

In order to complete the main task of a WebQuest, students use information from various sources to form their own opinions and share them with their group members to create a final project, usually in the form of an oral presentation and/or written materials such as brochures, newsletters, or websites. To complete a WebQuest task, students search through links provided on the WebQuest; these links are relevant to the topic being learned about and are thus efficient and focused learning tools. The students do not need to use general search engines as their primary tools so they do not run the risk of accessing inappropriate materials. WebQuests are designed to further several learning concepts. Their four underlying constructs are: (1) critical thinking; (2) knowledge application; (3) social skills; and (4) scaffolded learning (March, 2007). In sum, WebQuests are inquiry-oriented, group work-centered, higher order thinking-focused, and selected Internet source-heavy (Dodge, 1998). Below is an example of a WebQuest called “The right to die”, which was used in this study. This WebQuest required the students to answer the question “Should euthanasia be legalized in Thailand?” Students worked in groups of three to do research on the issue of euthanasia. In order to gather information on the topic, each student was required to take the role of either a physician, a lawyer, or a patient and pool their research findings to form group opinions. The primary objectives were for each group of students to form group opinions and create a PowerPoint presentation to explain their position on the issue. This WebQuest scaffolded students’ learning by dividing activities into manageable tasks and directing students with step-by-step guidelines to complete the task. Students were initially provided some background knowledge on the issue of euthanasia through the activities in the pre-activity section, which included a newspaper article reporting a case of a French woman who 13  

requested euthanasia and a whole-class discussion on the article. The procedures to complete the task included a number of steps. First, the teacher introduced the students to the topic of the WebQuest and informed them of the task they needed to complete using the Introduction and the Task pages on the WebQuest. Second, the teacher guided the students through the pre-activity discussion to activate their prior knowledge, as mentioned earlier. Then, the students were directed to gather information for the role each was taking by reading the articles provided on the WebQuest. During this step, the students read the articles with their peers who took the same role. (This sub-activity could be seen as a scaffolding for reading the articles and understanding the role.) Next, students worked with their group members to pool their research findings and develop PowerPoint presentation slides that explained their position on the issue with supporting evidence. Finally, the students presented their opinions on the issue to the class using PowerPoint slides. The students were also asked to write a journal entry on the issue as homework. These steps, therefore, scaffolded the students to answer the main question “Should euthanasia be legalized in Thailand?”

14  

Figure 2.1 The procedures and reading resources provided on The Right to Die WebQuest

WebQuests and critical thinking The potential of WebQuests to advance critical thinking skills may be explained by how the WebQuest task requires each member of the group to carry out a specific, meaningful role, and then pool their respective research findings to formulate a response to a complex, openended question. Unlike traditional learning activities, there can be multiple solutions to the topical question posed in a WebQuest. A good WebQuest focuses on an issue with multiple 15  

facets, such as social, political, and/or environmental, and requires more than information gathering; students must process the information in order to form their opinions (March, 1998). Crawford and Brown (2002) suggest that WebQuests emphasize higher order thinking skills, according to Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956), because they help develop higher cognitive processes by requiring students to sift through large amounts of information until they can construct an understanding of the problem and offer a solution. March (1998) asserts that the main question on the WebQuest requires students to transform information collected from online resources into something new. This process invites students to consider an issue, compare and synthesize information to form a hypothesis, and suggest a solution. Additionally, scaffolding techniques, in the form of specific sub-tasks on the WebQuest, prompt students to engage in higher levels of thinking. It is also suggested that the way students must sift through large amounts of information to form an understanding of the problem not only connects to their schema, but also builds new awareness that could be modified when they encounter similar problems in the future. This process of text selection requires students to evaluate content of texts as well as draw and test their inferences (March, 1998). These characteristics of WebQuests thus help to develop the critical thinking process. Since its inception, extensive research has been carried out on how WebQuests affect students’ learning. However, most WebQuest studies primarily explored the attitudes and perceptions of students and teachers, while fewer studies investigated how WebQuests can promote critical thinking skills (Abbit & Ophus, 2008). Although their number is still small, several studies have now been conducted to investigate how WebQuests can support critical

16  

thinking among first language students in different subjects (Allan & Street, 2007; Bradshaw et al., 2002; Kanuka, 2005; Murray, 2006; Vidoni & Maddux, 2002). In L1 contexts, several studies have theoretically linked WebQuests with higher order thinking skills. Vidoni and Maddux (2002) explored WebQuests in terms of six critical thinking concepts as proposed by Weinstein (2000), namely, skillful thinking; responsible thinking; nonroutine thinking; employing criteria; self-correction; and sensitivity to context, and concluded that WebQuests met all the six key elements in critical thinking and therefore could be a powerful tool for promoting critical thinking skills for students. Similarly, Kanuka (2005) found that WebQuests seem to be the most effective instructional tool for reinforcing higher levels of learning when he showed that students’ writing in response to a WebQuest topic reflected relational responses and extended abstract responses more than other instructional strategies. WebQuest is, therefore, a classroom activity with potential to promote complex thinking skills when it employs a learner-centered collaborative environment which takes advantage of problem-based activity (Bradshaw et al., 2002). Empirical studies in L1 contexts have also found that WebQuests could be used to promote critical thinking or higher order thinking skills. Allan and Street (2007) conducted a study on the impact of WebQuests in primary initial teacher training. The subjects were four groups of teacher training students who were Bachelor of Education final-year students and PGCE students at the University of Wolverhampton; the data were collected from a questionnaire focusing on students’ perceptions of the impact of the WebQuest session, focus group sessions, and an analysis of 48 feedback sheets for assignments. The results suggested that WebQuests may encourage higher order thinking skills as part of an initial teacher training 17  

module. In addition, the authors claim that the addition of the “pooling knowledge” stage of the WebQuest, where students are encouraged to discuss the issue or draw on prior knowledge, led to a major shift in learning levels. A number of studies that used WebQuests with grade school students have also showed positive effects of WebQuest use. Ikpeze and Boyd (2007) used WebQuests with six fifth-grade students for 10 weeks and found that the activities facilitated thoughtful literacy if the tasks were carefully chosen, managed, and delivered. They also showed potential for teaching literacy and technology skills by involving students with authentic problem-based activity. Similarly, MacGregor and Lou (2006) used WebQuests with fifth-grade students and found that using conceptual scaffolds (in the form of a study guide or a concept mapping template) helped facilitate students’ higher order learning when they provided cues for what information to seek and how to organize and synthesize such information. Likewise, Murray (2006) investigated the use of WebQuests to promote higher level thinking skills among seventh-grade students in a computer technology class. He found that WebQuests have potential to generate higher level thinking through sequential activities, during which students had to evaluate information to produce individual reports (on particular sub-cultures of the Australian people) and synthesize them into a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation. In sum, research studies on WebQuests in L1 contexts seem to indicate promising results of their use to facilitate advanced thinking skills. WebQuests and collaborative learning Collaborative learning refers to an instructional method in which students work in small groups for the purpose of achieving an academic goal. The active exchange of ideas within small groups not only helps students learn but also stimulates critical thinking (Totten, Sills, Digby, & 18  

Russ, 1991). It allows students to learn from others’ skills and experiences (Gokhale, 1995). Kanuka (2005) found that text-based Internet communication technologies have potential to encourage effective collaborative learning environments which can facilitate higher order thinking. The findings suggest that WebQuests are effective in encouraging students to deal with a task in a deeper way, and thus promote critical thinking. WebQuest is also considered a possible learning tool based on social-constructivism that allows second language learners to construct knowledge of the target language through meaningful activities (Simina & Hamel, 2005). It can set the condition for collaborative learning which is promoted by socialconstructivism. Learners will participate in meaningful exchanges through authentic information gaps (Felix, 2002). Through group work, language learners take on specific roles and work collaboratively to accomplish a task that is meaningful to them. WebQuests and language learning in EFL contexts  Not only can WebQuest be used to teach content, as evidently suggested in how it is widely used among L1 students, it can also be used for the purpose of language learning. The Dutch project “Talenquest”, or LanguageQuest in English, has been developed as a tool for foreign language instruction. It provides a variety of language input and encourages learners to collaboratively use language in an authentic environment. Koenraad and Westhoff (2003) proposed a set of guidelines for the creation of WebQuests designed for language learning. They suggest that the task should encourage use of the target language either in the form of instruction language, or of the language used in the LanguageQuest end products, or a combination of both. In addition, they state that the material presented in the LanguageQuest should be authentic and reflect what learners would apply in their real life. The tasks within the LanguageQuest should

19  

also be flexible and promote collaboration and meaningful communication. These guidelines theoretically connect WebQuests to language learning in the classroom. In a more specific learning context, Laborda (2009) suggested that WebQuests could be used in EFL content-based language learning classes, such as a tourism class, as social constructivist instruction, and in professional development activities. They could also promote verbal skills when tourism students engage in real-life communication situations containing professional content. WebQuest can, therefore, be used in the tourism classroom to promote interaction through the target language in a genuinely communicative and safe in-group situation. In a similar class environment, Luzon (2007) supported WebQuest use in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses and proposed several ways to enhance its use in such classes. She suggests that WebQuest activity used in an ESP class should be designed to help students acquire knowledge and develop communicative skills in their discipline, promote autonomous learning, and foster students’ use of new literacies and strategies for meaning construction of texts. WebQuest is beneficial in ESP classes because it helps students use background knowledge from their discipline to assess the problem, evaluate information from different sources and synthesize a response to the main WebQuest problem. In addition, WebQuest promotes autonomous learning when it provides scaffolded learning and facilitates higher order thinking skills. WebQuest is also an appropriate activity that trains students to develop multiliteracies by engaging them with multimodal texts and electronic literacy. From this view, these several benefits confirm the potential for WebQuests to be used in a language learning situation. 20  

Along the same lines, Noordin, Samed and Razali (2008) surveyed a group of Malaysian student teachers in a TESL program; they participated in three computer lab sessions that introduced them to WebQuest and involved them in a sample activity. A questionnaire was administered to elicit these student teachers’ perceptions on the practicality and potential of Webquest in EFL classrooms. The findings suggest that the majority of the students found WebQuest beneficial to English learning. They found WebQuest activity meaningful, authentic, motivating, and supportive of cooperative learning and higher order thinking. WebQuest, therefore, has potential to foster critical thinking skills and language learning. Apart from the studies mentioned earlier which explored prospective use of WebQuests in EFL classes, a number of studies have empirically observed the effectiveness of WebQuests use in EFL classrooms. Chuo (2007) investigated the effects of WebQuest on college-level Taiwanese learners’ writing performance. She compared students’ writing in a traditional writing section to that of students in a WebQuest-incorporated writing class and found that the students in the WebQuest class performed significantly better than those in the traditional writing class. The students also had more favorable perceptions of the WebQuest class because they experienced more advantages in language learning using Web resources. In another study conducted by Tsai (2006), Taiwanese students’ vocabulary acquisition in a WebQuest learning module was examined. He found that students in the WebQuest class outperformed those in a traditional reading class in both their vocabulary learning and story reading comprehension. However, WebQuest did not produce any significant difference in student thematic reading comprehension.

21  

Another research study conducted to investigate students’ perceptions of WebQuest in a college-level reading course in Thailand showed that students had mixed opinions toward WebQuest use (Prapinwong & Puthikanon, 2007). Some students expressed positive opinions and experienced WebQuest as a fun activity that helped them to learn English. However, some students found the reading in the WebQuest overwhelming and thus generally felt frustrated when completing the WebQuest task. However, a subsequent study carried out in a similar context indicated different results concerning the students’ and teachers’ perceptions. Prapinwong (2008) used two WebQuests with a group of students in a reading course at a university in Thailand. She found that both teachers and students showed favorable attitudes toward WebQuest use. The task also seemed to have a beneficial impact on vocabulary learning; the results showed a statistically significant gain in vocabulary acquisition among students. Since WebQuests for ESL/EFL students require specialized design, rubrics that can be used to assess appropriate WebQuests for students in such contexts are offered. Prapinwong and Puthikanon (2008) developed a rubric to evaluate popular existing WebQuests used in the L1 context. The study was aimed at evaluating whether WebQuests that were highly recommended in the L1 contexts would show similar benefits for EFL students. The rubric took into account five aspects, namely vocabulary and grammar, content knowledge, level of interest, assistance, and task demand, to examine whether a WebQuest would be beneficial for EFL students. The results indicated that only four out of fifteen WebQuests which were rated highly for L1 students were appropriate for EFL students. Most of the WebQuests needed some modification to make them applicable to EFL classrooms.

22  

Another rubric similar to that mentioned above was developed by Sox and RubensteinAvila (2009) to rate WebQuest effectiveness for English Language Learners (ELLs). The rubric focuses on the linguistic, multimedia, and organizational features of WebQuests. They found that even though the eight WebQuests in the study met the standards suggested by WebQuest creators, not all of them were effective for ELLs. They suggest that WebQuests for ELLs should contain linguistic features which are simple enough for ELLs to understand; integrate visual displays and online aids which help ELLs understanding of texts; offer direct links to specific information; focus attention on key information of the texts; give clear instructions; and provide supplemental resources. In summary, the body of research discussed in this chapter suggests that WebQuest has potential to generate critical thinking among students in various subjects and classroom contexts. However, most studies of WebQuests on critical thinking among L1 students offer anecdotal and theoretical conjecture rather than empirical evidence. Few studies on benefits of WebQuests employed research methods that could demonstrate the beneficial impact of WebQuests (Abbit & Ophus, 2008). In a similar fashion, most of the studies investigating WebQuests in EFL contexts seem to be based on a theoretical projection that WebQuests have prospects to engage students in language learning and higher order learning skills. Similarly, even though a number of studies have investigated the impact of WebQuest on language learning, few studies empirically observed the effects of WebQuest on critical thinking use among EFL students in particular. This study was thus aimed at providing insight into such issues.

23  

Theoretical frameworks for data analysis of critical thinking In order to analyze the data, two theoretical frameworks will be used to investigate how students used critical thinking during the WebQuest activity. 1. Bloom’s taxonomy In this study, I chose Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives (Bloom et al., 1956) as one of the frameworks to define critical thinking and analyze data because it is widely accepted among educators as an outline for cognitive presence in classrooms. It also clearly describes the characteristics of higher order thinking skills, which many teachers in Thailand are familiar with, so it was thought to be easier for the teachers to understand the critical thinking construct when participating in the study. In addition, many studies on WebQuests used the higher levels on this framework to refer to how WebQuests theoretically and empirically had potential to advance students’ critical learning (Allan & Street, 2007; Crawford & Brown, 2002; Luzon, 2007; MacGregor & Lou, 2006; Murray, 2006; Noordin, Samed & Razali, 2008). Therefore, to empirically investigate such claims, it would be more practical to explore them through the higher levels on Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956) was among the first models that provide educators with systematic classification of cognitive operations and one of the most widely used models of cognitive skills in education. It serves as a model that assists educators in presenting ideas and concepts at varying levels of thought. It outlines six types of cognitive thinking skills, ordered from the least to the most complex: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Although the model is hierarchical, subsequent levels of the cognitive 24  

skills may include some, but not necessarily all, of the mastery required in the previous level. This model is, therefore, a conceptual framework, not a prescriptive one (Athanassiou, McNett, & Harvey, 2003; Bissell & Lemons, 2006). The first three levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, namely knowledge, comprehension, and application, are often referred to as lower order thinking skills. The remaining levels-- analysis, synthesis, and evaluation-- are known as higher order thinking skills. Further discussion on each of the higher order thinking skills is provided below. Figure 2.2 Bloom’s taxonomy Bloom’s Taxonomy Evaluation Higher Order Thinking Skills

Synthesis Analysis Application

Lower Order Thinking Skills

Comprehension Knowledge

Analysis Analysis requires “examination of parts or elements of concepts, analyzing the relationship between conclusions and evidence, organizing knowledge based on a principle, or making inferences based on data” (Aviles, 1999, p. 11). It is the ability to break down material into its component parts and may include the analysis of the relationship between the parts.

25  

Synthesis Synthesis can be thought of as creativity or production of things that are new. It refers to the ability to put parts together to create a whole. Students put ideas together to originate or create a perspective that is new to them. Evaluation Evaluation requires students to make judgments. The judgments are based on defined criteria which are developed by students or taken from outside resources. Evaluation can be shown in the form of class discussions when students share their opinions based on their judgments of the information presented. Judgments are, therefore, neither right nor wrong. 2. The three-dimensional model In addition to Bloom’s Taxonomy, I employed a framework adapted from the threedimensional framework proposed by Damico, Baildon, and Campano (2005) which was also used in the Critical Web Reader (Critical Web Reader) to increase understanding of how students used language skills to comprehend texts on the Web and how they related their prior knowledge, personal experience, cultures, or beliefs when evaluating claims and evidence or reflecting on the issue of the WebQuest. This framework allowed me to see how language skills and social dimensions influenced students’ use of critical thinking skills, in addition to their analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information from the Web. Including this framework into the data analysis was meant to yield a more comprehensive lens to investigate how students use critical thinking in a WebQuest class.

26  

Damico, Baildon, and Campano (2005) first proposed a three-dimensional framework to explore how students evaluate claims and evidence on Web pages through the operational, academic, and critical dimensions. This three-dimensional framework is used as a set of lenses which directs students to critically evaluate assertions and evidence on websites. It was built upon three perspectives of literacy: 1) literacy as socially situated; 2) literacy as disciplined inquiry in social studies; and 3) new literacies (Damico, Baildon, & Campano, 2005). They developed this framework based on the three-dimensional model of literacy suggested by Green (1988) and Durrant and Green (2001) to guide students to analyze, interpret, and evaluate information using Internet resources. The model emphasizes the need for students to evaluate claims and evidence from various web pages, as well as the imperative for them to activate their prior knowledge in evaluation and look at several web pages to arrive at a conclusion. According to Damico, Baildon, and Campano (2005), the three-dimensional model views literacy as a socially situated practice developed from relations between people within a group or a community. It also aligns with sociocultural perspectives of learning where “knowledge and ways of knowing are constructed in the context of significant problems through a dialectical process in which certain tools or practices are used to solve problems” (Damico, Baildon, & Campano, 2005). In addition, a social studies classroom is viewed as a place where students learn to become critical readers of all texts and where teachers guide students to evaluate evidence, interpret information, and cross-check assertions to form interpretations. Literacy in this view can also be situated in the New Literacy Studies where literacy is viewed as “a movement away from autonomous models of literacy in which literacy is viewed as sets of technical, universal, and neutral skills and toward ideological models of literacy where literacy is 27  

viewed as sets of highly contextualized cultural and social practices” (Damico & Baildon, 2007, p. 254). This model is categorized into three dimensions, namely operational, academic, and critical. Damico, Baildon, and Campano (2005) describe the three dimensions as follows: •

The operational dimension refers to the ability to identify and sort the components of a web page; locate key information on the site by scanning for headings and topic sentences; determine the credibility of authors on the site and consider the intended audience; and choose whether to examine the site more closely or to move on to another site.

•

The academic dimension focuses on the ability to identify and draw upon relevant prior knowledge; evaluate claims and evidence within a website; and check and cross-check these from various websites and sources to build contextualized interpretations.

•

The critical dimension involves the ability to determine perspectives included and omitted on a website; identify techniques (such as loaded words, use of provocative images, links to highly reputable websites, etc.) that the author/creator uses to try to influence readers; and consider how one’s own beliefs, values, perspectives, prejudices, etc. shape one’s reading.

The critical dimension was later divided into two dimensions, namely critical and reflexive (Critical Web Reader), thus yielding a four-dimensional model. The reflexive

28  

dimension involves how one own beliefs, values, and experiences affect his or her reading of the Web. Table 2.1 The four-dimensional model (Critical Web Reader) Dimensions

Description

Operational

the ability to identify and sort the components of a web page; locate key information on the site by scanning for headings and topic sentences; determine the credibility of authors on the site and consider the intended audience; and choose whether to examine the site more closely or to move on to another site.

Academic

the ability to identify and draw upon relevant prior knowledge; evaluate claims and evidence within a website; and check and cross-check claims and evidence from other websites and sources to build contextualized interpretations.

Critical

the ability to determine perspectives included and omitted on a website and to identify techniques (such as loaded words, use of provocative images, links to highly reputable websites, etc.) that author/creator uses to try to influence readers.

Reflexive

the ability to consider how one’s own beliefs, culture, values, or experiences affect his or her reading of the Web.

In this study, I adapted the four-dimensional framework to better suit the objectives of the WebQuest activity in EFL contexts while maintaining the overall foundation of the framework. There were several reasons why I saw the adaptation as necessary. First, the four-dimensional framework was created to be a tool for assisting teachers and students in reading and evaluating information from the Web (Critical Web Reader), while the framework in this study would be used to analyze the data; therefore, the framework was adjusted to better suit this study’s purpose. Another reason was that the four-dimensional framework was used in social studies 29  

courses, which by nature focused on content, while the WebQuest in this study was used in an EFL reading course, where students focused more on the English reading skills. Therefore, the students might not have prior knowledge of the content, so we could not expect them to use prior academic knowledge in evaluating the information. In addition, reading on the Web was used as a supplementary activity, aimed primarily at helping the students to practice reading authentic English texts and secondarily at giving them information to express their opinions in written and spoken language. Therefore, the objectives of the activity for these students were to read texts and express opinions in the target language, more than to evaluate claims and construct knowledge on the issue. For the above reasons, part of the “academic dimension” was not applicable to the course in this study and was thus merged into a new construct called the “critical dimension”. The critical dimension along with other dimensions in the framework, was redefined to better suit the study objectives as follows: Table 2.2 The three-dimensional framework, adapted from the four-dimensional model (Critical Web Reader) Dimensions Operational

Critical

Description -

The ability to summarize and locate key information on the site.

-

The ability to determine the credibility of authors on the site and consider the intended audience

-

The ability to evaluate claims and evidence, including checking and cross-checking these with other sources.

-

The ability to identify and evaluate techniques that an author uses to influence readers (such as loaded words, use of provocative images, links to highly 30

 

reputable websites, etc.).

Reflexive

-

The ability to identify and draw upon relevant prior knowledge.

-

The ability to discern perspectives included and omitted on a website

-

The ability to consider how one’s own beliefs, values and experiences affect his/her reading of the Web.

These two theoretical frameworks, therefore, serve as the theoretical lens which I used to analyze how students used critical thinking during group work in this study. I used a rubric adapted from the Critical Thinking Rubric developed by Washington State University (Washington State University Critical Thinking Project, 2006), which incorporated the theoretical aspects from Bloom’s taxonomy and the three-dimensional framework, as a tool to analyze the data. The rubric and the analysis of the data will be further discussed in chapter 3.

31  

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY The purpose of this study is to examine how students used critical thinking skills during the WebQuest activity, focusing on their use of critical thinking during small group discussions. The role of the teacher in supporting this process and the amount of English used during the activity will also be explored to gain more insights into WebQuest use in EFL contexts. Given that using WebQuests to stimulate critical thinking in EFL courses in Thailand was a relatively new phenomenon, the case study approach seemed appropriate to investigate this. Yin (2003) suggests that case study methods can be used to examine a current phenomenon in context, when divisions between the context and the phenomenon under investigation are not clear. A case usually has an integrated system where behavior is patterned (Stake, 2003). Case study can thus be used to portray “a problem; indicate a means for solving a problem; and/or shed light on needed research…” (American Psychological Association, 2010, p. 11). This method is, therefore, suitable to examine how students used critical thinking and language during the WebQuest activity in this reading course. This research employed a case study approach with mixed methods to assess how students used critical thinking. Mixed methods design is advantageous when a researcher wants to complement a quantitative study with a qualitative one, in order to obtain more detailed information than can be gained simply from the results of a quantitative research strategy (Creswell, 2005). In order to evaluate how students used critical thinking in a WebQuest class, I employed both quantitative and qualitative methods to collect and analyze the data received from the group work discussions, classroom observations, oral presentations, and written assignments. 32  

A rubric was used in an attempt to quantify the level of critical thinking used, while a description of the process of such thinking demonstrated in more detail what actually happened in the classroom. Since a case study relies upon many sources of data (Yin, 2003), in this study I used a variety of sources, including classroom observations; transcriptions of student group work; written assignments; PowerPoint slides; interviews; and questionnaires. The convergence of multiple data sources was thus used to ensure the triangulation, which is a necessary procedure to “clarify meaning, verifying the repeatability of an observation or interpretation” (Stake, 2003, p. 148). Research Questions My research questions are as follows: 1) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? 2) What was the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson? 3) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? Context This study was conducted in an intermediate level reading course at a large university in Bangkok, Thailand. The course, titled English for Opinions (ENG 123), was a mandatory course for English major and English minor students. According to the syllabus, the course description was “the study and practice of reading skills used in reading argumentative texts; outlining and summarizing; giving opinions about the texts through oral discussion or writing”. The class met 33  

twice a week over a sixteen-week semester. Each class session lasted one and a half hours. Eight to ten sections of such a course were offered each year during the second semester of the academic year. WebQuests were implemented in the course as a supplementary activity to the main textbook. The regular class sessions were held in a traditional classroom setting; the WebQuest classes were held in a computer lab. Data collection was conducted over a six-month period, from October 2008 through March 2009. A textbook called Reading for Opinions (Sukkhakul, 1998), written by a faculty member in the university English department, was used for the course. The book consisted of five chapters, in which five articles discussing controversial issues were presented. The five topics included were dam building, marijuana legalization, journalists’ ethics, men’s and women’s rights, and human cloning. All of the readings were taken from magazines or newspapers published for native speakers of English, such as the Time, Newsweek, or the Bangkok Post. Many articles were chosen from the editorial sections of such publications. The article levels of difficulty were that of a regular article intended for educated native English-speaking adults. The textbook contains five sections, namely, preparing to read; reading selection; discussing the issue; developing reading skills; and integrating reading and writing skills. The “preparing to read” section was aimed at activating students’ interest in the issue. The “reading section” presented the main passage of each chapter. The “discussing the issue” section focused on examining the author’s perspectives and inviting the students to reflect on the agenda. The “developing reading skills” part focused on the reading skills needed to understand argumentative texts. The last section was “integrating reading and writing skills”, where the students were asked to write a journal giving their opinions on the issue. 34  

A typical class proceeded with students reading the main passage of a chapter with the teacher’s guidance, analyzing the author’s method in convincing the readers, and doing reading exercises focused on text comprehension. It was followed by the reading skills section in which the teacher presented a lesson as described in the textbook, asked the students to practice the reading skills learned, and then required them to write a short essay expressing their opinions on the article read. Students were assumed to have learned basic English reading skills, such as skimming, scanning, or guessing word meanings, from previous English courses. The teachers had flexibility to adapt the teaching strategies and class activities as they saw fit. Some teachers might focus more on text comprehension and thus would work to help the students understand the texts and interpret the authors’ points of view, rather than encouraging the students to express their opinions. Other teachers emphasized the students’ capability to express informed opinions, in addition to their ability to comprehend the text. Other than reading the passages in the textbook, supplementary readings in the form of news articles on controversial issues were generally used for reading practice throughout the course. Some activities frequently included in this course were debating, group discussions, group presentations, or class projects involving the presentation of information on a controversial issue. Participants 1. Students The group of students who participated in this study consisted of 39 Thai students from two sections of ENG 123 course. These two sections will be called class A and class B hereafter. 35  

Each section comprised sophomore students (20 in one, 19 in the other) aged from 19-22 years old. Their majors were varied, including Psychology, English, French, Economics, History, etc. The majority of students were psychology majors, and most of them were females. Their English proficiencies were considered intermediate, based on their English scores on the university entrance examination. The scores ranged from 40-80 out of 100, with an average of 60. The top 10% of the students would be capable of comfortably reading an article from an English newspaper written for native English speakers, with only minimal help from the dictionary. The bottom 10% of the students would have struggled with reading such an article; it would be difficult for these students to capture the main idea. However, they would be able to read a modified text, such as an abridged English novel. On average, most of the students would be able to read an article taken from an English newspaper with the help of a dictionary. The average students’ proficiency could be translated as approximately 133 on computer-based TOEFL, or 39-40 on TOEFL iBT, or 4 on IELTS. Most of the students were familiar with information technology, as evident in their ability to comfortably use web browsers during the class. However, they were either not familiar with WebQuest or had no prior experience participating in a WebQuest activity. Table 3.1 Summary of the student numbers and majors Student Numbers

Majors by student number

Class A

20 (18 females and 2 males)

Class B

19 (18 females and 1 male)

History (1), International Relations (1), English (3), Psychology (15) International Relations (1), Economics (1), French (2), 36

 

Average English Entrance Examination Scores (100) 60.7

61.4

Psychology (15)

In order to obtain more insights into student group discussion, I selected four groups to observe more closely. A total number of 13 students were chosen from both classes. Two groups of students were selected from each of these classes. I intended to select one group of higher proficiency students and the other of lower proficiency students, from each class. In order to do so, I worked with the teachers of both classes to identify such groups. Students were thus selected based on their levels of English proficiency, as perceived by their teachers along with their English subject scores on the Entrance Examination. As a result, groups A1 and B1 represented higher proficiency students, while groups A2 and B2 represented lower proficiency students. All names have been changed to protect the students’ identities. Table 3.2 Detailed information for students observed in group discussions Group

Name

Gender

Major

A1

Kanya Naphat Wan

F M F

International Relations Psychology Psychology

English Subject Entrance Examination Scores (100) 80 63 65

A2

Dew Thida Aey Bam

F F F F

Psychology Psychology Psychology Psychology

43 42 40 55

B1

Pim Nid Nuj

F F F

International Relations French French

75 65 66

B2

Sita Am Ploy

F F F

Psychology Psychology Psychology

56 55 54

37  

2. Teachers Naree (pseudonym), the teacher for Class A, was a Thai female in her late twenties. She had received a master’s degree in Applied Linguistics from a university in the U.K. and had been teaching English for four years. She had taught this reading course only once prior to this study. She had a brief experience using a WebQuest in her other reading class and found it interesting and useful. Pichet (pseudonym), the teacher for Class B, was a Thai male teacher in his late thirties. He had received a doctoral degree in Applied Linguistics from a university in the U.K. He had been teaching English for approximately 8 years, and had been teaching ENG 123 regularly for several years. His research interest concentrated on the use of concordances in English teaching. He was not familiar with WebQuests but had some knowledge about computer-assisted language learning. These teacher participants were selected based on their relative levels of interest in participating in the study and using WebQuests in their classrooms. In this study, Pichet, the teacher for Class B, represented a teacher who was knowledgeable on computer-assisted language learning and also experienced in teaching the course. In contrast, the teacher for Class A, Naree, represented a lesser experienced teacher who was interested in using information technology with her students. Both teachers considered critical thinking skills essential for Thai students in EFL classes and were interested in exploring how they could encourage students to use these skills in their classrooms. 38  

Research Procedures The data collection took place during the second semester of the 2008 academic year, which lasted from November 2008 to February 2009. I contacted the two teachers before the semester started for a pre-project interview and WebQuest selection for the classes. In addition, I provided a WebQuest training session in which I described the class procedures of a typical WebQuest lesson and discussed each step the students would need to undergo to complete the WebQuest task for this study. A lesson plan for each of the WebQuest classes was also provided and discussed as a guideline; however, the teachers were invited to use any teaching strategies deemed appropriate for their students. After the semester began, I observed two regular classes with each of the teachers to obtain a clear picture of the procedures and activities which took place during each class. Three short term 1 WebQuests were implemented in the classes. The first WebQuest, Piracy 2 , was used as a pilot project to familiarize the students and teachers with the WebQuest class procedures. It was also used to test the data collection procedures so as to ensure the most effective ways to record and collect data. The other two WebQuests, The Right to Die WebQuest, also called Euthanasia WebQuest 3 , and the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest 4 , were used to obtain the data. During the first week of the course, I introduced myself to the students and                                                              1

A short term WebQuest is a WebQuest that is designed to be completed in one to three class periods.  2

Piracy WebQuest http://questgarden.com/70/83/6/081003225402/ 

3

The Right to Die (Euthanasia) WebQuest http://questgarden.com/70/83/6/081002222807/

4

Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest http://questgarden.com/70/83/6/081003000331/ 39

 

gave a brief PowerPoint presentation to explain my research project and WebQuest activity in general; I also used this time as an opportunity to answer students’ questions. The students were asked to sign the consent form during the initial class. A questionnaire was also distributed to obtain student information, such as majors, ages, and English subject scores on the University Entrance Examination. During this class, the students were asked to form groups of three or four, which they would remain part of throughout the three WebQuest activities. According to the teacher pre-project interview (10/3/08), both teachers agreed that three would be the most appropriate number of group members in this class because it would leave little room for any member to be idle during group work and thus ensure participation from all. Similarly, friendship groupings were recommended by the teachers as the most successful way to foster collaborative work. However, since one class contained 20 students and the other 19 students, there would inevitably be certain groups with four members. Thus, each class was divided into five groups of three to four students for participation in the WebQuest activity. After the pilot WebQuest (Piracy), each teacher helped identify the higher proficiency and lower proficiency groups which would be selected for data collection. Each WebQuest was implemented as a supplementary reading activity at intervals between the class work on textbook chapters, resulting in two WebQuests prior to the midterm examination and one WebQuest following the midterm examination. The schedules of the WebQuest classes differed between the two class sections, depending on how the teachers arranged them. Two 1.5-hour class sessions were spent on each of the WebQuests. On the first day of each WebQuest, the teacher introduced the students to the respective topic by asking the students to 40  

read the articles or watch a YouTube video on the pre-activity section. They then discussed the articles, the video, and the topic with their group members and answered the three questions provided in the pre-activity section, which were aimed at activating students’ prior knowledge on the topic. The teacher then engaged the students in a whole-class discussion of the articles or video clip and the pre-activity questions. After that, the students selected a role on the WebQuest and participated in the “role discussion”, an activity in which students were grouped according to their assigned role. During the role discussion, students summarized the articles as well as discussed and exchanged opinions about the roles or perspectives assigned to them. The students were also asked to read the articles in more detail later outside the class; as homework, they were asked to complete the “role sheet”, a worksheet requiring them to summarize the articles read, and bring it for small group discussion during the next class. During the second day, the students came to class with their completed role sheet and engaged in small group discussions about the information learned from each perspective on the issue. They then formed their group opinions on the main topic of the WebQuest and composed a PowerPoint about these perspectives. After all the groups had finished with their slides, they presented their PowerPoints to the class. They were required to write a journal answering a question similar to the main question posed by the WebQuest as homework. At the end of the WebQuest project, a questionnaire was distributed to obtain students’ insights into the WebQuest experience, focusing on critical thinking use, perceptions of the role of the teacher, and language learning. The PowerPoint slides, along with students’ written assignments, were collected for data analysis. I then conducted semi-structured group interviews with a focus on critical thinking use, language use, and the role of the teacher with all four 41  

groups participating in the study. In a similar manner, I conducted a semi-structured interview with each of the teachers to obtain feedbacks and comments on the WebQuest use, as well as their perceptions of the teacher’s role and students’ critical thinking and language use. Table 3.3 Timeline of the study (October 2008 – March 2009) Date

Class A (Naree)

Class B (Pichet)

10/2/08

Meeting with the teachers to choose WebQuests (1)

Meeting with the teachers to choose WebQuests (1)

10/3/08

Interview with the teachers

Interview with the teachers

10/20/08

Meeting with the teachers to choose WebQuests (2)

Meeting with the teachers to choose WebQuests (2)

10/23/08

WebQuest Training

WebQuest Training

Semester start 11/3/08 11/11/08

Regular class observation (1)

Regular class observation (1)

11/13/08

Regular class observation (2)

Regular class observation (2)

11//18/08

Pilot WebQuest Day 1 (Piracy WebQuest)

Pilot WebQuest Day 1 (Piracy WebQuest)

11/20/08

Pilot WebQuest Day 2 (Piracy WebQuest)

Pilot WebQuest Day 2 (Piracy WebQuest)

11/25/08

Euthanasia WebQuest Day 1

12/2/08

Euthanasia WebQuest Day 2

12/ 9/08

Euthanasia WebQuest Day 1

12/11/08

Euthanasia WebQuest Day 2

Midterm Examination 12/22/08 - 12/26/08 1/8/09

Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest Day 1

1/13/09

Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest Day 2

42  

1/20/09

Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest Day 1

1/22/09

Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest Day 2

2/12/09

Interviews with the students

Final Examination

2/23/09 - 2/27/09

3/2/09

Interview with the teachers

Interviews with the students

Interview with the teachers

Instruments and materials WebQuests In order to prepare for the WebQuest activity, I had to select three WebQuests which had potential to stimulate critical thinking use and which were also deemed appropriate for EFL students in this course. I initially chose ten WebQuests, each on a controversial issue. In an effort to select a WebQuest which corresponded to the objectives of ENG 123, I selected five WebQuests from bestwebquests.com, a website created by Tom March, the co-creator of WebQuests. This website purports to provide a list of WebQuests highly rated by Tom March. I selected WebQuests on issues such as cloning, euthanasia and genetically engineered food from this website. In addition to these choices, to vary the selection, I chose the other five WebQuests from other Web resources. I conducted an Internet search and selected four WebQuests centered on controversial issues. I also added a WebQuest on global warming which I created to add to topic variety. In this way, I obtained a list of ten WebQuests involving controversial questions, in the hope of engaging students in the exercise of critical thinking.

43  

Table 3.4 List of potential WebQuests for the study

1 2 3

Name of WebQuests GE Foods – Friend or Foe? Human Cloning

Global Warming: Fact or Fiction? 4 Hello Dolly: A WebQuest 5 Compassion or Murder? 6 To Clone or Not to Clone? 7 The Science of Genetics 8 Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? 9 Right to Die or Right to Life? 10 Terror ‘n Thailand

URLs http://home.earthlink.net/~spcemonk/webquest.html http://www.glencoe.com/sec/science/webquest/content/cloning.shtml http://www.questgarden.com/author/preview.php?u=52618&l=52618070709034833&pt=student&p=introduction http://powayusd.sdcoe.k12.ca.us/projects/dolly/ http://geocities.com/CollegePark/Bookstore/6687/EuthanasiaWQ.htm http://www.ic.sunysb.edu/Stu/psims/wq.htm http://www.web-andflow.com/members/cschopf/schopfgenetics/webquest.htm http://www.web-and-flow.com/members/tmarch/freedom2/webquest.htm http://www.isabelperez.com/webquest/taller/l2/word/euthanasia/euthanasia.h tm http://eprentice.sdsu.edu/F04X/pfrang/tnt_wq/index.htm

I then used a rubric based on the three levels of higher order thinking according to Bloom’s Taxonomy to rate the critical thinking components of these WebQuests (see Appendix A). These WebQuests should require students to evaluate, analyze, and synthesize information taken from the Internet in order to produce the final task. They should also invite students to take different roles or perspectives on the issue. I then worked with an expert 5 in WebQuest use in EFL contexts to rate the ten WebQuests and selected two WebQuests that seemed suitable for the students in this study. The selected WebQuests were “Hello Dolly: A WebQuest”, on the topic of human cloning, and “Right to Die or Right to Life? WebQuest”, on the topic of euthanasia.                                                              5

My co-researcher of two previously published WebQuest studies. 44

 

Since the two WebQuests would be used as supplementary reading activities in the ENG 123 course, modifications to them were necessary in order to adjust the tasks to suit the course objectives as well as the time available. Before the semester started, I asked the two teacher participants to examine each of these two WebQuests, to obtain their feedback and suggestions on how I should modify the WebQuests to suit their students. The teachers were asked to examine several aspects of the WebQuests deemed appropriate for EFL students, according to the rubric proposed by Prapinwong and Puthikanon (2008). These aspects were: 1. The characteristics of the tasks. The teachers gave comments on whether the tasks would be achievable for their students within the class time available. I used this information to modify the tasks so as to suit students’ abilities and the time allotted. 2. The process required to complete the task. We discussed how much time would be needed to complete each step of the task and the suitable processes to help students complete it. Since only two class sessions were provided for each of the WebQuests, I wanted to be certain that the students would have enough time. 3. The instructions. The teachers determined whether the instructions provided on the WebQuests were clear enough for the students to understand. 4. The scaffolding. The teachers provided input on whether there was enough scaffolding on the WebQuests, such as online dictionaries, visuals, or vocabulary lists, to assist in topic and text comprehension. After the discussion, the two teachers and I agreed that the topic would be one of the main factors motivating the students to discuss and think critically (WebQuest selection meeting 1, 45  

10/2/08). Familiar subjects would likely provoke more discussion and motivate students to think deeply about the issue, while unfamiliar topics, if selected appropriately, could inspire students to broaden their perspectives and knowledge on an issue about which they might not have thought before. We thus agreed to use one topic focused on a controversial issue within Thai society, which would be familiar to the students. The other issue should involve international contexts, so that it could expand students’ awareness about a topic not normally familiar to them. I then needed to select one of the two pre-selected WebQuests-- one on human cloning and one on euthanasia as mentioned earlier in the previous section-- to have one WebQuest with an unfamiliar topic for the students. Both of the teachers agreed to use euthanasia, the central issue in the Right to Die or Right to Life? WebQuest, for the WebQuest with an unfamiliar topic. The teachers and I brainstormed and selected cosmetic surgery as the topic for the other WebQuest on the local context. We chose this topic because it was an issue that would be of great interest to students in the class due to the current cosmetic surgery trend among young women in Thailand. I then created a WebQuest based on this topic, to be used as the WebQuest focused on a familiar issue for the students. The teachers and I then examined the Right To Die or Right To Life? WebQuest and found a number of issues that might be problematic for its implementation in this reading course. We found that the web links contained vague and lengthy content, not suitable for EFL students who needed more precise web links to specific articles. The tasks were also considered too difficult and time-consuming for this course. In addition, numerous roles (seven) in this particular WebQuest could require a large group of students and thus might not accommodate well the full participation of all group members. As a result, I decided to create a new WebQuest that was

46  

focused on the issue of Euthanasia but contained more suitable tasks and appropriate web links, with articles that had the right length and level of language for students in this course. After finishing the creation and modification of both WebQuests, I asked the teachers for further input on the WebQuests and adjusted them accordingly until we were all satisfied with the results (WebQuest selection meeting 2, 10/20/08). Thus, the two WebQuests used to collect data in this study were The Right to Die WebQuest (or Euthanasia WebQuest) and Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest. As previously mentioned, the tasks and processes of these WebQuests were modified and slightly differed from the regular WebQuest tasks in a number of ways, to better suit the EFL students in this particular reading course. A number of modifications made are described below: 1. The web links provided in the WebQuest

In a regular WebQuest, the Internet resources would be used by the students to search for information provided through a number of web links. These links could be to websites which contain a large amount of information pertaining to the issue, where students would need to search further to find specific articles with information they sought. Each web link sometimes contains several lengthy articles, thus sometimes making it difficult to find specific information. These characteristics of web links were considered inappropriate for EFL students, especially considering the limited time available in the class. After consulting with the teacher participants and considering the class time constraints, it was decided that three specific online articles, as opposed to a general website, would be provided for each of the roles or perspectives on the WebQuest (WebQuest selection meetings, 10/2/08, 10/20/08). This amount of articles was deemed suitable for intermediate proficiency EFL students. Two additional articles were 47  

provided for each role if any student wanted to search for further information. These careful selections of articles complied with a guideline on selecting a WebQuest for EFL students proposed by Prapinwong and Puthikanon (2008). They recommend that an appropriate WebQuest for EFL students should provide web links to articles specific to the information students need to review, and of appropriate length and language proficiency level. 2. Pre-WebQuest activity and role group discussion activity

In a regular WebQuest, the introduction step would normally set the stage for the problem of the WebQuest or briefly describe the main question of the WebQuest. In the WebQuest created for this study, pre-WebQuest group and whole-class discussion activities were used to introduce the topic to the students and activate their prior knowledge on the issue. The students were asked to read an article or watch a video clip and engage in a small group discussion about what they read or saw, then answer two prompt questions with their peers. Following this, they shared their opinions in a whole-class discussion with the teacher, intended to help them reflect on the issue at the activity outset. This process was used to trigger students’ prior knowledge and curiosity about the topic before they engaged in the WebQuest activity. In a similar manner, during a regular WebQuest activity, after a student is assigned a role, he or she will obtain information for each role by following links provided in the WebQuest and read the text on his or her own, then share the information with the group. However, for intermediate-level EFL students in this course, it would be too difficult for the students to read the articles and try to understand the role by themselves. From my experience in using WebQuests with EFL students, the students seem to be more confident when they read in groups because they can scaffold the texts and check their comprehension with other group members. A “role discussion” was therefore arranged for students assigned the same role or perspective, to sit 48  

together and discuss the articles about their role. The goal of this activity was for the students to share their opinions in order to gain a better understanding of the role assigned to them. 3. Limited Internet search time

A regular WebQuest usually requires the students to search extensively on the Internet for information on an issue. However, in these particular WebQuests, the focus was on the articles already provided on the WebQuests. The teacher participants and I believed that it was more constructive to direct the students’ attention to a few specific articles so that they could devote their time to thinking more critically, rather than risk overwhelming them with copious amounts of data on the Internet (WebQuest selection meetings, 10/2/08, 10/20/08). Therefore, it was suggested to the students that they could do additional Internet searches for outside information but were not required to. After the WebQuests were chosen, to ensure that these two WebQuests met the requirements for a WebQuest that encouraged higher order thinking skills, I asked the expert on WebQuest use to rate these according to the WebQuest selection rubric (see Appendix A). The WebQuests received high ratings on the six aspects of the rubric and were thus considered useful in promoting critical thinking. Classroom Observation and field notes Before WebQuests were introduced to the class, I observed two regular class periods with each of the two teachers to see how they normally conducted the class and what the students did during that time. After WebQuests were introduced to the class, I again observed the class sessions during the WebQuest activities. Two WebQuests were implemented and two class sessions were used per WebQuest, resulting in four WebQuest class periods that were observed. 49  

These observed classes were videotaped by a research assistant and transcribed by the researcher. Additionally, I took field notes of the class observations, focusing on how students participated in class activity and how they used L1 and L2. In a similar manner, I observed how the teachers conducted the class during the WebQuest activity and how they supported the students in completing the task. Group work observation Since group work was central to the WebQuests task, in order to best observe how students used critical thinking, the bulk of the analysis was based on students’ small group discussions. Student group work was audio- and video-recorded simultaneously in order to capture as much as possible of students’ verbal and non-verbal interactions. A research assistant took charge of the recordings while I took field notes of the discussions, focusing on how the students analyzed, synthesized and evaluated the information along with their exchange of opinions. Since the discussions of all groups in the class were audio recorded, it could be assumed that the two research groups were not unduly influenced by the taping. In addition, the pilot WebQuest allowed students to be familiarized with the recording process. This was evident in how the students actively engaged in the discussion during the Euthanasia and the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuests without any suggestion that they were concerned about their conversations being recorded. After the class, I transcribed the audio and video recordings. The audio and video transcriptions were reviewed and compared so that inaudible portions were filled in as much as possible. Observation notes were also inserted to provide further explanation of the overall activities. 50  

Parts of the transcriptions of the students’ conversations were translated from Thai into English and used as examples throughout this report (they are presented in italics). In order to provide an accurate portrayal of how students discussed the issue of the WebQuests, I attempted to capture the meanings that the students tried to convey and translated them as accurately as possible. The translation done in this study, therefore, aimed to transfer the essence of the message to the target language so that the readers could understand the reasoning and thinking behind students’ discussions. Moreover, translation from spoken language into written language could be problematic. The informal nature of conversation sometimes made the sentences seem to lack coherence. For example, a speaker of Thai often omits pronouns in a sentence when the reference is clear. Also in the flow of speech, it may be difficult to tell where a sentence begins and ends. As a result, to translate the students’ conversations in this study, I had to organize some long, connected strings of words into proper sentence form and insert some connection words, such as because and so, to make the conversations more comprehensible to the readers. In addition, because of the cultural differences between Thai and American or other Englishspeaking cultures in general, some words or phrases in Thai if translated word-by-word could prevent readers from understanding the intention of the speakers. For example, in the excerpt below, the students actually said “born, old, sick, and die”, which was a phrase derived from the Buddhist beliefs frequently used to mean that everyone has to die in the end one way or another. I, therefore, tried to find the nearest interpretation of the words to be used in the transcription; the phrase that I used was “everyone has to die in the end”. Thida: In Thailand, almost all people know about Buddhism beliefs that everyone has to die in the end, so I think most people can accept death. So I think mercy killing should be OK. 51  

Aye: I agree. But we also have to think about this. In an article, it said when people are sick, everything seems terrible. So we don’t really know if they actually want to die. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A2, 12/02/08) In order to analyze the data, a critical thinking rubric adapted from the Guide to Rating Integrative and Critical Thinking developed by the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology at Washington State University (Washington State University Critical Thinking Project, 2006) was used. It was suggested that this rubric could be used as a foundation for teachers to adapt it to suit their courses and assignments when evaluating students’ critical thinking skills. The rubric was in fact modified to suit the objectives of the WebQuest activity to the particular reading course in this study. The rubric is made up of five parameters; each parameter is described in three tiers: low, medium, and high. A list of process- and behaviororiented descriptors defines the levels of thinking required at each tier. The five dimensions of the rubric are described below: 1. The first aspect measures how students understand the main problem of the WebQuest. This aspect examines their understanding of the issue central to the WebQuest, including their comprehension of its importance as well as implicit aspects. 2. The second aspect evaluates how students consider contexts relevant to the problem; in other words, how they understand the effects of contexts that could impact or influence their own perceptions and conclusions about resolving the problem. These may include, but are not limited to, social, cultural, legal, and ethical contexts. For example, in the Euthanasia WebQuest, contexts that students needed to consider 52  

could be Thailand’s legal system, the medical system, and values or beliefs of its people. Similarly, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, contexts could be the quality of the doctors, the perceptions of people in the society towards cosmetic surgery, or the social status of the person who wants to have a cosmetic surgery. 3. The third aspect examines how students develop group position through three subaspects, namely, how students identify group position on the issue; how they discuss or present support from experience and external information; and how they justify their own views while integrating contrary views into the presentation. 4. The fourth aspect measures how students summarize and analyze supporting data and evidence. This aspect is divided into three sub-aspects, namely, how students summarize information from each perspective on the WebQuest; how they examine information and question its accuracy; and how they discuss and use appropriate evidence to support their position on the presentation. 5. The last aspect entails how students discuss and integrate information from relevant perspectives on the issue. This dimension is broken down into how students discuss and synthesize diverse perspectives and how they integrate information from diverse perspectives into the presentation. This rubric integrates the elements from both Bloom’s Taxonomy and the three-dimensional model, and thus serves as a comprehensive model to analyze the data quantitatively. The table below illustrates the description of each rubric aspect and each level of critical thinking, along with the components from Bloom’s Taxonomy and the three-dimensional model which 53  

correspond to each element of the rubric. How each dimension of the two frameworks is identified as corresponding to each aspect on the rubric is only suggestive, and could thus be perceived differently by other researchers. Table 3.5 The Critical Thinking Rubric, adapted from the Washington State University critical thinking rubric (Washington State University Critical Thinking Project, 2006)

Rating Criteria 1. Understands the main problem of the WebQuest 2. Considers relevant contexts

Low

Does not attempt to or fails to identify the main issue accurately. Does not relate issue to other contexts. Does not recognize context.

3. Develops group position

3.1 Fails to clarify the group position on the issue. 3.2 Provides no support from experience or outside resources.

Rating Scale Medium

Understands the issue, though some aspects are incorrect or confused.

Clearly understands the main issue or question of the WebQuest.

Discusses and explores relevant contexts and assumptions, although in a limited way.

Analyzes the issue with a clear sense of scope and context.

Group position is generally clear, although gaps may exist. Discusses or presents little support from experience or outside resources.

54  

High

Discusses and identifies influence of context on the issue. Appropriately identifies group position on the issue. Discusses or presents support from experience and outside resources.

Suggested aspects from the theoretical frameworks related to each aspect of the rubric Synthesis (B) Critical (D)

Analysis (B) Critical (D) Reflexive (D)

Synthesis (B) Reflexive (D) Evaluation (B) Reflexive (D)

4. Summarizes and analyzes supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint

3.3 Fails to discuss or provide contrary views in the discussion and the presentation.

Justifies own view during the discussion but does not provide contrary views in the presentations.

4.1 Provides little summary of each viewpoint.

Summarizes the information from each viewpoint, although not thoroughly or with full accuracy. Demonstrates adequate skill in examining each viewpoint but may not question its accuracy and relevance.

4.2 No evidence of examination of information. Repeats information without questioning it. 4.3 Evidence is inappropriate or not related to topic. 5. Discusses/Integr ates information from relevant perspectives

5.1 Deals with a single perspective and fails to discuss others’ perspectives. 5.2 Looks at the issue from only own perspective in

Supporting evidence is used, although not fully explained during the presentation. Diverse perspectives are investigated or discussed in a limited way.

Rough integration of certain viewpoints offered on the WebQuest into the 55

 

Justifies own view while integrating contrary interpretations into the discussion. Provides contrary views in the presentations. Summarizes the information from each viewpoint accurately and thoroughly. Examines information provided in each viewpoint and questions its accuracy and relevance.

Analysis (B) Reflexive (D)

Discusses and uses appropriate evidence to support group position during the presentation. Discusses and synthesizes diverse perspectives related to the issue.

Analysis (B) Synthesis (B) Operational (D) Critical (D)

Fully integrates information from all perspectives

Synthesis (B) Evaluation (B) Critical (D) Reflexive (D)

Analysis (B) Operational (D)

Evaluation (B) Critical (D)

Synthesis (B) Evaluation (B) Critical (D) Reflexive (D)

the presentation.

presentations.

offered on the WebQuest into the presentation.

B = Bloom’s Taxonomy D = The three-dimensional model Interviews 1. Interviews with the students After the project was completed, I conducted a retrospective focus-group interview with each group of students. Each interview was conducted outside the class in a quiet room and lasted approximately thirty minutes. The interviews were aimed at soliciting students’ reasons for their decisions and behaviors during the class, as well as their perceptions of the activity. The interview followed a semi-structured protocol (see Appendix B) where a set of guided questions was used while allowing for a discussion of the issues brought up by the interviewees. I focused the interviews on how the students analyzed, evaluated, synthesized, and reflected on the issue of the WebQuest along with how they used English and perceived the role of the teacher in the WebQuest class. Additionally, I showed the students their group’s PowerPoint presentation slides to discuss how they composed the slides and delivered the presentations. The interviews were audio- and video-taped and transcribed immediately the following day. 2. Interviews with the teachers Prior to the beginning of the classes, I conducted a semi-structured interview with each of the two teachers to gain initial information about the classes and the students along with the 56  

objectives of the course. The interview also focused on their perceptions of information technology used in the class, critical thinking, and methods used to facilitate students’ English learning and critical thinking. A set of questions was used to guide the interview (see Appendix C). Each interview was conducted separately and lasted approximately one hour. For each teacher, another semi-structured interview was conducted at the end of the study. A set of questions was used to guide the interview (see Appendix D). The interviews focused on obtaining insights into how they conducted the class and how they perceived the role of the teacher in the traditional class and the WebQuest class. The topics of the interview ranged from class preparation, material development, teachers’ roles, perceptions of students’ critical thinking and English use in the class, and the overall experience of WebQuest use as an activity in this reading course. The pre-project and post-project interviews were transcribed immediately after the interviews were conducted. The data from the interviews with the students were later coded and grouped into themes which addressed how students used critical thinking and English language, along with how they perceived the role of the teacher during the WebQuest class. Similarly, the interview data from the teachers were analyzed and coded with the focus on how they perceived their roles as teachers in the WebQuest class. Coding was done to enable the researcher to examine the data for overlap and redundancy, and then categorize these codes into themes to identify concepts found in the data (Cresswell, 2005).

57  

Student PowerPoint presentations At the end of each WebQuest, students presented an oral presentation with PowerPoint slides to document their position on the issue. In order to examine how students used critical thinking skills, I videotaped the oral presentations, and later transcribed the video recordings. The PowerPoint slides were also collected. The transcriptions of the oral presentations and the PowerPoint slides were analyzed in combination with the transcriptions of the student group discussions using the Critical Thinking Rubric as described earlier in this chapter. Student written assignments At the end of each WebQuest, students were required to write a journal addressing a question posed by the WebQuest. A written assignment was collected at the end of each WebQuest session, resulting in two written assignments for each of the student participants. The writing prompts and the instructions were written in a way that invited the students to express their opinions and consider multiple perspectives on the issue. The students were also asked to support their opinions using evidence from the texts, personal experience, and outside resources. To analyze the data, a writing rubric (see Appendix E) adapted from the Critical Thinking Rubric mentioned earlier was used to examine how students used critical thinking skills on their written assignments. This writing rubric specifically investigated three aspects, namely: (1) how students show their individual position; (2) how students synthesize information from all perspectives; and (3) how students support their opinions with evidence. Each aspect was detailed using behavior-oriented descriptors in three levels of critical thinking as low, medium, and high. 58  

Questionnaires At the beginning of the WebQuest project, the students were asked to complete a questionnaire (see Appendix F) collecting their personal information, including name, age, gender, major, and English scores from the Entrance Examination. This was used to document students’ academic backgrounds and English proficiency levels. Following the end of the project, another questionnaire was distributed (see Appendix G). This questionnaire was used to elicit students’ attitudes about critical thinking use, and their impressions of the teacher’s role during the WebQuests; questions were also asked about their English language use, and their general perceptions of WebQuest use. Since the questionnaire was short and covered a wide range, it was used in offering triangulation of data, but not as a primary data source in its own right; Yin (2003) suggested that questionnaires can also be used to “confirm” the commonness of the phenomenon. Other documentation Other documents related to the course and not specified above were collected, including the role sheets, the course syllabus, student handouts, textbooks, and teachers’ PowerPoint slides. This pool of information helped in understanding the nature of the course and the activities in both the regular and the WebQuest classes.

59  

Data collection strategies for each research question In the following section, I will describe how several data collection strategies were used to answer each of the three research questions and how triangulation methods were employed to ensure data credibility. Research Question #1: To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? To answer this question, I focused my analysis on the student group discussions, the oral presentations, and the written assignments. Since the group discussion was central to the WebQuest activity, it allowed me to investigate how students engaged in the process of critical thinking when they interpreted, analyzed, synthesized, evaluated, and reflected on the information. In a similar fashion, since part of the students’ critical thought process was shown in the end products, it was necessary to examine these products to understand how students transferred their perceptions from the discussion to the presentation and the writing. To ensure the credibility of the data, classroom observation notes, teacher and student interviews, and questionnaire results were also used to triangulate the data. The transcriptions of student group discussions, combined with those of the oral presentations and the PowerPoint slides, were analyzed to determine how students used critical thinking skills based on a critical thinking rubric adapted from the Guide to Rating Integrative and Critical Thinking developed by the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology at Washington State University (Washington State University Critical Thinking Project, 2006), as mentioned in the previous section. This rubric incorporated the three dimensions of the higher levels of critical thinking on Bloom’s Taxonomy, which are: analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. 60  

It also addressed three specific dimensions according to the three-dimensional model, adapted from the four-dimensional model (Critical Web Reader), which are delineated as operational, critical, and reflexive. The five elements described on this Critical Thinking Rubric helped establish an overview of how Thai college students used critical thinking during the WebQuest activities in an English reading class. Examination of the rubric also offered insights into various factors that could affect how students analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information, such as their prior knowledge on the issue, along with how they use language skills, such as summarizing, to understand the readings, how they evaluate claims and evidence and how they reflect on the information; it thus provided a fuller understanding of the process students went through to form group opinions. To understand more about how lower and higher proficiency students performed similarly or differently on a task, I also analyzed the data by the students’ respective proficiency levels. In order to gain more insights into how individual students used critical thinking, I used a writing rubric adapted from the critical thinking rubric previously mentioned, to analyze two written assignments received from each of the student participants (see Appendix E). The writing rubric consisted of three aspects, namely; (1) how students show their individual position; (2) how students synthesize information from all perspectives, and; (3) how students support their opinions with evidence. To ensure the credibility of the analysis, I invited an expert in WebQuest use in EFL contexts to independently rate the data obtained from group work and score critical thinking use according to the Critical Thinking Rubric. I first discussed the features on each dimension of the rubric and practiced scoring to be certain that we had the same understanding about evaluating 61  

each aspect. The rater then examined the transcriptions of students’ small group discussions and evaluated how the students performed on each aspect. The analyses done by me and the rater were then compared and analyzed according to Cohen’s kappa 6 to establish an inter-rater agreement. The inter-rater reliability measure was 0.97 and was thus considered sufficient for the analysis in this study. This same process was used for the written assignment analyses, where a satisfactory inter-rater reliability of 0.98 was obtained. Research Question #2: What was the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson? To better understand the role the teachers played in supporting critical thinking skills in a WebQuest class, I looked for recurrent themes which emerged from the transcribed data of the observations from both the traditional and WebQuest classes, along with the interview data obtained from the teachers. The regular and the WebQuest class sessions of both teachers were observed and videotaped to document how they conducted their classes and how they encouraged their students to use critical thinking. The data also came from the pre-project and post-project interviews with each teacher, undertaken to explore how they viewed their roles in both the traditional and the WebQuest class. To examine the issue further, I documented their perceptions about students’                                                              6

The equation for kappa is:

Pr (a) = number of the observed agreements between raters Pr (e) = number of agreements that are due to chance  

62  

use of critical thinking and their overall experience of WebQuest use. I compared the data obtained from both interviews and observations to ascertain the similarities and differences in the respective roles each teacher played, and how each worked to promote critical thinking in both types of classes. To confirm the credibility of the results, I used the data obtained from student interviews to triangulate the data received from the two teachers. In a similar fashion, in order to ensure the credibility of the data analysis, I utilized “member checking” after the analysis was completed. I presented the study results to the two teacher participants to check for accuracy and provide feedbacks regarding interpretations of the data. Naree and Pichet found the analysis primarily corresponded to their perceived roles as teachers both in the regular and the WebQuest classes. Research Question #3: To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? In an effort to document the extent to which the students used English while engaging in the WebQuest activity, I examined the data according to a proposal put forth by Koenraad and Westhoff (2003); they suggest that the target language should be used as either the language of instruction or the language of the students’ end products in this type of activity. Following from this, I analyzed how English was used in the WebQuest class as (1) the language of instruction; (2) the language students used during the process of the WebQuest; and (3) the language used in the end products. I used this framework to examine all data obtained, from the transcription of the whole-class discussion; the transcriptions of the student small group discussions; transcriptions of the oral presentations; classroom observation notes; PowerPoint slides; and student written assignments. 63  

To triangulate the data and ensure credibility of the analysis, I used the interview results from teachers and students, along with the questionnaire results. In addition, peer examination was utilized to confirm that biases did not influence the outcome. I invited an outside expert to examine the analysis; she was a professor at a university in Thailand, with several years experience in conducting research on EFL classes. I explained the study background and data analysis process to her, and then showed her the analysis results of this research question. She agreed with the data analysis and results, and provided minor suggestions on how best to triangulate the data. Table 3.6 Summary of data sources and data analysis strategies used for each research question Research Questions 1. To what extent do Thai college students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an English reading course?

• • • • • • • • •

2. What is the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson?

• • • •

 

Data sources Transcriptions of student group discussions Transcriptions of oral presentations Classroom observation notes PowerPoint presentations and slides Written assignments Role sheets Teacher interviews Student interviews Questionnaires

Methods of analysis 1. A critical thinking rubric 2. A writing rubric 3. Triangulation of the data with classroom observation notes, teacher and student interviews, and questionnaire results.

Transcriptions of whole-class discussions Transcriptions of student group discussions Classroom observation notes Teacher interviews 64

1. Emerging themes from the data 2. Triangulation of the data with classroom observation notes and interviews with students and teachers.

3. To what extent do Thai college students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an English reading course?

•

Student interviews

•

Transcriptions of whole-class discussions Transcriptions of student small group discussions Classroom observation notes PowerPoint presentations and slides Written assignments Teacher interviews Student interviews Questionnaires

• • • • • • •

65  

1. A framework adapted from Koenraad and Westhoff (2003) 2. Triangulation of the data with classroom observation notes, teacher and student interviews, and questionnaire results.

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS (1) This chapter discusses the results relating to Research Question 1, “To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course?” I will examine how students used critical thinking at the group level and individual level. At the group level, the findings came from student group work discussions, student presentations, role sheets, and classroom observation notes. In addition, I will analyze how the students used critical thinking by their language proficiency. At the individual level, the data were collected from student written assignments.

Research Question #1: To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? Students’ use of critical thinking at the group level At the group level, the main data came from the videotapes and audiotapes of student small group discussions and the presentations, which were central to the WebQuest activity. The discussions and the presentations were analyzed using aspects adapted from the Washington State University Critical Thinking Rubric, as described in chapter 3. The rubric was broken down into five aspects of how students used critical thinking skills, namely: (1) how students understand the main problem of the WebQuest; (2) how students consider relevant contexts; (3) how students develop group position; (4) how students summarize and analyze supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint, and; (5) how students discuss and integrate information from 66  

relevant perspectives. I will also use the data from student interview and the questionnaire to triangulate the data. There were four groups of students from two classes – Class A and Class B. Group A1 and Group B1 represent students with higher intermediate proficiency of English while Group A2 and Group B2 represent students with lower intermediate English proficiency. In the following section, I will report the overall results of the types of thinking that students used during the activity, followed by a section that examines the results of how higher proficiency and lower proficiency students used critical thinking during the discussions and presentations. Analysis of types of critical thinking The results show that all five aspects of critical thinking were presented during the WebQuest activities. However, the quality of these aspects varied considerably. The strongest aspect of critical thinking which emerged from the data was Aspect 1: how students understand the main problem of the WebQuest. The aspect that most of the groups engaged in was Aspect 5: how students discuss information from relevant perspectives. Finally, the aspects that some of the groups performed better than others with were Aspect 2: how students consider relevant contexts; Aspect 3: how students develop group position, and; Aspect 4: how students summarize and analyze supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint. Table 4.1 Aspects on the Critical Thinking Rubric Descriptions of each aspect on the critical thinking rubric Aspect 1

Understands the main problem of the WebQuest

Aspect 2

Considers relevant contexts 67

 

Aspect 3

Develops group position Sub-aspect 3.1

Appropriately identifies group position on the issue.

Sub-aspect 3.2

Discusses or presents support from experience and information not from assigned sources.

Sub-aspect 3.3

Justifies own view while integrating contrary interpretations in the discussion. Provides contrary views in the presentations.

Aspect 4

Summarizes and analyzes supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint Sub-aspect 4.1

Summarizes the information from each viewpoint accurately and thoroughly.

Sub-aspect 4.2

Examines information provided in each viewpoint and questions its accuracy and relevance.

Sub-aspect 4.3

Discusses and uses appropriate evidence to support group position during the presentation.

Aspect 5

Discusses/Integrates information from relevant perspectives Sub-aspect 5.1

Discusses and synthesizes diverse perspectives related to the issue.

Sub-aspect 5.2

Fully integrates information from all perspectives presented in the WebQuest into the presentation.

68  

Table 4.2 Summary of the critical thinking results Critical Thinking Aspects

Cosmetic Surgery

Euthanasia

Group

1

2

3

4

5

3.1

3.2

3.3

4.1

4.2

4.3

5.1

5.2

A1

High

High

High

High

High

Med

Med

High

High

High

A2

High

High

High

Med

Med

Med

Med

Med

High

Med

B1

High

High

High

Low

High

High

Med

High

High

High

B2

High

High

High

Low

High

Med

Med

Med

High

High

A1

High

Med

High

High

High

High

Med

High

High

High

A2

High

Med

High

High

Med

High

Med

Med

High

Med

B1

High

Med

High

High

High

High

Med

High

High

High

B2

High

High

High

High

High

High

Med

Med

High

High

The aspect that all of the groups showed good critical thinking skills with was Aspect 1: how students understand the problem of the WebQuest. From the discussions and the presentations (12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09), all of the groups clearly understood the main questions of the two WebQuests, which are “Should euthanasia be legalized in Thailand?” and “Should people have cosmetic surgery to enhance their looks?” They were able to present their group position on the issue and use evidence to support their position (PowerPoint slides and videotaped oral presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). Though all the groups eventually received high ratings for their skills with Aspect 1, this was not the case at the beginning of the WebQuests. At first, they seemed not to be familiar with the topics, such as euthanasia. At the beginning of the class, many students did not know what 69  

the word euthanasia meant (Class observation notes, 11/25/08, 12/9/08). However, after the students each took on a role of the WebQuest, read the articles for their roles, and later shared information among members of their respective groups, they became more familiar with the main issue of the WebQuest and were able to participate in the discussion and express informed opinions based on the information obtained. The excerpt below shows how students in Group B2 understood the contradicting points if euthanasia was to be allowed. Sita: Does our group agree or disagree with euthanasia? 7 Am: I agree. Ploy: I also agree. People should have the right to die peacefully. But we also have to think about this -- if we allow euthanasia, people who may not be in that severe condition may also want to die. The patients feel that they are a burden to the family and the cost of treatment is expensive; sometimes the patient is depressed. If we allow euthanasia, these patients may also want to die. We can talk about these points in our presentation to add strength to our argument. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group B2, 12/11/08) This excerpt below also illustrates how students synthesized the information from all of the three viewpoints presented on the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest: (1) body image and the media, (2) working people, and (3) the doctor, and expressed their informed opinions on whether they agreed with the choice to have cosmetic surgery. Wan: I disagree with cosmetic surgery because cosmetic surgery is not necessary; it’s just done for social value. If someone is sick and needs plastic surgery, that’s OK. But other than that, it’s just a trend in the society. And secondly, it means the person who wants it has low self esteem. It might be because people around that person don’t love him/her. It’s just a psychological result of the desire to be accepted in society. This [psychology] is where we need to solve the problem, not with the person’s appearance. Cosmetic surgery doesn’t solve the problem and it doesn’t last the rest of our lives. It will deteriorate over time.                                                              7

Italics indicate that the language is in translation. 70

 

Naphat: I disagree with cosmetic surgery because it supports the endless greed of humans. I agree with Wan’s points that self esteem is not necessarily enhanced by having cosmetic surgery. If I were to agree with cosmetic surgery, it would be for only one reason -- it helps us be more competitive in the job market. Kanya: My points of view are totally different from you guys. I agree with cosmetic surgery because it’s about self esteem. I think it’s not so much about people around you but about how you feel yourself! If you feel you want to, just do it. Suppose a woman had a breast removed because of cancer, she would feel insecure about her breast, so I would support her choice if she wants to have a cosmetic surgery. Naphat: I think it depends on each case. Kanya: Right. I knew a person who lost a lot of weight and her skin was sagging. I think this person deserves plastic surgery. But I don’t support those who are addicted to continuous plastic surgeries, like someone who keeps having boob jobs. I don’t know why they do that … like that Korean woman who had more than 40 plastic surgeries to her face. I don’t understand why she did it. Wan: So our group would say that we disagree with cosmetic surgery. We’ll say that we wouldn’t talk about the case where someone is sick or in an accident and needs plastic surgery. Kanya and Naphat (nodding): Yeah, in that case, it is necessary. Wan: Yes, in that case doctors need to treat the physical and emotional state of the patient. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group A1, 1/13/09) Students were also able to understand the concepts vital to the topic, which they might not have considered before. The two examples below show how students understood what “legalize” and “euthanasia” mean when discussing about legalizing euthanasia. These points were not mentioned in the reading, but they were able to arrive at their own understanding after reading all the articles. (1)

Kanya: The main question asked is if euthanasia should be legalized. Wan: What does “legalized” mean here? Kanya: It means that if we let the court decide, it’s like we allow the court to say who should die and who should not. 71

 

Naphat: You mean the court can give the death penalty, and it’s like they can say who should die, so why can’t they allow mercy killing, right? In that case, I think they also play the role of God. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A1, 12/2/08) (2)

Thida: However, I think killing oneself is the same as being killed by the doctor, isn’t it? Aey: No, it’s not the same. The point we’re discussing here is whether we will let the doctor kill. If we let the doctor do euthanasia, we will die with awareness by the doctor. It’s safer and we’re the ones who make the decision. I think it’s better than just waiting to die with suffering in the end. It has more dignity. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A2, 12/2/08) The next aspect that most groups performed well on is Aspect 5: how students discuss

and integrate information from relevant perspectives. This aspect takes into account how students discussed and synthesized the perspectives related to the issue during the group discussion (sub-aspect 5.1), and how they integrated information from all of the perspectives in their presentation (sub-aspect 5.2). All of the groups discussed and synthesized the information from each of the three viewpoints presented, but not every group included supporting evidence from all three viewpoints. During the group discussion, after students summarized the information from each role, all of the groups synthesized and discussed all the perspectives. They shared their opinions on the information they received about each role. All of the groups seemed to be able to see why each perspective needed to be included in the WebQuests in order to understand the issue. The two examples below show how students understood why they had to look at the issue from various perspectives. (1)

Wan: The lawyer role gives a wider perspective on the issue. If it’s from the patient’s [viewpoint], it’s a viewpoint from one person or viewpoints from people surrounding the patient, but the lawyer role is the viewpoint from society. There are many people involved, like people in society… [pause] how it will affect the society. 72

 

(Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A1, 12/2/08) This excerpt shows that the student understood why a lawyer’s perspective was needed in order to look at the euthanasia issue. She perceived that not only did the group have to look at the issue from a patient’s perspective, it was also necessary to look from the lawyer’s perspective because euthanasia not only involved the patient or the patient’s family but other people in society as well. (2)

Dew: From what I read, sometimes the doctor just gave the wrong diagnosis or couldn’t find a good treatment for the patient, so he just let the patient die. So we can’t consider things only from the patient’s point of view; we have to look at other points of view like what the doctor thinks about each case, and the illness. And maybe they need to get second opinions from other doctors. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A2, 12/2/08) This excerpt is similar to the one above. The student saw why she had to also look at the

issue from the doctor’s perspective, and not only from the patient’s perspective, when considering the euthanasia issue. Not only were students able to see the importance of each perspective presented in the WebQuest, they were also able to synthesize the information from all viewpoints in the WebQuest. They compared the information and saw how all the viewpoints were related. They incorporated their opinions by discussing all the information, in order to form their group position on the issue. The excerpt below illustrates these points. Thida: The reasons why people do cosmetic surgery may be that they want to be more attractive and have more friends, but even when they have cosmetic surgery, if their behaviors are still the same, cosmetic surgery won’t help anything. Bam: I think looks are not everything. It would also depend on how you carry yourself. Aey: I agree with the working people role that better looking people will get a better job. From the doctor’s viewpoint, I think they wouldn’t encourage people to have cosmetic surgery, but if you want it, they will do it for you. 73  

Dew: Doctors can just do it for you but you need to choose a good doctor so that there won’t be problems. For example, they have to use a good grade of silicone. Aey: But most people won’t think about disadvantages. They would only think about advantages when they want to have cosmetic surgery. Dew: But if you are not careful and have an unqualified doctor, it can be very bad. Like a case in the article, they were talking about a woman in Thailand who had liposuction but the doctor was uncertified; so her stomach after the surgery was one inch thicker and there were many ugly scars. Her husband left her, and her children were so embarrassed about it that they didn’t want to go to school. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group A2, 1/13/09) Even though all of the groups performed well on sub-aspect 5.1-- discussing and analyzing diverse perspectives related to the issue--not every group included all of the perspectives in the presentation (sub-aspect 5.2). Most of the groups did include all viewpoints in support of the group positions, however Group A2 did not. Although the members in Group A2 discussed all of the perspectives in the WebQuests during their small group discussions (Euthanasia small group discussion, 12/2/08; Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, 1/13/09), in the presentations, they selected only the points that they wanted to use in support of their position, which did not represent all of the perspectives on the issue; they seemed to present only the viewpoints that were closest to their own experiences. For example, in the Euthanasia WebQuest, they mostly provided supporting evidence from the family members of the patient role when they argued that euthanasia should be allowed in Thailand, while offering only one reason from the lawyer’s perspective and none from the doctor’s perspective (PowerPoint slides, Group A2, 12/2/08). Similarly, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, they mostly offered reasons from the working people perspective and the media/body image perspective but no explanation from the doctor’s perspective (PowerPoint slides, 1/13/09).

74  

This speculation was supported by the interview I had with the students from Group A2 (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09). I asked them how they decided which information should be used on the slides to support their position on an issue. One of the group members answered, “We usually selected interesting points from all the articles. Then we would try to categorize all the points and put them on the slides.” On the contrary, the other three groups, whose presentations included all perspectives, responded that after they arrived at the group decision, they would find supporting evidence from “each role” and include this on the slide (Student group interviews, Groups A1, B1, and B2, 2/12/09). It seems that because each of these other groups consciously selected evidence from each role, they could thus ensure that they included supporting evidence from all of the perspectives. Another point that should be addressed is how the students composed their PowerPoint slides using information from all the perspectives. The results suggest that the higher proficiency students, Groups A1 and B1, synthesized information from all the perspectives into their PowerPoint slides using their own words (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery PowerPoint slides, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). On the contrary, the lower proficiency students, Groups A2 and B2, “cut and pasted” some sentences from the articles onto the slides. Group B2 mostly used their own words to provide supporting reasons for their position on the Euthanasia and the Cosmetic Surgery slides; however, they copied two sentences from the articles and used them as examples in the Cosmetic Surgery slides. As for Group A2, they mostly copied sentences from the articles onto their slides (Class observation notes, 12/2/08, 1/13/09). As a result, they probably did not look carefully enough to include information from all the perspectives. The last three critical thinking aspects I will discuss further are the ones on which the students overall performed at an average level. These are Aspect 2: how students consider 75  

relevant contexts; Aspect 3: how students develop group position; and Aspect 4: how students summarize and analyze supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint. In Aspect 2: how students consider relevant contexts, the results show that students discussed the contexts more during the first WebQuest, Euthanasia, than the second WebQuest, Cosmetic Surgery. During the Euthanasia WebQuest, all of the groups extensively discussed and identified the influence of contexts on the issue. The transcriptions show that the students took into consideration these contexts, in terms of the law, the culture, and the beliefs of people in Thailand, when deciding whether euthanasia should be legalized in Thailand (Small group discussions, 12/2/08, 12/11/08). On the contrary, during the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, even though the students understood the issue of cosmetic surgery well, most the groups did not mention how these contexts would affect cosmetic surgery, except for Group B2. During the Euthanasia WebQuest, students in all the groups were able to see how contexts, such as religion and law in Thailand, played a role in deciding whether euthanasia should be legalized in Thailand. Following are examples of how students considered the contexts of the issue when forming the group position. Wan: The question asked if we should have mercy killing in Thailand. Kanya: I agree [with euthanasia]. Naphat: I agree, but we should lay out the rules and regulation so that we know which case can be allowed. Wan: But it seems like people do not trust the justice system in Thailand. Kanya: The system is not that important, but we just have to make sure which case can be allowed. But actually, if you ask me, I don’t think Thai people will allow mercy killing to their family members because we are Buddhists. Naphat: Yeah.

76  

Kanya: We believe that we have to pay back to our parents before we die, according to the Buddhist belief, so we just can’t cut our life short before we can even pay back to our parents. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A1, 12/2/08) In the above excerpt, students in Group A1 discussed whether they wanted to allow euthanasia in Thailand. Wan brought up an issue regarding the trust of the Thai people on the justice system in Thailand. She doubted if the government could enact law that would properly regulate euthanasia when people did not trust the justice system. Kanya also brought up the issue of a Buddhist belief that a person should live to pay gratitude to their parents before they died, so she doubted if Thai people who ascribed to Buddhism would agree with euthanasia. This example indicated how students took into account the context of Thailand in terms of law and people’s belief when they made the group decision about whether euthanasia should be legalized. Likewise, the example below shows how students considered contexts, in this case the context being the prevalent poverty in rural areas of Thailand, when the students made a group decision on euthanasia. Ploy: And how about the discrimination of doctors. What should we say? Sita: Discrimination? Ploy: Yes, in Thailand you know that in the rural areas sometimes doctors discriminate against poor people. So should we also say [in the PowerPoint slides] that the government should distribute more budgets to the rural areas? Sita: Sounds good. Am: But is that like we are saying we disagree with euthanasia? Ploy: No. Why? We want to say that if we allow euthanasia, the government should give more budgets to the hospitals in the rural areas, to develop the hospitals around the country. So there wouldn’t be a case that doctors would want to treat rich patients and allow euthanasia for poor patients because they don’t want to or don’t have resources to treat them. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group B2, 12/11/08) 77  

In contrast to the above examples from the Euthanasia WebQuest, during the Cosmetic surgery WebQuest, most of the groups did not mention how the contexts affected cosmetic surgery. Only the students in Group B2 discussed how cosmetic surgery was more common in other contexts, such as in Korea or Japan. Am: I remember from another English class. They talked about how Japanese or Korean people have to do cosmetic surgery before applying for a job. Sita: Right. I heard that they have to make themselves look good so that the company will hire them. Cosmetic surgery can also be a gift. Like in Korea, parents give a cosmetic surgery as a gift to their daughter when she graduates from high school. Ploy: Their parents pay for their daughter to do cosmetic surgery?! Sita: Yes! (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group B2, 1/22/09) It was anticipated that the students would discuss contextual influence more in the Euthanasia than in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuests, considering that euthanasia is a high-stake issue involving life and death. Contexts, therefore, play a bigger role in the issue of euthanasia than that of cosmetic surgery. In addition, the fact that the quality of cosmetic surgery in Thailand is at a similar standard to that of the West or other developed Asian countries could reduce the necessity for the students to take the contexts into consideration when deciding whether they would agree with cosmetic surgery. Furthermore, cosmetic surgery has become more common in Thailand, so they would not need to consider as much about how the religion or culture would affect people who wanted to have cosmetic surgery as they would with euthanasia. This lesser concern with contexts could also have resulted from the fact that the main question of the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest did not state a specific context when it asked the students to decide whether people should do cosmetic surgery to enhance their looks. 78  

However, even though the students did not discuss the contexts specifically, they were aware of the general contexts of cosmetic surgery when they took into account the job market situation in Thailand, the quality of Thai doctors, and the overall beauty values in the Thai society (Cosmetic surgery small group discussion, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). Below is an example from a student interview that illustrates how students recognized the influence of contexts even when they did not directly discuss them during the small group discussion. A student in Group A1 discussed how she recognized that contexts played a role in cosmetic surgery when she answered the question “how did your cultural background affect your opinions on an issue?” during the student interview: Kanya: I think quite a lot. For example, in the Plastic Surgery WebQuest, if we discussed plastic surgery in a Korean school, they would have different opinions about the issue. Like when we presented, we said that we disagreed with cosmetic surgery. We thought that we didn’t need to do plastic surgery if we only wanted to improve our selfappearance. There were many other ways to do it, such as make up, or personality improvement. These are our reasons. But if we discuss this issue in a culture that sees cosmetic surgery as a normal thing to do, like in Korea, they would agree with doing plastic surgery. They wouldn’t see anything wrong with it. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) The next aspect on which some groups used more critical thinking skills than others is Aspect 3: how students develop group position. In order to explicate how a group developed a position on a WebQuest issue, not only will I consider whether the students had a clear position on the issue (sub-aspect 3.1), I will also examine how they incorporated outside information, such as their experience or outside knowledge, to form group opinions (sub-aspect 3.2). In addition, I will investigate how they integrated contrary perspectives into the presentations (subaspect 3.3). The results show that in terms of developing a group position, overall, students performed better on the second WebQuest, Cosmetic Surgery, than on the first WebQuest,

79  

Euthanasia. For closer examination, I will discuss in more detail how the students performed on each of the three sub-aspects as described earlier. All the groups demonstrated a clear position (sub-aspect 3.1) on both the Euthanasia and the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuests (PowerPoint slides and videotaped oral presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). Before discussing the results of sub-aspect 3.1 further, I would like to first describe the process of how the students in each group arrived at their group’s position on the main WebQuest question. From my class note observations (12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09) and from the student group interviews (2/12/09), all of the groups engaged in a similar process in arriving at the group’s decision. First, each member shared the information from their assigned perspective or role on the WebQuest. They then discussed each member’s position on the issue. Each student would indicate their own position and sometimes provide accompanying reasons. If their stances were different, they would discuss the differences and vote on the group’s position again. When the group arrived at an agreement, they would proceed to develop a PowerPoint presentation. When disagreements arose, the students would either try to discuss and resolve the discrepancies or use them as refutations on the presentations (Student group interviews, 2/12/09). Even though Group B1 reported that they unanimously agreed on the same position on both WebQuests, if there were disagreements, they would try to discuss and solve them (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09). Similarly, when divergence in group positions occurred in Group B2, they would discuss them and try to reach a consensus (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09). On the contrary, Groups A1 and A2 indicated that they used opposite opinions as refutations in the presentations: 80  

(1)

Kanya: It’s normal and very acceptable [to have disagreements]. For example, when we presented, we would say we disagree with this issue but ... [pause] and then you gave a condition. We would provide the exception, like … there is an exception if this situation occurs, we would do like this and that instead. We usually have conditions for our position on an issue. For example, in The Right to Die WebQuest, we would allow euthanasia if the patient has such and such disease or is in such and such conditions. If it occurs in other situations, we would do a different thing. Researcher: So that means you would use the opinions of the person who had a contrary view with the rest of the group in the presentation this way? Kanya: Yes, that’s right. Wan (nodding) (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09)

(2)

Thida: I usually looked at two sides of the story and saw what evidence would explain each side. I usually listened to the opinions of the people with the majority vote and tried to see their sides. It’s sometimes good for the group [to have contrary viewpoints] because the person who has a different viewpoint may add something new to the argument that the rest of the group already has. It can make a good refutation. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09) When forming their own opinions on an issue, not only did the students consider

information from the articles, they also used their experience and external knowledge not included in the WebQuests (sub-aspect 3.2) in the discussions and the presentations. The results indicate that, overall, all the groups used experience and external knowledge when discussing the issues. However, a closer examination suggests that the students distinctively used more experience and outside knowledge during the second WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery) than the first WebQuest (Euthanasia). In the Euthanasia WebQuest, the students mainly discussed the information retrieved from the texts provided on the WebQuest. Overall, they sparingly used experience and outside knowledge in the discussions and presentations. The results show that in this WebQuest Group 81  

A1 used more external knowledge than the other three groups when they used examples from the American medical series ER to describe the medical scene in the U.S. during the discussion. Group A2, during the presentation, also used an example of a friend who suffered from a brain tumor to describe how a patient suffers from an incurable illness. However, Groups B1 and B2 did not use any outside knowledge or experience during the discussions and presentations. Below are two examples from Group A1. Kanya used what she had seen on the medical television show ER to show that, compared to Thailand, the medical technology was more advanced in the U.S., so the patients could not be confident when the doctors in Thailand suggested that there was no treatment for their diseases. (1)

Kanya: Have you watched ER? From the show, I can see that the U.S. has a very advanced medical system. But in Thailand, we don’t know if the doctor has done everything they can to save the patient. There may be more advanced medical treatments to cure the patient out there. So we can’t trust the doctor in Thailand when he or she says that there is no cure for a disease. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A1, 11/25/08) In the excerpt below, Kanya explained to Naphat what the term “Do not resuscitate”,

which was mentioned in an article on the Euthanasia WebQuest, meant. She knew the meaning of this medical term from the television series ER. (2)

Naphat: Do you know what “do not resuscitate” mean? Kanya: Yeah, I know this word from the series ER. They will ask the patient to sign a form saying that if the patient is not breathing, the doctor will not use the machine to make the patient breathe again. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A1, 11/25/08) In a similar manner, Group A2 used an example from their personal experience as

evidence to support their position that euthanasia should be legalized in Thailand. They gave an

82  

instance of someone they knew who died from a brain tumor to describe how the patient and the family suffered because of an incurable condition. Aey: We agree with mercy killing. First reason is that it’s a good resolution for patient and family. For example, for a patient who has a severe illness like a brain tumor. I have a friend who died from this condition. The patient had to suffer a lot from this. His family felt more pain to see their loved one suffer. (Euthanasia oral presentation, Group A2, 12/2/08) In contrast to the limited examples given in the Euthanasia discussions, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, students from all groups shared their experience to support their opinions to a greater extent. This may be due to the fact that cosmetic surgery was an emerging trend among Thai teenagers, and thus more relevant to Thai students. Many of the students had prior knowledge on the issue or knew someone who had had cosmetic surgeries. As a result, they seemed enthusiastic to discuss this and share the story of someone they knew or what they had heard about cosmetic surgery with their group members (Class observation notes, 1/8/09, 1/13/09, 1/20/09, 1/22/09). Five instances below exemplify how the students used a great deal of experience and outside knowledge to support their opinions during the discussion about cosmetic surgery. The two examples which follow show how Kanya, whose sister had a successful nose reshaping surgery, shared her sister’s story with the group members. She also used her own experience when applying for a part-time job to support an article in the WebQuest that claimed good-looking people received more job opportunities than average-looking people. (1)

Kanya: I asked my sister why she decided to have a nose job when it was painful and cost a lot of money. She said she felt better about herself when she did it. But she doesn’t want to have more plastic surgeries. She just wanted to have her nose done and when she got it done, she was satisfied. It’s not like she’s addicted to cosmetic surgery. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group A1, 1/13/09) 83

 

(2)

Kanya: From my experience, when we apply for a job, even though the job doesn’t require a good looking person, they will prefer to hire good-looking applicants. Why is it wrong if I want to be pretty when beautiful people get more opportunity in life? (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group A1, 1/13/09) Similarly, the excerpt below shows how a member in Group A2 discussed how a weight

loss supplement television commercial exaggerated in its portrayal of overweight people as ugly and undesirable among young people. Thida used this example to comment that advertising should also be blamed for why women would do everything to be thin and beautiful. (3)

Thida: Also, the advertising plays a role in this. Like the Nature Gift ad, women have to be worried about their weight even when they want to eat something; it’s pressure on women. Aey: Fat women are not that ugly but this ad portrays fat women as being very ugly so the people in society think that being fat is really ugly. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group A2, 1/13/09) Another excerpt below is from a transcribed discussion of the students in Group B2. Sita

used an example of her friend to show that cosmetic surgery was needed for a person injured in an accident to regain his or her normal appearance prior to the accident. (4)

Ploy: …No. It’s not like that. For example, a person had an accident. They didn’t intentionally want to do cosmetic surgery to make themselves look more beautiful. But they were in an accident unintentionally. They have to do cosmetic surgery so at least they can have their normal appearance just like before the accident. Sita: I have a friend who was in a motorcycle accident and her head and face were injured so she had a nose job. She looks OK now. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group B2, 1/22/09) The last excerpt below shows how a student from Group B1 used experience and outside

knowledge as an example in their presentation. Nid used the example of Michael Jackson to show that even actors and actresses, who probably needed cosmetic surgery to enhance their looks, were also in danger of having unsuccessful cosmetic surgery. 84  

(5)

Nid: Plastic surgery is not a solution to fix appearance. There are alternative ways to do it [fix appearance]. Women in the entertainment business need to be beautiful to get a job, so they do plastic surgery to make them look better. However, there are dangers in doing so like Michael Jackson who had so many cosmetic surgeries that his face looks strange. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B1, 1/22/09) The lesser discussion of outside information during the Euthanasia WebQuest was

probably due to the fact that the topic of euthanasia was more distant to the students’ everyday life, compared to cosmetic surgery. As a result, the students might not have much experience with or knowledge about the euthanasia issue and thus chose to draw more on the information provided in the texts to support their opinions. Having said that, the students’ limited experience with euthanasia itself by no means prevented them from discussing this topic. Instead, the results from the questionnaire at the end of the WebQuest activities suggest that half of all the students in both classes prefer the topic of euthanasia over that of cosmetic surgery (Questionnaire results, 1/13/09, 1/22/09, see Appendix H). Some students mentioned in the open-ended section of the questionnaire that since they had never discussed this issue as extensively as they did in this class, it was interesting for them to learn more about euthanasia. Some suggested that because the issue was very personal, it was easier for them to imagine if they were in the position of a terminally-ill patient, and thus made it easier for them to express opinions on the issue. (Questionnaire results, 1/13/09, 1/22/09, see Appendix H). The limited use of experience and outside knowledge on the Euthanasia WebQuest resonate with the findings from student group interviews. When asked how they used experience and information from the texts to support their opinions, Group B2 reported that they used

85  

experience to support their opinions when the topic was more relevant to them and used more of the information from the texts when the topic was more distant: Researcher: What is the proportion of the personal experience and the text that you use to support your opinions? Sita: It depends on the topic. For the topics that are closer to us, like cosmetic surgery, we have some knowledge or experience of it, so we can use more of our experience. But if it’s a topic that’s far away from us and not in our everyday life, like euthanasia, we would use information from the text more because we don’t have any experience that we could share. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) The students in Group A1 suggested that while they mostly used the information from the texts to support their arguments, they preferred to use their experience when they wanted to give extra evidence to convince someone of their argument: Researcher: When you discussed this in group, what was the proportion of using personal experience and the information provided in the text to support your opinions? Wan: We usually used the information found in the texts for discussion. However, when we discussed and I tried to convince others to agree with my opinions, I would use my personal experience to support my opinions. But we mostly used the texts that we had read; I think it’s about 70% of the information from texts and 30% from personal experience. But if I wanted to show by argument that I knew about the issue, I would use personal experience. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) For some students, such as the students from Group A2, experience was considered more supportive of an argument because they believed that it was more powerful in convincing others. An excerpt below shows how a student in Group A2 explained the reasons for using experience to support their argument. Researcher: Did you use more of the personal experience or information from the text? Bam: Personal experience, because if we had some real life experience, we knew that it was true and could be evidence. For example, in the cosmetic surgery WebQuest, I had a friend who has done plastic surgery, so I used this experience as evidence. Our 86  

experience could prove that something was real or not. If I had some experience about a topic, I would use my experience. Researcher: And how about a topic that you don’t have experience with, such as Euthanasia? Bam: I would use feelings. I would imagine if I were the person in that situation, what would I do? Researcher: So, in general, you would use experience more than the texts? Bam: Yes. Thida (nodding) (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09) On the contrary, Group B1 reported that they would rely more on the texts than experience. Researcher: What are the proportions of the information on the WQ and your personal experience that you used to support your argument? Pim: I used the information that I read more than my experience. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) The results seem to indicate that the lower proficiency students, Groups A2 and B2, relied more on their experience (when available) to support their arguments while the higher proficiency students, Groups A1 and B1, relied more on the texts to support their opinions. Apart from examining how students arrived at group positions on a topic and used experience and knowledge from external sources to support their opinions, I will now further investigate how students discussed opposite views in their discussions and incorporated them into the presentations (sub-aspect 3.3). All the students were aware that, to make an argument more solid, they should include opposing viewpoints or refutation in their presentation. Refutation is a reasoning strategy that

87  

they had learned earlier in the course (Regular class observation notes, 11/11/08, 11/13/08; ENG 123 textbook). Group B2 seemed to be most aware among all the groups of the need to include a refutation in their presentation. They seemed to be very conscious of addressing opposing viewpoints to make their argument more concrete in the presentations. The two excerpts below illustrated how the students in Group B2 attempted to include contrary views to their positions on euthanasia and cosmetic surgery. (1)

Sita: How will you offer a contrary view on the issue? Ploy: From what I read, doctors can discriminate against patients. Also, it gives doctors too much power. Third, doctors may give wrong diagnoses. These things will affect the patient. Sita: If it becomes legal, doctors don’t have to be afraid that they’ll be wrong. Ploy: But in the article it said it gives doctors too much power to decide for patients. Sita: But if it becomes legal, doctors don’t have to be afraid anymore. Ploy: So what about if the doctors give wrong diagnoses? Sita: Like I said, it should be an expert doctor, so he can give a reliable diagnosis. Ploy: But how can you be sure that every expert doctor can give a correct and reliable diagnosis? Sita: OK. So what do you want to say? This is like we are trying to give opinions that contradict our position on the issue. From our slides, it’s not like we agree with everything they [the articles] said anyway. Ploy: What do you think? Do you think doctors in Thailand are all good and experienced? Sita: umm… Actually in Thailand doctors are not that good. Ploy: So in that case we should say that we should educate the doctors to make sure that they are well-trained and can give reliable diagnoses. Sita: OK, I’ll put that on the slides. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group B2, 12/11/08) 88

 

The excerpt above shows that the students discussed how they could include opposing views on their slides after they decided that they would support legalizing euthanasia in Thailand. They included advice that the government should ensure that the doctors in Thailand were well-trained to prevent misdiagnoses, a possible point of argument from those who opposed euthanasia. (2)

Am: By the way, does this mean we disagree with cosmetic surgery? Sita: We agree but we have to give some advice. Ploy: We agree but we have to find information to refute what may be seen as a hole in our argument. Sita: Right. It’s not that we should totally not have cosmetic surgery. We’ll say we should but we should give some advice to prevent bad things from happening. Ploy: We should put advice at the end of that slide. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group B2, 1/22/09) The above excerpt shows that the students were aware that they had to provide refutation

to make their argument stronger and more convincing. Therefore, as supporters of cosmetic surgery, they would provide some advice for those who wanted to have it to prevent side effects or mistakes from happening. The results also show that, after they had arrived at a group position, most of the groups discussed the opposing views on the subject and generally addressed them in their presentations, except Group A2. Even though Group A2 examined the opposing views during the group discussion, they did not include these in the presentation. Below is an excerpt from Group A2’s small group discussion about euthanasia: Dew: If I were the patient, I would want mercy killing. Thida: In Thailand, almost all people know about Buddhism beliefs that everyone has to die in the end, so I think most people can accept death. So I think mercy killing should be OK. 89  

Aye: I agree. But we also have to think about this. In an article, it said when people are sick, everything seems terrible. So we don’t really know if they actually want to die. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group A2, 12/02/08) The excerpt above from Group A2 shows that they discussed opposing viewpoints after they arrived at the group’s decision to support legalizing euthanasia in Thailand. Aye questioned if a terminally-ill patient would be mentally healthy enough to make a rational judgment. However, they did not mention any plans to include this point in their presentation. This is in contrast to the below examples of two other groups, in which the students discussed contrary viewpoints to their positions and mentioned that they would include them in their presentations. (1)

Nuj: I want to add this [to the slides] -- even though we have to respect the patients’ decision, sometimes the patients are too sick, so their ability to judge may not be reliable. So they can make a wrong judgment. So it can be the patient’s fault. We can talk about this when we present. (Euthanasia small group discussion, Group B1, 12/11/08) The above excerpt shows that Group B1, although opposed to euthanasia, recognized a

possible argument from people who supported euthanasia that the patients’ requests should be respected. Nuj, therefore, suggested that the group include in their slides the point that even though we should respect patients’ requests, their illness could cloud their judgment, so they might not be mentally healthy enough to make an important decision. Group B1’s videotaped presentation reveals that they actually included these points in their presentation. (2)

Ploy: But the doctors seemed to disagree with cosmetic surgery. In the article, they talked about the possible risks like infection and scars. Am: We can add in the slide that infection won’t happen if the doctor keeps the medical equipment clean and sterile. Sita: Right. We should say that. Ploy: Also, if the doctors really have expertise, this can also prevent some medical risks. (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, Group B2, 1/22/09) 90

 

In the excerpt above, Group B2 acknowledged that there might be concerns from people who disagreed with cosmetic surgery about possible infections and scarring. As a result, the group planned to include in their presentation points about how capable and well-qualified doctors along with a hygienic and well-equipped facility could ensure a safe cosmetic surgery. Group B2’s videotaped presentation indicates that they actually included these points in their presentation. In their presentations, most of the groups, except Group A2, addressed opposing viewpoints. The three examples below show how the students included refutation in their presentations. (1)

Kanya: From what the article says, people want to do plastic surgery because they do not have self confidence. Actually, plastic surgery is not the only way to help us. There are many other ways to help us look better. If a person is overweight, he or she can exercise and try to lose weight. Clothes and makeup can also help a person look better. Some people may be beautiful but don’t realize it because they have never dressed themselves nicely. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group A1, 1/13/09)

(2)

Nuj: Sometimes there are errors in the patient’s decision making. We think that we should respect the patient’s decision, but sometimes patients who suffer a lot from their disease may feel depressed and sad and feel pressured or burdened. These feelings are changing all the time because it’s a problem psychologically. These states of mind may cause the patient to make a wrong decision. (Euthanasia oral presentation, Group B1, 12/11/08)

(3)

Ploy: We all know that there are risks in plastic surgery. However, if the doctors are experts in cosmetic surgery and the hospitals or clinics are of good standards and high quality, it will be OK. Also, new advanced technology in cosmetic surgery makes it safer to perform now. And if the equipment is clean, it will reduce the risks of infection. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B2, 1/22/09) The last aspect that I will discuss is Aspect 4: how students summarize and analyze

supporting data and evidence from each viewpoint. This aspect explores how students 91  

summarize and analyze supporting data and evidence from each role presented on the WebQuest. In greater detail, I will examine how students summarize all information from each viewpoint presented on the WebQuest (sub-aspect 4.1); how they study the information and question its accuracy (sub-aspect 4.2); and how they provide appropriate evidence to support the group position on the presentation (sub-aspect 4.3). It should be noted that sub-aspect 4.1: how students summarize information from each viewpoint on the WebQuest, is closely related to sub-aspect 5.1: how students discuss and synthesize diverse perspectives related to the issue. However, sub-aspect 5.1 focuses more on how the students discuss and synthesize information from all perspectives while sub-aspect 4.1 aims at examining how students summarize the main points of the articles provided for each viewpoint on the WebQuest. With regard to how students summarized information from the WebQuest (sub-aspect 4.1), the overall results reveal that the students did a better summary of the articles from each viewpoint during the second WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery) than the first WebQuest (Euthanasia). In the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, all groups were able to cover the main ideas from the articles on the WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, 12/2/08, 12/11/08). On the other hand, in the Euthanasia WebQuest, Groups A1, A2 and B2 did not provide a thorough summary of all the articles presented; only Group B1 did a complete summary of the information (Euthanasia small group discussion, 12/2/08, 12/11/08). This might have resulted from the students adjusting to the activity more fully during this WebQuest, considering it was their third WebQuest activity (including the pilot WebQuest Piracy), and they were possibly able to manage their time better and thus to provide a more complete summary. In the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, all the groups took turns sharing the 92  

information from each viewpoint and this allowed them to cover all the main points more thoroughly (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery small group discussions, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). In comparison, during the Euthanasia WebQuest, most of the groups only raised the points they wanted; this limited the opportunity to gain all information from the viewpoint of each role. In addition, the students might have found the readings in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuests slightly easier to understand compared to the readings in the Euthanasia WebQuest, as evidenced by how they rated the difficulty of each set of readings in the questionnaire. The mean score for the readings’ difficulty in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest is 2.80 comparing to 3.60 for the Euthanasia WebQuest (for Class A). Similarly, the mean score for the readings’ difficulty for the Cosmetic Surgery (for Class B) WebQuest is 3.42 compared to 3.58 for the Euthanasia WebQuest. (Questionnaire results, 1/13/09, 1/22/09, see Appendix H). It is noteworthy that during the class held prior to the small group discussion, as part of the WebQuest activities, students were grouped into a role discussion. It was an activity that was added to the WebQuest activities in this study because, based on my previous experience of using WebQuest with EFL students, I theorized that it would support students’ reading of texts and provide the students with an opportunity to share opinions about their roles with fellow students who had the same role. According to the class observation notes (11/25/08, 12/9/08, 1/8/09, 1/20/09), during the role discussion the students were grouped according to their assigned role. They helped one another read the articles and discussed the information provided for the role. They were given a role sheet, on which they had to write summarized information from all the articles given for their role and the information that they wanted to share with their group members during the 93  

small group discussion in the next class session. The teachers told the students to read all the articles again after the class and complete the role sheet as homework. The role sheets were to be collected by the teachers after the group presentations in the following class period. Since the time for the role discussion was limited, the students usually helped one another read some or all of the articles, as time permitted, and shared the summarized information among the role group’s members so that they were all aware of this information from the articles and could discuss it and share their opinions on the issue (Role discussions, 11/25/08, 12/9/08, 1/8/09, 1/20/09). Both higher and lower proficiency students helped one another in scaffolding the reading assigned to them during the role discussion (Class observation notes, 11/25/08, 12/9/08, 1/8/09, 1/20/09). After each article was summarized, the students were engaged in discussing the information from the articles and sharing their opinions on the issue. Much of the activity time was devoted to discussing and sharing opinions on the information for the role. The data from the student interviews revealed that most of the students found the role discussion helpful for sharing opinions and supporting their comprehension of the texts used in the WebQuest (Student group interviews, 2/12/09). It provided them an opportunity to listen to the summary of all the articles before they read the articles again as homework to complete the role sheet. They also had an opportunity to discuss information and share opinions among the students who had the same role. The two excerpts below further explicate the students’ process during the role discussion and show how they found the activity helpful: (1) Researcher: You had a chance to discuss the articles first during the role group discussion? Wan: Yes. There were many articles for one role and sometimes we didn’t have enough time to read all of them [during the class]. We would divide the texts among our role group’s members. For example, if it was the doctor role, one person would read the first 94  

article for this role, another read the second article, and the others read the third article. Then we would summarize what article one said, what article two said, and what article three said. Then we would discuss our opinions. What would we do if we were the doctor? Then we would go back to our small group [during the next class] and share what the doctors’ perspectives were with our group members. So [the benefits of the role discussion were that] it’s not that we only share our own opinions as if we were the doctor, we also had a chance to listen to other opinions from people who were also in the doctor role. Their opinions might be different from ours. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) The example above details what Wan did during her role discussion. Since the time for the role discussion was limited, the members in the group divided all the articles to read and then shared the information among each other so that they could use it to better understand differing viewpoints.. Wan found that it was useful to discuss the information from the articles and share opinions with other students because she could learn more diverse perspectives from other students who took the same role. (2)

Researcher: Do you think that the role group helped you think about the role more? Which one do you prefer – getting in a group with the students from the same role first [before reading the articles on your own] or just reading the articles on your own and sharing it [the information] with other people [in your small group]? Nuj: Getting in a role group helped me understand the role better before I could share the information with other members in my [small] group who had different roles. Then we could arrive at the group’s position on the issue. So, I think getting in a role group first is useful. Nid: Getting in the role group first [before reading on my own] also allowed me to see the role more clearly. I could understand the information provided for that role better. Sometimes, we might misunderstand the texts, so getting in a role group helped us clarify our understanding of that role. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) Regarding how the students selected information to be included in the role sheet, that is,

how they summarized the information they would later share with their small group’s members, 95  

the results from the student interviews show that the students would locate the main ideas from each article, including interesting points that they wanted to share with their group members (Student group interviews, 2/12/09). Some of them also selected the information that could be used to refute arguments from other roles (Student group interviews, 2/12/09). The role sheets collected from the students reveal that all of the students summarized the main points of all the articles (Role sheets, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). However, the data indicate that some students provided more information from the articles than others. Higher proficiency students generally seemed to include information from all the articles in more detail compared to lower proficiency students (Role sheets, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). This probably indicates that higher proficiency students had read the articles more thoroughly and summarized all the information better. Among lower proficiency students, some students provided a thorough summary of all articles including detailed information, while others wrote only main ideas from each article and provided very few additional details. It was possible that those students who did not include as much information from the articles read the articles less thoroughly, or perhaps used the summary from the role discussions to “substitute” for their reading of the articles. The following four excerpts from student interviews illustrate how the students summarized the information on their role sheet. (1) Researcher: When you completed the role sheet, what criteria did you use when you selected the points to be put in the role sheet? In other words, how did you select the information that you would share with your group members? Kanya: I usually read all the articles and summarized the main points for each of the article. 96  

Naphat: I wrote down important points in each article. I read and wrote according to my understanding of the points so that I could share this information with other members and help them understand the points. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) The excerpt above shows that these two students in a higher proficiency group would find the main ideas of each article and include them in the role sheet. Naphat stated that writing the summary in his own words allowed him to relay the information to other group members better. (2)

Researcher: On the role sheet, how did you select the points that you wanted to write down to tell your friends later? Pim: I selected the points that were interesting, the ones that I had never seen or heard before and I wanted to know about. I would tell my friends about these points. Nuj: I wrote down the main points of the articles first and then wrote other details that I found interesting. Nid: I would write down the main ideas [of all the articles] first and then the points that I found interesting. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) The above excerpt from the higher proficiency Group B1 shows that the students in this

group included the main points of each article and the points that they found interesting on the role sheet. For Pim and Nid, who did not mention whether they included important information from all the articles, it is evident by their role sheets that they included the main ideas along with detailed information of the points they found interesting, as mentioned in this interview (Role sheets, 12/11/08, 1/22/09). (3)

Researcher: How did you select what information you wrote in the role sheet? Bam: I read all the articles and wrote the main ideas of all the articles. I also kept in mind the main question of the WebQuest. For example, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, they asked if we wanted to have plastic surgery. If we shared the information from every role, we would know if we wanted to do plastic surgery. 97

 

(Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09) The excerpt above indicates that Bam, a student from the lower proficiency Group A2, read and summarized all the articles. Her role sheet suggests that she provided a summary and detailed information from all the articles (Role sheets, 12/2/08, 1/13/09). (4)

Researcher: How did you select what to put on the role sheet? Am: I discussed it with people who had the same role and we selected what should be on the role sheet together. I selected the points that could counter the possible argument from other roles. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) The excerpt above shows that Am, a student from the lower proficiency Group B2, said

that she used the information learned from the role discussion in her role sheet. She would find the points that could be used to refute possible arguments from other roles. Her role sheet indicates that there were main ideas and information from each of the articles. However, she provided more information from some articles than from others (Role sheets, 12/11/08, 1/22/09). This may suggest that, for those articles which she did not provide much detailed information on, she possibly used information from the role discussion to substitute for reading of the articles. Another sub-category to be further explored is how the students examine the information and question its accuracy (sub-aspect 4.2). The results reveal that even though all the groups examined the information in the way that they summarized it and discussed the information from each role, they did not question the accuracy of the information (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery small group discussions, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). This may have resulted from how the WebQuest activities, used as supplementary reading activities in this course, were designed to correspond to the course objectives of ENG 123, which did not emphasize the evaluation of sources of information; instead, the focus was more on text comprehension. This is 98  

because, on the examinations, the students would be required to read one or two text passages, answer comprehension questions about the texts, and write a short response expressing their opinions on the issue of the texts (Teacher pre-project interviews, 10/2/08) According to Pichet and Naree, the teachers of this course, the students should be able to read and comprehend the articles as well as identify the author’s position on the issue and the strategies used to convince the readers. The students should also be able to express informed opinions and use information from the article to support their arguments. The two excerpts below show what the teachers expected of the students from this course: (1) Research: What is the goal of the course ENG 123? Pichet: It’s the same as what is stated in the course outline. First, students need to be able to analyze argumentative texts. They need to know the author’s purpose, and the strategies that the author used to convince the reader. The students also need to be able to reflect or give their opinions about the text. They should be able to discuss the topic read. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/2/08) (2) Researcher: What is the goal of the course? Naree: First, they should be able to get the main ideas of a text. Second, they should be able to know what the position of the author is on the issue. Third, they should be able to judge the author’s claims; in other words, to see if there is evidence to support his or her claims in the article. Fourth, they should be able to express their own opinions after reading someone else’s opinions, and support their opinions with reasons. And there are some minor things in terms of English skills that students might also get from the course… such as summarizing skills because students have to do summarizing in the term project. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/2/08 ) Not only were the WebQuests designed to correspond to the course objectives, the time constraints and the proficiency levels of the students in this course also limited the use of Internet searching and thus directed the students’ attention more on the texts provided in the WebQuests. 99  

Pichet described in the teacher’s WebQuest selection interview that he would prefer the WebQuests to contain a few specific links for the students to read: Researcher: What do you think about the links that contain a lot of information, or the links that require the students to do further Internet searching to get information? Pichet: I think it’s not suitable because our time is limited and students may choose only to read something they found first or whatever came up first. So, it should be clear which articles or which specific Internet links the students need to read to make sure that they read all the links which are required. Actually, in our situation or in our class, I think we should choose one or two main articles and ask the students to read them. Some students may have lower reading skills so they read quite slowly and may not be able to analyze and think about the texts quickly enough. Most of the students only had one English reading course in the past and the nature of that reading course was different from this course. The reading in the previous course seemed easier than in this course because there were more informative texts. So, students in this course still need time to decode texts. It already takes a lot of time to read and gain an understanding of the text, and this course also requires them to use the information in the text to discuss their opinions and support their opinions with evidence; so it’s a whole new level of reading for these students. (WebQuest selection interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) The last sub-aspect that will be discussed is how students provide evidence to support the group position during the presentation (sub-aspect 4.3). Even though all the groups discussed the reasons that they would use to support their evidence and included them in the PowerPoint slides, in the presentations some of the groups did not fully explain their reasons. They only mentioned the points used to support their position, without giving much further explanation. The results show that even though all the students discussed supporting evidence in the group discussion, the higher proficiency groups seemed able to explain their supporting reasons better than the lower proficiency groups during the presentations. The two excerpts below show how a higher proficiency group, Group B1, which disagreed with cosmetic surgery, and a lower 100  

proficiency group, Group B2, which supported cosmetic surgery, presented their reasons to support their positions. (1)

Pim: The cosmetic surgery could cause many bad effects to people who have undergone the operation such as social isolation, family problems, and self-destructive behaviors. The physicians had made mistakes during the malpractice and people have risked and suffered the worst outcome when the plastic surgery gone wrong. 8 Pim: There are risks in doing plastic surgery. If the results of a plastic surgery are not what the patient has expected, the person might isolate himself/herself and it can cause problems in the family. Some people just isolate themselves and lock themselves up. They might have strange behaviors. Many research studies show that mistakes in plastic surgeries have occurred often so there are many risks in doing plastic surgery. If the results are not what one has expected, the person has to suffer from it. An article I read gave an example of a person who paid 5,000 Baht for a nose job and the doctor said it would last 3 years. But it did not last this long. Also, the nose became crooked so she had to pay 5,000 Baht to remove the silicone. Pim: Another reason is that it is hard to monitor unqualified surgeons. Many doctors are allowed to do the cosmetic surgery without any certificate in a specialized field. It’s hard to specify the qualifications of doctor. Most doctors are allowed to do plastic surgeries even though they are not specialized in the field. This allows mistakes to occur. Nid: Lastly, having cosmetic surgery is not the last answer to solve the body problems. There is another way to be a good-looking person. Moreover, it reduces the value of selfesteem. Plastic surgery is not a solution to fix appearance. There are alternative ways to do it [fix appearance]. Women in the entertainment business need to be beautiful to get a job, so they do plastic surgery to make them look better. However, there are dangers in doing so like Michael Jackson who had so many cosmetic surgeries that his face looks strange. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B1, 1/22/09)

                                                             8

The quotes of participants speaking in English are presented as actually spoken, with no error correction.

 

101  

The excerpt above illustrated how Group B1 provided reasons and evidence to support their position of disagreeing with cosmetic surgery. They explained each point clearly and gave examples to illustrate their reasons. (2)

Sita: The next point is aiming to turn back the years. For older people, plastic surgery will make them look younger. Sita: The next point is good health and quality of life. It will make a person have a good quality of life, good health, and good looks. Am: The next point is from body image viewpoint. It will improve self-esteem to make people feel good about themselves. Plastic surgery will make a person have a higher selfesteem. Am: Next, it will make people love themselves, and they will love and respect the other. If someone loves himself, he can love and respect others. Another point is that it will make family life happier. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B2, 1/22/09) From the excerpt above, even though Group B2 provided reasons to support the group

position, they only mentioned each point without giving further explanations or examples for any of the reasons. Analysis of critical thinking by proficiency of the students Following the overall results of how the students used critical thinking skills presented above, in this section I will analyze how students used critical thinking by their proficiency. The aspects that both higher and lower proficiency students performed equally well on are Aspect 1: how students understand the main problem of the WebQuest; sub-aspect 3.1: how students provide a group position on the issue; and sub-aspect 5.1: how students discuss and synthesize information from diverse perspectives related to the issue during the group discussion.

102  

With regard to Aspect 1, both higher and lower proficiency students seemed to understand the main problem of the WebQuest well. The results show that, on the whole, both higher and lower proficiency students performed equally well in their comprehension. In addition, they were able to form a group position on the issue (sub-aspect 3.1), as evident by their group discussions (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery small group discussion, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09) and the oral presentations (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery PowerPoint and oral presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). In doing so, both higher and lower proficiency students had thoroughly discussed and synthesized information from all the viewpoints presented in the WebQuest (sub-aspect 5.1). The overall results from these three aspects, therefore, suggest that both higher and lower proficiency students were able to participate in the discussion and synthesize information from all the perspectives to form a group’s position, resulting in a thorough understanding of the issue, at an equally skilled level. In a similar fashion, both higher and lower proficiency students did a better summary of the information provided on the second WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery) than on the first (Euthanasia) (sub-aspect 4.1). This might have resulted from the fact that the readings for the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest were easier for these students than readings for the Euthanasia WebQuest, as evident in the questionnaire results when all the students rated the readings for the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest as easier. (Questionnaire results, 1/13/09, 1/22/09, see Appendix H). The aspects that higher proficiency students seemed to perform better on than lower proficiency students are sub-aspect 3.3: how students integrate contrary viewpoints in the presentations; sub-aspect 4.3: how students use evidence to support their position in the presentations; and sub-aspect 5.2: how students integrate information from all the perspectives in 103  

the presentations. These three sub-aspects all involve how students presented their positions and opinions on the WebQuest issues in the presentations. Higher proficiency students did significantly better in providing reasons to support their group’s position during the oral presentations than lower proficiency students (sub-aspect 4.3) (Oral group presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). The students from the higher proficiency groups explained the reasons to support their position in detail while the lower proficiency groups only listed claims to support their position without offering detailed evidence during the oral presentations (Oral group presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). In a similar manner, on the PowerPoint slides, even though all the slides were composed in English, the higher proficiency groups mostly used their own words while the lower proficiency groups, although using some of their own words, cut and pasted a number of sentences from the articles, especially Group A2 (PowerPoint slides, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). This group mostly used copied sentences from the articles in their PowerPoint slides whereas another lower proficiency group, Group B2, used their own words to describe the reasons to support their position and used copied sentences from the articles as examples (PowerPoint slides, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). This might have resulted from the fact that the higher proficiency students had better English skills and more vocabulary knowledge than the lower proficiency students, so that they were able to better compose sentences using their own words. Similarly, the higher proficiency students generally seemed to do better at providing the contrary viewpoints (sub-aspect 3.3) and integrating information from all the perspectives (subaspect 5.2) than the lower proficiency students in the presentations. On closer examination, the lower proficiency Group B2 also received a high rating on these two aspects and this implies 104  

that, in the presentations, they were able to integrate information from all the perspectives and provide viewpoints contrary to their position on the issue on a level similar to the higher proficiency students. In contrast, another lower proficiency group, A2, provided information from only selected perspectives on the presentations and did not include contrary viewpoints to their presentations (Oral group presentations, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). The results therefore suggest that the students in Group A2, most of whom had the lowest language proficiency levels among all four groups, probably had limited English writing skills and vocabulary knowledge; consequently, they were unable to effectively compose the slides using their own words and thus were not able to integrate the information from all perspectives, including the contrary viewpoints, as skillfully as other groups of students in the presentations. Finally, when critical thinking skills were analyzed by proficiency in relation to Aspect 2: how students consider relevant contexts; sub-aspect 3.2: how students use experience and external knowledge to examine information; and sub-aspect 4.2: how students question the accuracy of the information provided on the WebQuests; the differences in students’ thinking patterns were not tied to their respective proficiency levels, in contrast to findings for several aspects listed above. As previously discussed in this chapter, for these sub-aspects, other factors such as the nature of the WebQuest topic; students’ prior knowledge on the issue; and the characteristics of the WebQuest activity, had more impact on the students’ use of critical thinking than the language proficiency and thus no emerging themes of critical thinking use between higher and lower proficiency students were found.

105  

Students’ use of critical thinking at the individual level Even though group work is vital to the WebQuest activity, more insights into students’ use of critical thinking could be obtained if we explore how students use critical thinking at an individual level. In order to do that, I will examine the students’ two written assignments responding to the questions similar to the main questions of the Euthanasia WebQuest and the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest. Based on information from the regular class observations (11/11/08, 11/13/08); the teacher interviews (3/2/09); and the course outline, during a regular class, after the students finished reading a passage in the textbook, they were often asked to write a short response answering a question about their position and opinions on the passage. The assignments were not graded because they were used to promote writing as a way to express informed opinions on an issue. Instead, the students were given a few points when they turned the assignments in. The two teachers and I agreed to ask the students to do a similar type of assignment for these WebQuests. Each student wrote a one- to two-paragraph response to a question similar to the main question of each of the WebQuests. The students were usually given four or five days to complete the assignment and turn it in. For the first WebQuest (Euthanasia), the students were asked to do the following: Write a short response to the question below. What if? You were the patient and you had been sick and in so much pain, the doctors told you they could not do anymore for you. They told you would eventually die but it was going to be slow and painful death when you died. Your physician told you when you felt you could not tolerate it any more; he would help you speed up the process. What would you do? Lie in bed in so much pain which could last as long as five years, or would you ask the doctor to speed up death? From the situation above, would you want euthanasia legalized in Thailand so that in the future you will have the option of euthanasia when you need it? 106  

Give your opinions with reasons to support your answer. You should also consider all of the 3 perspectives (the 3 roles) that have been discussed in this class and include them in your answer. (The writing prompt from the Right to Die WebQuest) For the second WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery), the writing prompt was: Write a short response to this question: If you had enough money, would you have cosmetic surgery to enhance your looks? Why? Give your opinions with reasons to support your answer. You should also consider all of the 3 perspectives (the 3 roles) that have been discussed in this class and include them in your answer. (The writing prompt from the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest) I used a writing rubric developed from the Critical Thinking Rubric that was used to analyze the students’ discussion, as presented in the previous section of this chapter, to evaluate the students’ writings in terms of their use of critical thinking. I included in this writing rubric the aspects that were associated with these written assignments, that is, the aspects that were relevant to what the teacher asked the students to do in these assignments. The aspects that were selected to be included in the writing rubric were Aspect 3: how students develop a position; Aspect 4: how students synthesize supporting information and evidence from each viewpoint; and Aspect 5: how students discuss and integrate information from relevant perspectives. As a result, in order to examine how each student used critical thinking in their writing, I will explore how they included their positions on the issue (Aspect A), how they used information from all the viewpoints in the WebQuest (Aspect B) , and how they used evidence to support their position (Aspect C) (see Appendix E). I collected two writing assignments, one

107  

from the Euthanasia and the other from the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, from each of the students in the four groups which participated in this study. For the first aspect, all of the students had a clear position on the issue (see Appendix I). The results show that some students had a different position from their group’s position (Written assignments, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). It is therefore suggested that this writing assignment provided a place for the students to express their individual opinions on the issue. With regard to the second aspect (Aspect B: how students use information from all the viewpoints in the WebQuest to support their position), half of the students in all the groups used the information from all three perspectives on each WebQuest to support their position (see Appendix I). All of the students from class B except one, incorporated information from all three perspectives on each WebQuest into their writing (Written assignments, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). However, only some of the students from class A did so. Many of them, mostly lower proficiency students, in addition to almost exclusively using their own opinions, only included information from one or two relevant perspectives. The selected perspectives were mostly the ones that seemed closer to them, such as from the patient’s point of view in the Euthanasia WebQuest or from the body image point of view in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest. They tended to not include information from the perspectives that were not as relevant to them, such as the doctor’s or the lawyer’s perspectives. This might have resulted from the fact that the majority of students in class A expressed mostly their own opinions and thus used information from the perspectives closest to them to support their own opinions. For the last aspect (Aspect C: how students used evidence to support their position), overall some students were able to use information to support their position better than others (see Appendix I). Many students were able to fully explain the reasons that they used to support 108  

their position. Not only did they provide ample explanation to support their position, they also used information from the articles and from their experience as supporting evidence. On closer examination, most of the students from class B, except two, were able to explain their reasons and provide supporting evidence well (Written assignments, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09) whereas only a few students in Class A were able to do so. Most of the students in Class A, mainly lower proficiency students, used their own opinions to support their position without providing evidence from the texts or from outside resources. Based on the findings, the fact that all the students in Class B received high ratings on all three aspects for the second WebQuest (Cosmetic Surgery) might have resulted from how the teacher in Class B, although not grading the papers, provided individual feedback on the content of the first writing assignment. Thus, the students could learn from the feedback and improve their second writing assignments; every participant from Class B received a high rating for all aspects in the second writing (Class observation notes, 1/22/09; Written assignments, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). The excerpt below shows how Pichet, the teacher for Class B, encouraged the students to use supporting evidence from all the perspectives presented on the WebQuests in addition to their own opinions during the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest class. Pichet: From the last assignment [on Euthanasia], not everyone did well on that assignment. Some of you used too much of your own opinions and did not incorporate enough supporting evidence from the three perspectives [on Euthanasia]. In this assignment [on Cosmetic Surgery] you should use supporting evidence from the articles. You have read all the articles and written a summary on the role sheet. You should use that information as supporting evidence. Apart from the information from the WebQuests, you can also add some support from your own opinions… (Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest class, Class B, 1/22/09)

109  

Before I present examples of the writings that received higher and lower ratings, it should be noted that the writings were not graded for language and the students were told to focus only on the ideas, such as their position on the issue and supporting evidence, and not so much on the grammar that it restrained them from expressing their opinions. The teachers wanted to use this assignment to promote writing as a way to give informed opinions on an issue (Regular class observations, 11/11/08, 11/13/08; Teacher interviews, 3/2/09). Naree, the teacher for Class A, suggested in the pre-project interview that, “I usually make the written assignment a platform for them [the students] to express their informed opinions and not have to worry about grades. But I won’t let the students know that I would give them full score if they just turn the writing in” (Translated from the pre-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09). Below are examples 9 of student writings that represent those which were overall rated as higher and lower on critical thinking use. On the high level, the students had a clear position on the issue and sufficiently elaborated supporting reasons from various perspectives on the topic. Half of the students’ writings from all groups fell into this category. The three examples below illustrate the writings that received high ratings on all the three aspects. (1)

In my opinion, I think that we should legalize euthanasia in Thailand because I think it is about right. People who severely ill until they think they can not bear to live should have a right to die. So they will not be suffer but euthanasia should have a rigid regulation to stop people from using it for persuasion or coercion to get people to request euthanasia when they don't really want it such as people who be put under pressure to end their lives, people who don’t have enough money to pay for medicine, and who think it is a burden to his/her family to stay alive. About how to make a decision for the patients who will get to die ,there should be an expert doctors to diagnose which there might be only few doctors in Thailand, so I think we should ask for foreign expert doctors to diagnose whether we should do euthanasia or not. About the moral issue, doctors who kill

                                                             9

All quotes are presented without error correction. 110

 

(Written assignment on Euthanasia from Am, Group B2) (2)

Nowadays, cosmetic surgery is being approved dramatically, but as for me, I am against the surgery such a thing. I am sure that I would not consider having cosmetic surgery to make myself look any better. Even or not I have enough money, it doesn’t matter to be a vital factor at all. There is variety of significant reasons to not having a cosmetic surgery. First of all, the cosmetic surgery could only make people look better in external appearances. Physical appearances especially artificial beauty is not permanent especially when it comes through men’s opinion according to the passage provided in WebQuest. Second, the cosmetic surgery could cause many bad effects. As soon as the operation has been finished, the patient himself was put in pain of long-standing daily. People who undergo the operation would more likely to face the problems such as social isolation, family problems, and self-destructive behaviors. Some of the patients went further; they committed suicide. During the malpractice, the physicians had made mistakes and people have risked and suffered the worst outcomes when the plastic surgery gone wrong. For example, one of my friends had gone for the operation to fix her nose’s shape, after a while, she ended up paying more money to remove the silicone by repeating the same procedure again. Even though people could be successful if the surgery went well, but regularly they often face jealousy of other people. They might get a job easier than those who are not good-looking people. Another point is that it is hard to monitor unqualified surgeons. Many doctors are allowed to do the cosmetic surgery without any a certificate in a specialized field but the number of having cosmetic surgery has increased 44 percent during a year. Most of the Korea’s teenagers have undergone the cosmetic surgery after the high school’s graduation just because they wanted to have girlfriend/boyfriend. Last, having cosmetic surgery is NOT the last answer to solve the body problems. There is another way to be as a good-looking people such as training personality, acting occasionally, and being outgoing person. Moreover, it reduces the value of self-esteem starting right after he/she thinks to do the surgery. In conclusion, patients have their own responsibility to ask question before the operation, to consider health effects as the first priority, to educate themselves about the pros and cons, and to follow the instruction from a physician. These ways cause small amount of poor outcomes and patient could be satisfied with their expections. (Written assignment on Cosmetic Surgery from Pim, Group B1) 111

 

(3)

Normally, beauty and women are like intimate friends. Everybody wants to be the perfect person, me too! A number of women think that body image is the most important thing that can increase their confidence. So, women care about their looks because they want to attract others. They want everyone to admire them or they feel they will not be successful in their jobs. But what is the cause of this idea? Absolutely, it is the media that has a powerful influence over people. The media presents celebrities who have a firmly shape, sexy body, and beautiful face. But in fact, almost of them have undergone cosmetic surgery. These affect the thinking of many women. So, lots of women think that cosmetic surgery is the best way to change their appearance. For me, if I have enough money, I will not have cosmetic surgery. There are many reasons for why cosmetic surgery is not the best answer to enhance my looks. The first, the achievements in our life do not come from body image. When we apply for a job, the appearance is the first that that we see, it is like a first impression. However, that does not show the ability I have. On the other hand, there are other things that are more important than appearances such as personality, knowledge, and experience. Another reason is that not every surgery will be successful. Although, we have advanced technologies of surgery, doctor still make mistakes. We can not foreknow that these mistakes will happen with us or not. If cosmetic surgery fails, it may have harmful consequences for our lives. These are many examples of Hollywood stars who have terrible pain because of cosmetic surgery like Michel Jackson, David Gest, Jocelyn Wildenstein, etc. Especially Jocelyn, she has have lots of positions of cosmetic surgery on her body; making eyes like cat’s eyes, face lift, lip implants, cheek implants, chin implant, breast implants, liposuction etc. They have spent lots of money so that they can transform to a perfect person. Body image is just an external beauty. We can not decide who is good or bad, clever or not from the outside. On the contrary, the most important characteristics are confidence in what we are and self esteem from the inner. (Written assignment on Cosmetic Surgery from Nuj, Group B1) The student writings that received a lower rating are the ones that, even though they

presented a clear position on the issue, provided reasons that were mostly drawn from their own opinions and failed to use sufficient evidence from the texts or outside resources to support their reasons. Even though some of them used supporting reasons derived from relevant perspectives on the issue, these viewpoints were treated lightly with no clear explanation for the point being made. The justification seemed limited and repetitive. 112  

(1)

First of all, I’ll make sure the doctor told me the correct. If it was correct for me, absolutely I want the euthanasia legalized in Thailand. Because if that one from the above situation was me, I don’t know why do I have to live on? My family have to pay too much for prolong my life if I need it. It’s nonsense to do that, finally I must die. Every life has to die, and it’s just faster for me. From the given situation, I have been sick and in so much pain, so it’s so much pain and I think I can’t resist it for too long. If I really pain for many times, it’s better to get a so much pain for once and die. But if I can’t get a mercy killing from the doctor I’ll suicide. That’s sure! I’ll do it if I were that. It’s the good way for my family – save their money and times and myself. I don’t want to be a hard work for them. Although, it has so much regret but I’ll die peacefully and my relative will keep me in their heart as natural die. (Written assignment on Euthanasia from Dew, Group A2)

(2)

Euthanasia should be legalized in Thailand because I think we have the rights in our life though as doctor’s false. But I will die as peacefully, and the doctor is chosen to manage my life by myself. In fact, if we think euthanasia is good, if we ready to die, our family will be more pleasure then watch I resist to suffering, continuing treatment for many medical conditions. In the future, if the euthanasia legalized in Thailand I don’t know what will be happened for my life. May be it’s not only me that choose to end my life as peacefully and ready to die. Before everything going to be late – worse body, worse mind. If I have no any pain or I can stand toward everyone, I will choose to fight for tomorrow. (Written assignment on Euthanasia from Thida, Group A2)

(3)

Yes, because I feel good when I good looking. If I have more money I choose the best clinic for my surgery, self-confident and least failure. I do not care that someone need me to be mother of their son or not. I think that getting plastic surgery is depend on each people. Getting plastic surgery can’t change physical appearance not change about habit. If habit can change, it causes from anyone around you. My physical appearance is from my parents and they pleased that me is me and pleased that me is a good children for them. (Written assignment on Cosmetic Surgery from Thida, Group A2)

113  

Summary of students’ critical thinking use during WebQuests In conclusion, overall the students were able to engage in critical thinking during the discussion in the WebQuest activity at a relatively high level. They examined information provided in the articles and considered the information from various perspectives involved in the issue. Even though they did not judge the accuracy of the information, they used personal experience and external knowledge to evaluate if the information could be trusted. After examining the information provided, they were able to arrive at a group’s decision on the issue, indicating that they had an understanding of the problem central to the WebQuest. However, even though most students were able to engage in a thoughtful discussion, not every student was able to effectively transfer their judgment of information from the discussions into the products of the WebQuest activity in an equally thoughtful manner. Higher proficiency students seemed better able to utilize critical thinking skills in the form of a more thorough integration of relevant information from all perspectives into the presentations and the written assignments; they could thus support their position better than the lower proficiency students. Even though lower proficiency students were able to show their position on the issue, they provided less detailed explanation from selected perspectives to support their positions, both in the presentations and the written assignments. As a result, the final works created by the lower proficiency students seem to show a less developed level of critical thinking than the higher proficiency students.

114  

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS (2) This chapter discusses the findings for the second and third research questions. The second research question focuses on the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in the WebQuest classes. The data were collected from the regular and WebQuest class observations, the transcriptions of student group discussions, the interviews with teachers and students, and student questionnaires. For the third research question, the data were drawn from the regular and WebQuest class observations, the transcriptions of student group discussions, the interviews with the teachers and the students, student oral presentations and PowerPoint slides, student written assignments, and student questionnaires. Research Question #2: What was the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson? To examine how the teacher plays a role in supporting critical thinking skills in a WebQuest class, I will look for recurrent themes to emerge from data obtained during observations of both the traditional and the WebQuest classes, along with interview data obtained from the teachers and the students. In order to discuss the role of the teachers in supporting critical thinking, I would like to first describe the characteristics of the ENG 123 course, along with the role of the teachers in the regular class so that the connection between the regular and the WebQuest class can be established; this will be used as the background for describing how the teachers played a role in the WebQuest classes.

115  

ENG 123 was an intermediate reading course for English major and English minor students that focused primarily on reading argumentative passages in the textbook and secondarily on encouraging students to express their opinions on the passages read. Throughout this reading course, students had to read six argumentative passages, each in separate chapters of the textbook. The teachers would closely guide the students in reading and translating a passage to help the students with a reading comprehension exercise at chapter’s end. The second section of a chapter comprised instructions on reading skills such as refutation, finding the main ideas of a text, and figurative language, along with the reading comprehension exercises. Following the reading skills exercises, the students were often asked to write a short journal entry as homework, expressing their opinions on the issue raised in the passage. These class procedures were usually completed in four to five 1.5-hour class sessions. Since this course was teacher-focused, the teachers were usually centrally involved in class activities and provided guided reading instruction (Regular class observation notes, 11/11/08, 11/13/08; Teacher interviews, 10/3/08, 3/2/09). Pichet, the teacher for Class B, was more experienced and had taught this course several times; Naree, the teacher for Class A, was less experienced, having only taught this course once before. Prior to this class, Naree had had a brief experience of using a WebQuest in another English course while Pichet, in contrast, had never used WebQuests previously. Before the semester started, the two teachers were given a lesson plan and guidance in using WebQuest. The teachers were told to follow the lesson plan, which contained normal WebQuest activity procedures. However, during the activity they were invited to use any teaching strategies deemed appropriate for the students. In order to understand the overall role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking, a description of what teachers did during a regular class will first be provided. The regular class 116  

procedures for both Naree’s and Pichet’s classes were similar. It usually started with the teachers guiding the students carefully in reading a passage. Sometimes the teachers would translate a paragraph or ask the students to take turns translating a paragraph for the class. The teachers would point out and clarify some vocabulary or sentence structures that the students might not have understood and make sure that everyone had comprehended the passage correctly. After that, the teachers would ask the students to do comprehension exercises, which were mostly on the main ideas of the texts, the author’s position on the issue, and supporting evidence. The teachers then gave the correct answers to the exercises at the end of the class. Additionally, the teachers would instruct students in the reading skills, such as understanding figurative language, paraphrasing, or finding main ideas of an article, and later provided practice exercises for students (Regular class observation notes, 11/11/08, 11/13/08; Teachers interview, 10/3/08, 3/2/09). In sum, the regular class of this course was structured such that knowledge was transmitted from teachers to students, who passively received the information. The excerpt below shows how Naree, the teacher for Class A, viewed her role as a teacher in the regular class. She saw herself as someone who guided the students to read the texts and encouraged the students to think about passages and participate in the class discussions. Researcher: What is the role of the teacher in the course ENG 123? Naree: Guide the students to see what the text is saying. Provide guidance to students so that they know if they understand the text correctly. Stimulate students to think about the issue and participate in the class discussion. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08)

117  

Similarly, Pichet, the teacher for class B, viewed his role in the regular class as someone who guided the students to read and analyze the texts and encouraged them to express informed opinions on the topic. Researcher: What is the role of the teacher in ENG 123? Pichet: First, guide the students to read the text because argumentative text is complicated and the author uses many techniques to convince the readers. Help students see what the author wants to communicate, where he uses irony to convey some meanings. So we need to help students to interpret the meaning of the text to see what the author wants to convey and whether the author is being sarcastic or not. So the first role is that teachers help students analyze the text where it’s too difficult for the students to understand. Second, teachers need to stimulate students and encourage them to think about the issue and express their opinions. The third role is to be a moderator when students have discussions about the topic of the passage at the end of a chapter. At the end of the chapter, sometimes we have an activity like role play or debate so I will act as the facilitator to lead that activity. I sometimes play the devil’s advocate role to challenge students to think about the issue from another perspective and discuss more. The last role is to give feedback to students. For example, to correct them when they do the exercises in the textbook, to see if they understand the text correctly, or to see if they have enough evidence to support their opinion when writing journals. But, I think the role of the teacher to correct students’ language is not the main objective of this course. I usually don’t teach much grammar or English language per se in this course compared to other English courses. I usually focus on reading technique such as analyzing the author’s opinions. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) It was, therefore, evident that both teachers viewed their role in the regular class as someone who helped the students to understand the texts and also encouraged them to think critically about the texts and express their opinions.

118  

Since WebQuest is a learner-centered activity that contains well-structured steps and focuses on group work, it allows the students to gain more control of the activity, compared to a traditional teacher-centered class. The role of the teacher in a WebQuest class is therefore often viewed as lessened from being the leader of class activities to being a coach who facilitates students’ learning. Pichet said in the post-project interview that when WebQuest activity became part of a class, the role of the teachers seemed to be reduced and student-centered learning seemed to be increased. The excerpt below illustrates these points: Researcher: The role of the teacher in a WebQuest class is similar or different from that in a regular class? Pichet: Slightly different. During the regular class, the teacher has a more dominant role in the class. I have to explain the texts and teach reading skills. But, in a WebQuest class, students play a more important role. The role of the teacher is decreased. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) Similarly, from Naree’s experience with WebQuest, the role of the teacher during a WebQuest class seemed reduced from being the focus of the class to facilitating the students’ learning during the activity. The excerpt below shows how Naree, the teacher for Class A, summarized the difference between the role of the teacher in a regular class and in that of a WebQuest class. Researcher: What is the difference between the role of the teacher in the regular class and the WebQuest class? Naree: In the regular class, I was the leader of the class 100%. My role was to provide information for the students. Sometimes the students shared something but mostly it was my job to give them information. But in the WebQuest class, it was like the students gave information to me. I listened to their ideas and summarized [their ideas] for them [the class]. In the regular class, I would summarize the information for the students, but in the WebQuest class they summarized information for me. So you can see the picture. 119  

(Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) As a result, it would be interesting to see how the two teachers adapted to their new role of supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest class. The data analysis revealed three themes, namely the role of the teacher in facilitating text comprehension, the role of the teacher in encouraging student discussion, and role change. Each theme will be discussed in detail below. The role of the teacher in facilitating text comprehension An important role for teachers in a WebQuest class is to facilitate students’ learning and provide guidance for students when reading the articles. Before the students participated in a group discussion, they had to read several articles, gathering information necessary to understand the issue. As a result, text comprehension was necessary before students were able to engage in the discussion. This section will illustrate how the two teachers played a role in supporting reading comprehension of articles for the WebQuest. The overall results revealed that even though both teachers provided guidance for the students in reading and understanding the articles, they did so in differing ways. At the beginning of the role discussion activity, during which the students were divided into different roles and read the articles provided for their roles, both teachers would explain to the students what they needed to do in the class, point out the links to be explored on the WebQuest and organize the seating of the group so that students knew where they had to be. Naree: As a person, you may agree or disagree with Euthanasia. 10 But as a lawyer, as a doctor, or a family member of those terminally ill patients, what would you think? What we’ll do next is on the process page. Among your group members, choose a role. If there are four people in your group, there may be two people for one role.                                                              10

 The quotes of participants speaking in English are presented as actually spoken, with no error

correction. 120  

For the doctor role, you sit here on the first row. For the lawyer role, you can sit in the middle. And for the family members role you can sit in the back. After you get into your role group, you can read the articles provided for your role. Just follow the links under your role and read the articles. You should write down the points that you might later use to agree or disagree with euthanasia. Then you should discuss what you have read with your role group members. (Euthanasia role discussion, Class A, 11/25/08) The excerpt above illustrates how Naree provided directions for the students before they began the role discussion activity. She explained how the students should be divided and where to sit, along with where to find the articles in the WebQuest and what to do during the activity. For Pichet, not only did he give these same kinds of directions to the students, he also reminded the students of the reading strategies that they could use to read the articles in a limited time for the role discussion. Pichet: You don’t need to read every word. Just get the main idea of the articles and see if each article is for or against euthanasia and what the main reasons which they used to support their position are. You should also write down the main points so that you can share the information with your group. If you don’t know the meaning of a word, you can ask your group members or me. (Euthanasia WebQuest class, 12/9/08) The excerpt above shows how Pichet made sure that the students knew how to read the articles. Since the time available for this activity was limited and the students could read these articles in detail at home when they completed the role sheets, Pichet encouraged the students to focus more on the main ideas and supporting details so that they could participate in a discussion of the information during this activity in the class. The results from the role sheets, where students had to summarize the main points of the articles, suggest that most students, except some lower proficiency students, read the articles in more detail later at home; this was evident in how many students recapitulated the information from the articles in more detail while some 121  

lower proficiency students used the summary given during the discussion to substitute for their reading. During the role discussion, the two teachers usually circulated the class and made themselves accessible for answering the students’ questions. Both teachers indicated in the interviews that they moved around the class and made themselves available if a student needed to ask them anything. From my class observations (WebQuest class observation notes, 12/2/08, 1/8/09), Naree usually circulated the class and stopped at each group to listen to the students’ discussion. She would see if any students had questions to ask. The excerpt below gives an example of how the students sought help from Naree to clarify a word. Student: Could you please explain what “regulation” means? Naree: It means the law…or the rules that are set to control things. (Euthanasia role discussion, Class A, Lawyer role, 11/25/08) Even though some students asked Naree to explain some words or sentences, from the videotapes of Naree’s classes (11/25/08 – 1/13/09) and the transcriptions of the students’ discussion (11/25/08 – 1/13/09), the results show that the students mostly used an online dictionary to search for the meaning of a word or sought help from other members in the group for clarification of the meaning of a word or sentence. Many students asked higher proficiency students in the group to explain these meanings. Only a few students asked Naree for clarification of some vocabulary or sentences. It seemed that only when they did not get an answer from an online dictionary or from a student in their group, they would ask Naree for help. The excerpt below illustrates a case where a student found the meaning of a word which she could not find in her electronic dictionary. She first asked the members in her group if anyone knew the meaning. A member in the group searched the word in an online dictionary and 122  

still could not find the meaning. Only then did they approach the teacher and ask for the meaning of this word, which in fact was a typographical error of the word “initiate”. Student 1: (Asking another student in the group) What does “intitiate” mean? I could not find in my electronic dictionary. Student 2: Let me check with the online dictionary. (Searching for the word in an online dictionary.) umm… nothing. Anybody knows what intitiate mean? (She asked other group members. Some members said they did not know the meaning.) Maybe we should ask the teacher. Student 2: (Turning to the teacher.) What does intitiate mean? Is it a typo? I couldn’t find it anywhere? Naree: (look at the article) Yes, it’s a typo. It’s initiate. Students 1 and 2: Thank you. (Euthanasia role discussion, Doctor role, Group A1, 11/25/08) As a result, the overall findings show that Naree seemed to do what many teachers in a learner-centered class might have done, which was to monitor the class and ensure that she would always be available for the students to ask questions while not interfering with the students’ group work. In the middle of the activity, while the students were engaged in role group discussion, Naree moved around the class and sometimes stopped at certain groups to listen to the students’ discussion. However, she did not participate in the discussion nor express her opinions to the group. This may be because she viewed the role of the teacher as being reduced to someone who “organized” the class – to make sure that the students knew what they needed to do and how much time they had available to complete each step of the task. As a result, some of the reading responsibilities for the class were passed on to the students. The excerpt below shows how Naree perceived the role of a teacher in a WebQuest class. Researcher: What is the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class?

123  

Naree: The role of the teachers is reduced. Teachers don’t have to explain the text because students help each other in reading the text. Teachers will only answer the questions if students have one. All the instructions are there in the WebQuest so the teachers don’t need to do that [giving instructions to students] that much. Teachers just help to explain when students misunderstand something. Teachers just circulate the class and help students when they have questions. Teachers just organize the class, such as monitor the time or the procedures of the activity. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08) In a similar manner, Pichet also circulated the class and assured the students that he would be willing to help them with the texts and answer any questions they might have. However, not only did he make it clear that he would be available when a student needed help, he approached every group to ask if anyone had questions and encourage the students to ask. He also noticed if there were any less proficient students who seemed to need help with the texts. He described in an excerpt below how he would initiate a move to help the students, especially lower proficiency students, because he knew that some students might be too afraid to ask the teacher a question. He wanted to make sure that everyone understood the main ideas of the texts. Pichet: …Second, I have to help lower proficiency students in reading the texts because they usually read more slowly. I have to be accessible for them so that they can ask for the meaning of vocabulary or the meaning of some sentences. I also have to observe which students seem to need help because some students might be afraid to ask. I usually provided a lot of help with reading the texts because if the students did not understand the texts, it would be difficult for them to express their opinions. So, I had to make sure the students understood the texts and the main question of the WebQuest. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) In order to ensure students’ comprehension of texts, he seemed to be closely involved with the students’ reading. Even though the amount of time did not permit him to wait until every group finished reading all the articles, he approached every group and asked the students to summarize what they had read so far to check reading comprehension. The students would 124  

summarize the articles for him and discuss the content. The excerpt below illustrates how Pichet went to a group during the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest to ask the students to summarize the article they had read. He asked questions and gave examples of some points mentioned in the article so that the students had an appropriate comprehension of the readings. Pichet: How might cosmetic surgeries have negative effects on our body? Student 1: The results of surgery may not be what we expected. Pichet: Right. The article talks about some negative side effects of cosmetic surgery such as bleeding and infection. Student2: Also dead tissue. Pichet: Right. Dead tissue; the muscles lost feelings. Also, some wounds may take a lot of time to heal. There’s also anesthetic risk. Student 3: There’s a news story in Thailand about a doctor in Chiang Mai who gave anesthetic to a patient during cosmetic surgery and then the patient died. Pichet: Right. There’s side effects. If you give a patient too much anesthetic, the patient may be shocked or have an allergic reaction to some medicine. These are physical side effects. How about social or psychological side effects? Student 2: When you have cosmetic surgery, sometimes you can’t accept the results. For example, after you do cosmetic surgery, people will pay more attention to you, and sometimes that make you feel embarrassed. Pichet: Right. For example, if a woman has breast implants, people would pay attention to her. Would she feel uncomfortable about that? Student 2: Some people might feel that after they have cosmetic surgery, they still feel ugly, so they will do another cosmetic surgery. Pichet: It’s a cycle. Student 2: Yes. And there are some people who are addicted to cosmetic surgery. When they do it, they feel proud, so they will do cosmetic surgery again--a little bit more of this and a bit more of that. Pichet: Right. So there are negative side effects in terms of the physical, social and psychological. (Cosmetic Surgery role discussion, Doctor role, Class B, 1/20/09)

125  

In a similar manner, when Pichet noticed that some students misinterpreted a reading, he would guide them towards the correct understanding. The excerpt below shows how a student thought that the article she read agreed with euthanasia when only the first part of the article offered the reasons why some people might agree with euthanasia. However, the second part of the article, which she probably had not read closely, offered the real position of the author on the issue; he did not support euthanasia. Pichet explained to the student that she missed an important piece of information in the second part of the article which indicated the true position of the author. Pichet: Could you summarize what you have read from the article, so I can help you see if you understand it correctly? Student 1: The article I read said that it agrees with mercy killing. It will mainly consider the patient’s condition and see if he wants to die. If the patient wants to die, they will allow mercy killing. Pichet: umm…The first part of this article said it agrees with euthanasia but ... What reasons do they have? What does ‘fair distribution of health resources’ mean here? Do you remember? This is like the main reason the article gives. (Student 1 paused and tried to look in the article.) Pichet: It’s OK. Just tell me what you understand. Don’t worry if it’s right or wrong. Student 1: [pause] Fair distribution means … (Students seemed hesitant to tell the teacher what the article said.) Pichet: OK. I will tell you what the first part of the article said. It said some people agree with euthanasia because in some countries there’s a shortage of health resources. So, if someone wants to die, we should just let them die because at least we can have that health resource reserved for someone else who still wants to live. The first part of the article said we should allow people who want euthanasia to die because of health resources. But you have to finish the second part of the article. It said there are objections to this issue. You have to read through the article to see why...why giving health resources to someone else may not be right. Student 1: The author said it will not convince people to believe that mercy killing is the right thing to do in the society? 126  

Pichet: Right! The main reasons they give to oppose euthanasia is that this kind of thinking is too pragmatic. It does not consider moral issues. If we allow it, it will be open to wide abuse (saying “abuse” in English). Abuse (said in English.) means using it in the wrong way. For example, if a hospital wants to have more rich patients, they can tell poor patients that death is an option for them. We can arrange death for you so you don’t have to suffer. You see that this kind of idea can be abused. Then more people will want euthanasia the minute they feel that they are a burden to society. So this is wrong. So you see this article is actually disagreeing with euthanasia, not agreeing. The article said some people think that we should have euthanasia because so and so but the author disagrees with those ideas and gives reasons why it’s wrong. You can read this article in more detail later. Student 1: OK. Now I got it. (Euthanasia role discussion, Class B, Doctor role, 12/9/08) In comparison to the regular class, it seemed that even though Pichet acknowledged that the role of the teacher would be different in a WebQuest class, he still continued his role of providing support for reading comprehension. In the regular class, he usually closely guided the students through the reading because he wanted to make sure that the students had a thorough comprehension. Likewise, in the WebQuest class, one of his priorities was for the students to understand the text so he provided as much help as he could to achieve this objective. In the preproject interview Pichet said that the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class was similar to that of a regular class because the teacher still had to guide the students to read the texts. The excerpt below shows how Pichet viewed the role of a teacher in a WebQuest class to be only slightly different from that in a regular class. Apart from how more active student learning was at the center of the WebQuest activity, he thought that the students still needed to analyze the texts and gain a clear comprehension of the texts provided in the WebQuest, just as they had to do in the regular class. As a result, the teacher would continue the role of providing guidance for students’ reading. 127  

Researcher: Do you think that if WebQuest is used in an English classroom here [in this course], the role of the teacher will change? Pichet: Maybe a little. The teacher’s role as the center of the class may be reduced. And student-centered learning or independent study may increase. Instead of the teacher finding extra information about a topic for students, they may find the information online by themselves. This forces students to rely on themselves more. For this course, from my experience, I think the role of the teacher would not change much because technology or WebQuest hasn’t come into play much in the main section of the class when students analyze texts or apply reading skills. The teacher still needs to guide students when reading the text. But technology may make the class more interesting because there would be something else other than the lecture. The activities for the class would be more varied [compared to the regular class] and students would become more of the focus of the class. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) In sum, in order to support students’ comprehension of texts, Naree assured the students that she was available for the students to ask questions and would be ready to help them upon request, without intervening in the students’ group work. For Pichet, he approached every group and asked the students to summarize the articles so that he could check on and help clarify the students’ comprehension of texts. The role of the teacher in encouraging student discussion Another role that the teachers played during the WebQuest class was to encourage students to view different perspectives on the issue and discuss the information learned from the articles. For Naree and Pichet, critical thinking meant a similar thing. It involved the ability to look at something from different perspectives, explain why these existed, and judge them based on supporting evidence. (1)

Researcher: What do you think critical thinking is? 128

 

Naree: It’s about finding the reasons why things happened in a certain case. It’s also about being able to judge something if it’s right or wrong, and why it is so. And, can we believe a claim that was made? Also, what are the reasons behind what is presented in a text? (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08) (2)

Researcher: What do you think critical thinking is? Pichet: It’s when we look at something objectively. We don’t use emotion to judge something. We look at things and try to explain them with reasons or evidence. Also, it’s when we look at something with different perspectives. So, to sum it up, it’s when we look at something and try to explain it with reasons or find evidence to support it. Also, it’s when we look at things from different perspectives. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) Although critical thinking had not been much emphasized in English courses in Thailand in

general, both teachers viewed critical thinking as necessary for college students; thus, they both believed it should also be promoted in an English class. The two excerpts below show how Naree and Pichet viewed critical thinking as important for the students, even in an English course, which typically focused solely on learning English skills. They thought that the students should be able to make informed judgments based on information received and support their position with evidence. (1)

Researcher: Is critical thinking necessary for students who learn English? Naree: Yes. If students don’t have critical thinking skills they would believe everything they see or hear. They won’t have their own standpoint on anything. For example, when they read something about politics they should be able to decide which side they believe. They can use it in everyday life. They can also evaluate information they hear from the media. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08)

(2)

Researcher: Is critical thinking necessary for students who learn English? Pichet: Yes. It will allow them to use the [English] language more effectively. After they know all the language rules and grammar, they should be able to express their informed 129

 

opinions in writing or do critical reading. Or even when they do independent studies in advanced courses, they need critical thinking skills. In advanced courses, they have to express opinions a lot. If they don’t have critical thinking skills, it will be like someone who is fluent at the language but cannot express their opinions or support their opinions with evidence. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) The two teachers used several strategies in encouraging the students to participate in a discussion and use critical thinking both in the regular class and the WebQuest class. During the regular class, Naree would encourage the students to participate in a discussion by using guided questions to stimulate them to think further about the issue and asking them to work in groups to generate more thought and ideas. In addition to those strategies used by Naree, Pichet also motivated the students to participate in a discussion by relating the activity to the examination, using extra scores as rewards, arranging for quieter students to work with outspoken students, and calling on some students to share opinions. The two excerpts below illustrate these points: (1)

Researcher: How do you encourage students to express their opinions in your regular class? Naree: I use questions to stimulate their thinking. I also ask them to discuss in small groups before sharing their ideas with the whole class because they might be more comfortable sharing their ideas with their friends first. Sometimes it’s hard to explain. It also depends on the dynamic of the class. In some classes, students love to discuss so I don’t have to use any tactics. They just discuss and discuss. But the topic is also important. Interesting topics make students want to discuss and share their opinions more. In addition, I may have some lead-in questions that stimulate students’ curiosity so that they want to participate more. Those are all strategies I use to encourage them to participate. Also I think working in groups can encourage students to discuss more. From my experience, they love working in groups more than working individually. If I ask for opinions from the students, it’s better to allow some time for them to work in groups with 1-2 peers to discuss the issue. In our class, students usually made a list of their opinions 130

 

and would come out to present them to the class in group presentations. It allows everyone in the class to participate in the discussion. Sometimes students might be distracted and talk about something else in the small group, but at least they can share their opinions with the class. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08) (2)

Researcher: What do you do to encourage students to express their opinions in the regular class? Pichet: First I will tell the students that expressing opinions is an important part of this course and will relate this to the assignments or exams that they need to do. If students are conscious about the scores, I try to relate this to the grades they will get. I will tell them that whoever participates more will get extra points. It usually works with those who are conscious about grades. Another thing is the management of the class; I will group people who are quiet with those who always express their opinions in the class. I will have guiding questions that lead them to express their opinions. Other than that, if no one discusses, I’ll use role play or debate to encourage them to think and express opinions. In addition, I will bring in the hot topic in society at that time to generate a discussion. I have found that it makes the students more willing to discuss. Sometimes I call on a student to answer questions. (Pre-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08) During the WebQuest class, both teachers used strategies comparable to the regular class

to encourage students to express their opinions and use critical thinking. During the pre-activity discussion for the WebQuests, both teachers led a whole-class discussion which introduced the students to the topic of Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery, in order to activate students’ prior knowledge on the issues. Naree asked questions provided on the WebQuest to stimulate the students to think about mercy killing while Pichet, although he used the same questions from the WebQuests, asked additional questions to elicit further thoughts from the students on the issue. The two excerpts below illustrate how Naree and Pichet conducted the pre-activity discussion during the Euthanasia WebQuest. In this class, the students had to read an article 131  

about a case of a French woman who had nasal cancer and suffered a lot from the disease. She asked the French court for euthanasia but the court denied her request. Naree examined the issue with the students in the discussion by using the guiding questions provided on the WebQuests to elicit students’ opinions and perceptions on the issue. She invited the students to offer their opinions and then summarized the points each student made. She also called on the lower proficiency students, Group A2, mentioned in the excerpt below as the group in the back of the class, to offer opinions on the issue (Class observation notes, 11/25/08). (1)

Naree: What’s your opinion? Do you think the French court has done the right thing? Student 1: I think no. They have no right to decide. Naree: So the French court did the wrong thing to her. You think that the court was hardly correct and hardly on the context? Student 2: I think it should be the patient’s right to decide. They suffered a lot so they should have the right to decide. Naree: So your answer is similar to what we have just heard. You disagree with the court’s decision. How about that group (pointing to a group in the back)? Do you think the court did the right thing? Student 3: Yes. I think they [the French court] did the right thing because it should not be allowed; otherwise, there will be more people who want to do it. Naree: So this group agrees that the court has made the right decision. Who else want to share opinions? Student 4: I think the court should not prohibit her from having euthanasia. A patient should have his or her right to decide. Naree: So, to sum up, many of you disagree with the court’s judgment. Many of you think that euthanasia should be allowed. Naree: The next question is … personally, if it happened to you. If you were a terminally ill patient in Bangkok, what would you do? Would you want a mercy killing? Student 5: If it were me … if I were in that situation, I wouldn’t want to prolong my life and torture the people surrounding me…if it’s uncurable. Naree: If it’s incurable. You would like to have mercy killing but on the condition that you have to suffer a lot. 132

 

(Euthanasia pre-activity discussion, Class A, 11/25/08) Likewise, the excerpt below, also taken from the pre-activity discussion for Euthanasia, shows how Pichet encouraged the students to express their opinions on the article about the French woman. Not only did he use the questions provided in the WebQuest to ask for students’ opinions, he also used questions to probe further into the students’ reasons, such as in what case euthanasia should be allowed or who should be on the committee to decide who should have euthanasia. He also asked questions to stimulate students’ thinking on the issue, such as when he asked who should decide if the patient and the patient’s relatives had different opinions on euthanasia. (2)

Pichet: This topic is being used in this class because it’s a controversial topic and there are many perspectives to the issue. There’s no right or wrong. Who thinks the French court has made the right decision? Or who thinks that if you were the French court you would allow her to die? Student 1: I both agree and disagree. If the court allows it, there would be more people who want to have euthanasia even though their cases may not be severe enough. It will cause problems later. Pichet: So, it will set a bad standard because if the court allows one case, it has to allow every case. Can you give reasons why they shouldn’t give permission to have euthanasia in some cases? Student 1: For example, some people’s conditions may not be that severe but they just want to die. Their body is still OK but they have psychological problems such as depression. Pichet: What is the other side of your opinions that the court should allow euthanasia? Student 1: On the other side, I think the patient should have the right to make a decision because nobody can really understand them. For example, when we got hurt a little bit, we would feel terrible, and they have to suffer a lot. I don’t think we should object to the patient’s decision to do something. Pichet: How about other people? What do you think? Student 2: I think it’s the patient’s right. We should have some law to say that if a patient is really in a severe condition, we can allow it. There should be some regulations that prevent people who may not be in severe conditions from having it. There should be some 133

 

organizations or committee that examines the patients to see if they deserve euthanasia. I think if a patient doesn’t want to live any longer and if they are in a very severe condition, I don’t think we should object to their plea to die. It’s a waste of resources. Pichet: So the organization or committee might be comprised of psychologists, doctors, and maybe priests, right? Who else should be on this committee? Student 3: I think the patient’s relatives should have a say in this. Pichet: If the patient and the relatives have different opinions, who should make the decision? Student 3: I think in that case the patient should be the one to make a decision because he is the one who suffers, not the relatives. Pichet: Do you think euthanasia should be allowed in Thailand? Student 4: I think we should allow it because we should have the right in our own life but we need to make strict regulations. Student 5: It’s a very sensitive issue, so we should be careful when we make the law. We have to take several factors into consideration. Student 6: I agree because it affects so many people, like the patient, the relatives, and the doctors. Pichet: Which cases should be allowed? Student 7: I think there should be an organization to oversee the process, and to select which cases really deserve it. (Euthanasia pre-activity discussion, Class B, 12/9/08) When the students were later engaged in small group discussions, Naree would move around the class and make sure that the students knew she was available to answer questions. She stopped at some groups to listen to the students’ discussion but she did not intervene or share her opinions. The data suggest that most students only discussed in their group and hardly asked her any questions (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery group discussions 11/25/08 – 1/13/09). Similarly, Pichet also circulated the class and went to every group to ask for students’ opinions on the issue. He also asked challenging questions to inspire the students to think more about the

134  

issue (Euthanasia and Cosmetic Surgery group discussions 12/9/08 – 1/22/09). The excerpt below shows how Pichet asked questions to encourage students to think more about the issue. Student 1: Yes. Good looking people are more successful. Pichet: Is it a motivation for people to have cosmetic surgery? Student 1 and Student 2: Yes. Part of it. Pichet: Do you agree that better looking people will be successful at doing business? Student 1: I think it’s true. Student 2: (nodding) Pichet: Why? So a person with an MBA but an average look would not be as successful as a beautiful person with a general bachelor’s degree? Student 2: I think appearance is a part that helps. When you are good looking, people want to hire you or do business with you. It [physical beauty] may boost your selfconfidence to make you actually be successful in your job. Pichet: So that was also mentioned in the article [that good looking people are more successful in their career] and it’s something you agree with. Student 1 and Student 2: Right. (Cosmetic Surgery role discussion, Working people role, Class B, 1/20/09) The above excerpt shows how Pichet asked questions to stimulate students’ thinking and gave a hypothetical situation -- comparing an average-looking person with an MBA to a goodlooking person with a bachelor’s degree -- for the students to consider if their opinions about good-looking people were consistent in this situation. For Pichet, he considered motivating the students to think or express opinions part of his role in the WebQuest class. Because he noticed that some students dominated the group discussion while others were more reserved, he would ask questions to the group to challenge some students’ opinions on the issue and encourage others to think more about the issue and express their opinions. 135  

Pichet: …The next role [of a teacher in a WebQuest class] is to motivate students’ critical thinking. From my observation, in some group discussions, some students dominated the discussions while other students were quieter and did not share much opinion. I had to go in there [the group discussion] and encourage their thinking by asking them questions like, “Isn’t there anyone who disagrees with these ideas? Even I might disagree. How about you?” I tried to encourage the students to see different perspectives and argued as much as possible. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) Even though Naree had fulfilled her role as a facilitator who was ready to help on request in the WebQuest class, during the post-project interview (when she had heard from an informal conversation with Pichet how he conducted the WebQuest class), Naree acknowledged that she probably did not get involved much with the students’ discussion. She indicated that she would want to try to do what Pichet did – to approach the students to check text comprehension and ask students for their opinions -- in future WebQuest classes. Thus, she came to think that the role of a teacher in a WebQuest class also depended on how much the teacher gets involved with the students. Researcher: What do you think the role of the teachers in a WebQuest class is? Naree: I might not have gotten involved with the student group discussions much. From what I heard about how Pichet approached the students during the group discussion, I think it’s a good idea. I think that if I have a chance to use WebQuests again, I would try to discuss with the students more to check text comprehension and to see their opinions. So, I think the teacher’s role in a WebQuest class can be different depending on how much the teacher decides to be involved with or intervene in the students’ activity. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) Naree also perceived that the role of the teacher in the WebQuest class was controlled by the structure of the WebQuest activity and thus limited her involvement with the students’ group work. She recognized that it was, therefore, sometimes difficult for her to monitor students’ comprehension of texts during the class, as mentioned in the excerpt below. As a result, she 136  

considered increasing her involvement with the students’ group activity if she were to use WebQuest again in the future, so that she could better monitor students’ comprehension of texts and encourage students to think more about the issue. Naree: …It’s difficult for me to monitor [students’ comprehension of texts] during the WebQuest activity in the class because it was 100% self learning. It was difficult to know who understood the text or who did not because students’ work was based on group work [during the in-class discussion]. It’s different from a regular class. During a regular class, a teacher could walk up to the students and ask if they understood the texts and clarify things they did not understand. However, in a WebQuest class, the role of the teacher was controlled by the structure of the WebQuest, which framed the teacher’s role as the organizer of the activity or only as the one to give directions [of the activity] to students. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) When asked how she encouraged students to use critical thinking in the WebQuest class, Naree stated that she found topics pertinent to students’ use of critical thinking. If the topic of the discussion was interesting or relevant to students, such as cosmetic surgery, she believed that the students would be interested in discussing more and would use more critical thinking skills. Researcher: What do you think can help the students in a WebQuest class use more critical thinking? Naree: We need to have a structure that motivates students to think. For example, if we discuss religions, the students would not be interested. However, if it’s a topic that they are interested in and want to discuss, such as cosmetic surgery, they would want to discuss more and as a result use more critical thinking. We can also put some pictures in the WebQuests or ask questions that stimulate their thinking and ideas on the issue. I believe that if we do all this, the students will be able to think critically in the end. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) For Pichet, he believed that the teachers should encourage the students to think more critically by guiding the students to think using such methods as providing a model of how to 137  

think critically, or convincing the students that there were many perspectives on the issue and there was no right or wrong in their judgment of the perspectives. Text comprehension was also considered important to how the students understand the issue and share informed opinions. Researcher: How can a teacher help the students to think more critically during a WebQuest activity? Pichet: Teachers need to guide the students to think. We should introduce some ideas to the students so that they can have an idea about how to think critically. We should emphasize that there are several perspectives on the issue. We also need to emphasize that there’s no right or wrong in expressing their opinions. We also have to help them with the reading comprehension of the texts because if they don’t understand the texts, they won’t be able to use critical thinking to judge the information and express their opinions. Another thing is that the teacher should have good knowledge about the issue of the WebQuest. He should be like a “resource person” who can recommend other web links by which students can find more information about the issue.   (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) In conclusion, Naree and Pichet both took on the role of encouraging students to participate in the discussion. Naree took a role as a class facilitator who, during the pre-activity whole-class discussion, asked questions to challenge students to think and summarized students’ ideas while ensuring that she was easily accessible to answer any question the students might have during small group discussions. Pichet not only assured the students that he would be available for help, he asked questions to challenge students’ thinking during the whole-class discussion and approached every group for students’ opinions during the small group discussion. He also used a hypothetical situation to invite students to examine their own opinions more closely.

138  

Role change Since the two teacher participants had to adapt themselves to a shift from a teachercentered class to a student-centered activity, it would be interesting to gain insights into how their roles were redefined. The overall results suggest that Naree thought the role of the teacher in the WebQuest class was reduced from someone who closely guided the students’ reading and discussion activities to a class organizer or manager. However, Pichet thought that even though the role of the teacher was somewhat diminished, the teacher still played an important role in supporting students to achieve the goal of the task. The two excerpts below exemplify these claims: (1)

Researcher: What do you think about the roles of the teacher during the regular and the WebQuest class? Naree: There are advantages and disadvantages for both roles. In the regular class, the teacher can make sure that students understand the text. It’s easier for me to correct the students. But in the WebQuest class, students are divided into small groups, so it’s hard for the teacher to make sure that everyone has the same understanding. One reason is that computers and the internet can easily distract students in the WebQuest class, so it’s difficult for the teacher to make sure students pay full attention. While in the regular class, I can see everyone without anything to obstruct my view, so students pay more attention. So, students can increase language accuracy more in the traditional class. Also, students can surf any website in the computer room, so I don’t know if they are working on the WebQuest or looking at other websites. (Pre-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08) The excerpt above shows how Naree considered the role of the teacher in a WebQuest

class more challenging because the group environment made it more difficult for her to ensure that every student had a correct understanding of the texts, compared to the regular class where she could check individual students’ comprehension of the lessons better. In addition, the closely

139  

arranged computer desks and the computer monitors made it difficult for her to supervise the class and thus left some students with more opportunity to be distracted by the Internet. (2)

Researcher: What is the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class? Pichet: The first role is to tell the students what they have to do during the activity and in what amount of time. Second, I have to help lower proficiency students in reading the texts because they usually read more slowly. I have to be accessible for them so that they can ask for the meaning of vocabulary or the meaning of some sentences. I also have to observe which students seem to want help because some students might be afraid to ask. I usually provided a lot of help with reading the texts because if the students did not understand the texts, it would be difficult for them to express their opinions. So, I had to make sure the students correctly understood the texts and the main question of the WebQuest. The next role is to inspire students’ critical thinking. From my observation, in some group discussions, certain students dominated the discussions while other students were quieter and did not share much opinion. I had to go in there [the group discussion] and encourage their thinking by asking them questions like, “Isn’t there anyone who disagrees with these ideas? Even I disagreed. How about you?” I tried to encourage the students to see different perspectives and argue as much as possible. Also, I had to encourage the students to take advantage of the Internet to search for extra information if they needed to. During the PowerPoint presentations, my role was to manage the time for each group to present and summarize each group’s points in the presentation. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) The excerpt above shows how Pichet specified his role as the teacher in a WebQuest

class. Not only did he have to tell the students what to do in the class, he also needed to help the students with text reading and encourage students to think critically and express their opinions. Moreover, he encouraged the students to take advantage of the Internet to find additional information about the issue. The last role for him was to facilitate the time management and

140  

summarize the main points of each presentation when the student groups were doing their presentations. As mentioned earlier, Pichet found that the teacher’s role, even though it seemed less dominant in a learner-centered activity, was still important in supporting students’ learning. He recognized that while some students were able to carry the task procedures efficiently by themselves, some students might not be able to do so and thus still needed much of the teacher’s guidance. Researcher: Sometimes in a class that brings in technology such as WebQuests or in a learner-centered class, [as you have mentioned] the role of the teachers might be reduced, but you still think that the teacher plays an important role in such a class? Pichet: Right. In a student-centered class, the teachers still need to continue their role to support the students. We still need to do some intervention because otherwise some students might not be able to achieve the class objectives. It’s true that some students were able to work on their own effectively and the teachers do not always need to intervene. However, there are some students who do not participate or work as much as others, or those groups that have one or two people dominating the group discussion. We need to intervene in these situations. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) The findings mentioned earlier resonate with how the students viewed the role of the teachers in the WebQuest classes compared to the regular classes. Many students in Naree’s class viewed the role of the teacher as different between the two types of classes because Naree seemed not to involve herself in assisting students’ reading as closely in the WebQuest class as in the regular class. Meanwhile, many students in Pichet’s class felt that even though the teacher’s role as the focus of the traditional class seemed diminished in the WebQuest class, the role of the teacher was still similar to that of the regular class because Pichet still provided the same extensive amount of help with text reading. 141  

(1)

Researcher: Is the role of the teacher the same or different between the regular and the WebQuest class? Naphat: I think it’s different. In the regular class, the teacher will point out to us what a sentence or a passage means. But in the WebQuest class, the teacher just divided the work for the students. She just organized the class while we, the students, read and interpreted the texts on our own and in our own way. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) Naphat perceived the role of Naree as teacher in the WebQuest class as being different

from the regular class, because in the regular class Naree provided closer guidance in reading texts, while in the WebQuest class, she seemed to take only a managerial role, so students had to rely on themselves more when reading the texts. (2)

Researcher: The role of the teacher is the same or different between the WebQuest class and regular class? Aey: In the regular class, the teacher acted as the moderator and facilitator in a discussion and also helped us with the texts. But in the WebQuest class, we read the texts and discussed by ourselves in our group. We were our own facilitators. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09) Aey viewed the role of Naree in the regular class as a moderator for the class discussion

and someone who provided reading help for the students. However, in the WebQuest class, Aey had to work on her own in her group, reading the articles by herself and facilitating her group discussion. (3)

Researcher: Do you think the role of the teacher is the same or different between the regular and the WebQuest class? Nid: I think that in the WebQuest class, the WebQuest played the central role because we had to follow what the WebQuest said. We had to read information from it. But in the regular class, the teacher took the leading role. He also helped us translate the text. In the WebQuest class, the teacher let us read in our group first and then he would ask if we had any questions about the text. The students got involved more in the WebQuest class. 142

 

(Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) In Pichet’s WebQuest class, Nid perceived the role of the teacher to be reduced compared to the regular class, and she had to rely more on herself in the WebQuest class. However, the teacher still provided reading guidance in the WebQuest class, although not as much as in the regular class. (4)

Researcher: What do you think is different about the role of the teacher in the regular class as opposed to the WebQuest class? Am: In a WebQuest class, the teacher helped explain the meaning of a word we didn’t understand. He also organized the class, such as organizing the time, and let us share our opinions freely. In the regular class, the teacher led and guided our discussion. So, the role of the teacher is quite the same. In the WebQuest class, it’s like we were the person in the role assigned to us. We found out more about the role by ourselves from the texts in the WebQuest, so we could share more opinions later. But in the regular class we did not have a chance to play a role. The teacher usually led us [in a reading activity] and told us about the author of the passage we were reading -- why he thought like this and what he wanted to say. In the textbook, there was only one perspective, which was the author’s. But in the WebQuest, there were many perspectives, so we could agree or disagree with each perspective. So we could see more diverse opinions and perspectives on the issue. Ploy: The role of the teacher is similar in the WebQuest and the regular class. In the WebQuest class, the teacher also helped us read the text like in the regular class. In a regular class, because the text is shorter the teacher would focus more on the sentence level, but in the WebQuest class, since there were many texts in the WebQuest, the teacher couldn’t focus as much on the sentence level so we discussed more about the main ideas. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) Am and Ploy perceived the role of Pichet to be similar in both the WebQuest class and

the regular class. The teacher still helped them with the texts in the WebQuest class similarly to what he did in the regular class. However, Am found that she had to work on her own more to

143  

understand the role assigned to her, while in the regular class the teacher would provide guidance in interpreting the author’s viewpoints and opinions on an issue. In sum, Naree viewed the role of the teacher in the WebQuest class to be reduced to an “organizer” of the class while Pichet, even though he considered the teacher’s role to be somewhat diminished in the WebQuest class, perceived that the teacher still played an important role in supporting the students to understand the texts and in encouraging the use of critical thinking. A Summary of the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest class In conclusion, the role of the teacher to promote critical thinking in the WebQuest class is first, to help students to understand the text; and second, to help students use critical thinking during the discussion. Naree focused on the role of a teacher that facilitated the students’ reading and discussion by being accessible for the students to ask questions but not intervening during the students’ group activity. However, Pichet focused more on supporting and checking students’ text comprehension and encouraging the students to express their opinions by approaching the students to check their understanding of the texts and asking challenging questions to invite the students to think more. Both teachers found that the role of the teacher in the WebQuest class was different from in the regular class, but not to the same extent. Naree found her role to be reduced significantly during the WebQuest activity. Since the students’ learning was central to the activity, her role was diminished to a manager of the class who arranged the time and the procedures for the activity. For Pichet, he viewed his role as only slightly decreased because he still placed a great emphasis on guiding the students in their reading of the articles and discussion. He still 144  

considered teacher’s intervention necessary in a learner-centered activity such as WebQuests because not every student was able to accomplish the activity on their own and thus many still needed close guidance from the teacher.

Research Question #3: To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? In order to examine how intermediate proficiency students in this study used English in a WebQuest class, I will analyze the data according to what Koenraad and Westhoff (2003) describe as how the target language should be used during WebQuest activities in a language class. They suggest that the target language should be used either in the form of instructional language or the language of the students’ end products. As a result, I will explore the amount of English used during the WebQuest classes in this study according to (1) how the language of instruction was used; (2) how English was used during the class discussion; and (3) how English was used in the end products of the WebQuest. The data came from transcriptions of student group discussions and whole-class discussions, class observation notes, the interviews with teachers and students, student questionnaires, student PowerPoint presentations, and student written assignments. English as the language of instruction In the WebQuest classes, Naree and Pichet used English as the language of instruction to a certain extent. The overall results showed that during the role discussions and the small group discussions, they mostly used English when giving directions or explaining the procedures of an

145  

activity while using Thai when discussing or explaining more complex concepts. However, during the whole-class pre-activity discussions, they seemed to use English more frequently. Throughout the class, the results show that Pichet and Naree used English to give directions to the students explaining what they had to do during the activity. On closer examination, Naree seemed to use English slightly more often than Pichet while Pichet usually explained the procedures in English first and then described them again in Thai. The two excerpts below illustrate how Naree and Pichet used English and Thai when giving directions in the class. (1)

Naree: As a person, you may agree or disagree with Euthanasia. But as a lawyer, as a doctor, or a family member of those terminally ill patients, what would you think? What we’ll do next is on the process page. Among your group members, choose a role. If there are four people in your group, there may be two people for one role. For the doctor role, you sit here on the first row. For the lawyer role, you can sit in the middle row. And for the family members role you can sit in the back. After you get into your role group, you can read the articles provided for your role. Just follow the links under your role and read the articles. You should write down the points that you might later use to agree or disagree with euthanasia. Then you should discuss what you have read with your role group members. (Euthanasia role discussion, Class A, 11/25/08)

(2)

Pichet: If you follow this web address, you will find the main page of the cosmetic surgery WebQuest. And if you follow the third link here, you will find the process page. And when you double click on the process link, you will see some nice photos of women. You should first read the article about cosmetic surgery trends among Thai teenagers. Because this was your homework, I’m sure some of you have read it, right? Today we will work on the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest. First we will read the article in the pre-activity so that we have some background knowledge about cosmetic surgery. You can follow the link on the ‘process’ page on the WebQuest. (Cosmetic Surgery pre-activity discussion, Class B, 1/20/09) The excerpt above portrays how Pichet used English and Thai in giving directions to

students during the pre-activity discussion. He first explained what the students had to do in 146  

English and then switched to Thai to repeat what he had said. Pichet said during the post-project interview that he used Thai more often in this class compared to the other ENG 123 section he was teaching during that particular semester because the students in this class generally had lower levels of proficiency, so he wanted to make sure that all the students understood what they had to do (Translated from the post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09). During most of the class time when Naree and Pichet answered the students’ questions, explained a concept concerning the topic discussed in the WebQuest, or checked the students’ comprehension of the texts, they used Thai. Naree mentioned in her post-project interview that, “I sometimes spoke Thai in class when explaining something to the students” (Translated from the post-project interview with Naree, 10/3/08). For Pichet, he mentioned in the post-project interview that he used both English and Thai in this class to discuss the topic with students or explain some concepts because he wanted the students to clearly understand what he was telling them (Post-project interview with Pichet, 10/3/08). Even though the results showed that both teachers generally used their L1 during the discussions in the WebQuest classes, a closer examination revealed that during the pre-activity whole-class discussion, Naree and Pichet used English more frequently. Naree mostly used English to ask questions or summarize a point a student made, while Pichet mostly used English and Thai during the whole-class discussion. The two excerpts below illustrate how Naree and Pichet used Thai and English during the pre-activity whole-class discussion. (1)

Naree: What’s your opinion? Do you think the French court has done the right thing? Student 1: I think no. They have no right to decide. Naree: So the French court did the wrong thing to her. You think that the court was hardly correct and hardly on the context? 147

 

Student 2: I think it should be the patient’s right to decide. They suffered a lot so they should have the right to decide. Naree: So your answer is similar to what we have just heard. You disagree with the court’s decision. How about that group (pointing to a group in the back)? Do you think the court did the right thing? Student 3: Yes. I think they [the French court] did the right thing because it should not be allowed; otherwise, there will be more people who want to do it. Naree: So this group agrees that the court has made the right decision. Who else want to share opinions? Student 4: I think the court should not prohibit her from having euthanasia. A patient should have his or her right to decide. Naree: So, to sum up, many of you disagree with the court’s judgment. Many of you don’t think that euthanasia should be allowed. Naree: The next question is … personally, if it happened to you. If you were a terminally ill patient in Bangkok, what would you do? Would you want a mercy killing? Student 5: If it were me … if I were in that situation, I wouldn’t want to prolong my life and torture the people surrounding me…if it’s uncurable. Naree: If it’s incurable. You would like to have mercy killing but on the condition that you have to suffer a lot. (Euthanasia pre-activity discussion, Class A, 11/25/08) The excerpt above shows how Naree used English during the pre-activity whole-class discussion to ask questions and discuss the issue with the students. Most students in this excerpt used Thai while only one spoke in English. (2)

Pichet: What happened to the lady in the article? Student 1: She had a nasal disease. Pichet: I think she had nasal cancer. Nasal is ‘about nose’. That’s why her face was disfigured or (translates the word “disfigured” in Thai). hmm… So, what is euthanasia? [pause] It’s when a patient wants to end his/her life. The key word here is (speaking this word in English) ‘intention’. There are many types of euthanasia such as active euthanasia. It’s when the doctor gives something to the patient to let him/her die. Another type is passive euthanasia. It’s when doctors don’t do something to the patient and he/she will die. For example, if a patient has to take some kind of medicine to live and if he doesn’t take the medicine, he will die. So, he asks that he is not given the medicine any 148

 

more. But the main thing is that the patient doesn’t want to live any longer so he asks the doctor to do something to let him die such as giving him an injection or stop the treatment or get the patient off the life support. What were the reasons that the French lady wanted to die? Student 2: She suffered a lot. Pichet: How did she suffer? Student 2: She could not see and did not have any feelings. Pichet: Right. She couldn’t see. And when the children saw her, they were afraid of her. So, did the court allow her to die? Many students: No. Pichet: This topic is being used in this class because it’s a controversial topic and there are many perspectives to the issue. There’s no right or wrong. Who thinks the French court has made the right decision? Or who thinks that if you were the French court you would allow her to die? Student 1: I both agree and disagree. If the court allows it, there would be more people who want to have euthanasia even though their cases may not be severe enough. It will cause problems later. Pichet: So, it will set a bad standard because if the court allows one case, it has to allow every case. Can you give reasons why they shouldn’t give permission to have euthanasia in some cases? Student 1: For example, some people’s conditions may not be that severe but they just want to die. Their body is still OK but they have psychological problems such as depression. Pichet: What is the other side of your opinions that the court should allow euthanasia? Student 1: On the other side, I think the patient should have the right to make a decision because nobody can really understand them. For example, when we got hurt a little bit, we would feel terrible, and they have to suffer a lot. I don’t think we should object to the patient’s decision to do something. (Euthanasia pre-activity discussion, Class B, 12/09/08) The excerpt above shows how Pichet used English and Thai during the pre-activity discussion. He asked questions to elicit students’ opinions for the article in English but explained the word ‘euthanasia’ in Thai. Then he started the discussion in English and later continued the

149  

discussion in Thai with the students. In this excerpt, the students seemed to use English to say a short sentence while they used Thai to explain more complicated ideas. The amount of English used during the discussion Since the majority of the WebQuest class time was dedicated to the discussions, this section will provide an analysis of the amount of English used during the whole-class and small group discussions. The overall results show that most students did not use much English during these discussions in the WebQuest classes (Class observation notes, 11/25/08 – 1/22/09). The findings resonate with what the students reported during student group interviews. When asked whether they spoke English during the WebQuest classes, most of the students in all groups said that they did not use much English and mostly used Thai (Student group interviews, 2/12/09). The excerpts below document some of these statements. (1)

Researcher: Did you speak English in the WebQuest class? Naphat: When we discussed, we usually used Thai. When we summarized the articles, we also used Thai. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09)

(2)

Researcher: Did you speak English in the WebQuest class? Thida: No, I think I practiced reading and writing more. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09)

(3)

Researcher: Did you use English during the WebQuest activity? Nid: Only when the teacher required us to speak in English during the presentations. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09)

(4)

Researcher: Did you speak any English during the WebQuest class? Sita: No. I mostly used Thai. 150

 

(Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) One reason why most of the students did not use much English during group discussions could be that the teachers focused more on the reading and writing skills than the oral skills. The findings reflect the reports of both teachers that reading skills were practiced most during the WebQuest classes, followed by writing skills. They both acknowledged that the students did not use much speaking or listening skills. A justification given by Pichet was that these two skills were not among the main objectives of the course and thus not emphasized during the activity. (1)

Researcher: Which English skills did the students use most in the WebQuest classes? Naree: Reading, then writing when they wrote the written assignments; and then listening when they listened to me; and the last one was speaking. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) The excerpt above indicates that Naree regarded reading as the skill used most during the

WebQuest class, followed by writing. The students also had a chance to practice listening when the teacher spoke to them, while speaking was the least used skill. (2)

Researcher: How did the students benefit from the WebQuest class in terms of language skills? Pichet: I think they were able to practice reading skills. They had a chance to read more articles and learn more vocabulary because there was a set of vocabulary word which were pertinent to each topic of the WebQuest. They also had a chance to practice writing in the written assignments. They also learned to organize their ideas in the presentation. They learned to analyze the readings and find the main ideas of the articles. But they did not practice much speaking and listening because we did not emphasize that in this course. However, they could practice speaking a bit when they did presentations. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) Naree further explained during the interviews that the main objectives of the course were

reading and expressing informed opinions on the articles read while other skills, such as writing, speaking and listening, were considered supplementary. As a result, as long as the students had a 151  

chance to practice reading skills along with giving their opinions on articles read, she considered the course objectives to be satisfied. The excerpt below illustrates these points: Researcher: How much English do you think students should use during the WebQuest class? Naree: During the first few classes, I encouraged them to use English. In later classes, I emphasized focusing on their ideas more. I think speaking English was a secondary benefit in this class. It’s not the main objective because “Reading for opinions” (the title of this course) means students should read to form their ideas and opinions. It gave priority to reading and thinking or giving opinions. So, it would not be a problem if the students did not use other English skills much [such as writing, speaking, and listening]. They had a chance to practice reading from reading many articles in the class. They also had a chance to practice some listening and speaking by interacting with me and their class members even though we did not focus heavily on practicing these skills. If they could gain some learning on these skills, it would be a secondary advantage. However, if they learned only reading and critical thinking, I think that was good enough. Some students asked me if they would get low marks if they had a lot of mistakes in their writing, I told them that they would be fine if there were not too many errors. Anyhow, I did not teach English structures in this class. One reason was that we did not have enough time to do that. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) Another reason why English was not used much during the WebQuest discussions could be that both Naree and Pichet believed the teacher should give students a choice to speak in either English or Thai in order to encourage every student, especially lower proficiency students, to fully participate in the discussion. When asked to what extent the teacher should encourage the students to speak English in the WebQuest class, the two teachers answered as follows: (1)

Researcher: In your opinions, how much should the teacher encourage speaking English in the WebQuest class? Naree: If one of the main goals is to increase critical thinking use, not 100% English skills, I think that we should provide the choice of using either Thai or English to students. From my experience, if we require students to speak only English, some students would just not participate in the activity, even though this might only be a small number. So, if we give them the option to speak in English or Thai, students who don’t have high English proficiency would be more willing to participate. 152

 

(Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) (2)

Researcher: How far should the teacher go in encouraging students to use English in the WebQuest class? Pichet: Actually, we should support them to speak in English as much as possible, especially in small group discussions and presentations. However in a class of lower proficiency students like this one, we might allow the students to use L1 in small group discussions, but we should ask them to present in English in formal situations such as the presentations, so they can learn vocabulary and English structures [from preparing for the presentations]. When we push them to use English in the presentations, it’s like we force them to find more vocabulary [to compose the slides]. If we don’t push them they will only use Thai [in the presentations]. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) Naree and Pichet’s suggestion to allow students to speak in their L1 during the

discussions resonate with students’ views when they were asked whether being required to speak in English would affect their use of critical thinking skills. Most students believed that even though it would not keep them from thinking critically, it would prevent them from freely and thoroughly communicating their thoughts to others. Higher proficiency students who could speak English well would still be able to contribute to the discussion; however, lower proficiency students would be limited in sharing their opinions due to their insufficient ability to find appropriate English words for expressing themselves. The four following excerpts illustrate how students in each group saw this issue. (1)

Researcher: Suppose the teacher required everyone to speak in English only, would it affect how you think? Kanya: It could be. Using Thai helped me think faster. The problem [of discussing all in English] is we always think in Thai and if our English is not good, we cannot explain our thoughts or ideas to other people. So, those ideas would just be dropped without being expressed to other people. Wan: I think that in a class that requires expressing opinions, if it is not an English speaking class, we should allow students to use Thai to discuss or express opinions. If we can speak English we will discuss in English, but if we can’t, we should be allowed to express opinions in Thai so that the ideas are not dropped or held back. Some students 153

 

are too shy to speak English, but if they are allowed to speak in Thai, they will usually express their opinions. The situation [of participating in discussions] will be better. It’s not that we should always speak Thai, but we should tell them [students] that if they can speak English, they should do so, but if they can’t, it’s OK to speak Thai. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) (2)

Researcher: Suppose the teacher required everyone to speak in English only. Would it affect how you think? Aey: Yes it would affect our thinking in the way that we might want to express something but couldn’t find the right words to express it. It’s difficult to find words that can accurately describe our thinking. So I think it would definitely be a problem. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09)

(3)

Researcher: Suppose the teacher required everybody to speak English at all times, do you think it would affect how you think or analyze the texts? Nuj: Definitely yes. We might not be able to get our message across to other group members. We might not get the same understanding of one point. So it would affect our communication a lot. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09)

(4)

Researcher: Suppose the teacher said everyone had to speak English in class, do you think it would obstruct your use of critical thinking? Ploy: No, it wouldn’t prevent us from thinking, but it will prevent us from discussing issues with our group members. Sometimes it’s difficult to try to find a word that expresses the same meaning as what we think. So it would reduce the chance that we could communicate our thinking to others. Researcher: So, does that mean speaking in Thai would encourage you to discuss more? Ploy and Am: Yes, we could discuss more. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) Both Naree and Pichet agreed that even though the teachers could require that all students

speak in English during the WebQuest classes, it would probably reduce participation of lower proficiency students in the discussions and could compromise the expression of students’ critical thinking. Naree explained that if English was required in the discussions, it could discourage participation of lower proficiency students because they might feel under pressure to discuss in 154  

English and possibly be afraid of being compared to higher proficiency students, who generally contributed more often to the discussion in English. The excerpt below illustrates these points: Naree: Teachers could push everyone to speak English in the class but I think that would probably make them [lower proficiency students] speak out or share their opinions even less because they would feel under pressure to speak out and then risk being compared to higher proficiency students in front of other students in the class. (Post-project interview with Naree, 3/2/09) Pichet further stated that the students would probably choose to say easy expressions in English, instead of expressing deeper opinions which would be more challenging. As a result, Pichet recommended that the teacher allow students to discuss in their L1 but require them to speak English during presentations to balance critical thinking use and English speaking practice. The teachers could also help students with finding appropriate words and rephrasing their sentences. Pichet: If the teacher pushes the students to speak English, they will do so, but its effect might not be to the fullest, meaning that their thinking or reasoning will not be as deep or thoughtful as when they speak Thai. They would probably just give basic ideas or opinions such as “I agree” or “I don’t agree”. If we tell them that they can use either English or Thai, they will use Thai more but their reasoning will be deeper and more thoughtful because they can think and fully express their opinions without having to translate their ideas into another language. So, I think the teachers should say when to speak English. Second, we should help rephrase what students say into English. If they say something in Thai, we can rephrase it into English. If they can’t think of a word to use, we can also help them. (Post-project interview with Pichet, 3/2/09) When comparing the extent to which the students used English in the WebQuest and the regular classes, the students’ perceptions varied. Some students found that they used English more in the WebQuest classes compared to the regular classes, while other students thought they used the same amount of English in both types of classes. 155  

(1)

Researcher: Comparing the traditional class and the WebQuest class, which class allows you to use English more? Kanya: For speaking skills, I think it’s about the same because that doesn’t depend on the organization of the class. It depends on whether a student seeks an opportunity to practice English or not. Like in our regular class, usually me and another guy always speak in English. Other people in the class speak less English. So it’s not about how the teacher teaches but it’s about whether a student wants to practice speaking English. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09) Kanya thought that in terms of English speaking skills, she used the same extensive

amount of English in the WebQuest class as in the regular class. She was motivated to speak English in both types of classes and thus felt that self motivation drove a student to speak English rather than the class structures or the teachers. (2)

Researcher: Comparing the traditional class and the WebQuest class, which class allows you to use English more? Bam: I think I read more in the WebQuest class but I did not speak much English in either the regular or the WebQuest classes. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09)

(3)

Researcher: Comparing the traditional class and the WQ class, which class allows you to use English more? Pim: In the regular class, we used English when we answered the teacher’s questions but, still, I think I spoke English more in the WebQuest class. We also read more in the WebQuest class because we had to read many articles. We also wrote more in the WebQuest class, like when we wrote and summarized the main points of the articles in the role sheet. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) Pim thought that she used more English in the WebQuest classes. Comparing to the

regular class, she spoke English more, read more articles, and wrote more when completing the role sheets. (4)

Researcher: Comparing the traditional class and the WebQuest class, which class allows you to use English more? 156

 

Sita: For speaking, I think it’s the same. We didn’t say anything much. For English reading, I think it’s similar for the regular and the WebQuest class. But for writing, I think we wrote more in the WebQuest class. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) For Sita, she found herself not using much spoken English either in the regular or the WebQuest classes. She read the same amount of text in both types of classes but wrote more for the WebQuest classes. It is noteworthy from the interview data above that the students from the lower proficiency groups (A2 and B2) seemed to speak little English in both the regular and WebQuest classes, while the students from the higher proficiency groups (A1 and B1) used either the same extensive amount of English in both classes or more in the WebQuest classes. Even though the students claimed that they did not use much English during the discussions, they seemed to read substantially more during the WebQuest classes. The questionnaire results (see Appendix H) show that most students in both classes perceived that they had improved their reading skills following the WebQuest activities. In class A, 16 students (80%) found that the reading activity in the WebQuests helped them improve English reading skills, while 17 students in Class B (90%) found that they had improved their reading skills. In the open-ended section for this item, the majority of the students from both classes similarly stated that they had learned new vocabulary, practiced guessing meanings of words, and captured the main ideas of the passages. The reading activity in the WebQuest also helped them become faster at reading.

157  

The amount of English used in the end products The end products for the two WebQuest activities were comprised of an oral presentation, in which PowerPoint slides were required, and a short written response for each of the two WebQuests used in this study. The overall results suggest that most participating groups used both English and Thai during the oral presentations, except the lower proficiency group A2, which used Thai exclusively. In addition, the higher proficiency students seemed to compose the PowerPoint slides using their own words more extensively than the lower proficiency students, who copied some sentences from the articles. As for the written assignments, the length of the writing was controlled by the writing prompts, resulting in most students using a similar amount of English, with the exception of some higher proficiency students who wrote longer than the others. During the oral presentations, the results from the four participating groups show that some students used English together with Thai while others used Thai exclusively during the presentations. A closer examination of the data from the four participating groups in the study revealed that, in Naree’s class (Class A), the higher proficiency group A1 used English to read points from the slides and provided further explanations in Thai. On the contrary, the lower proficiency group A2 exclusively used their L1 during the presentations. In Pichet’s class (Class B), both groups of students (Groups B1 and B2) used English to read points from the slides and offered explanations in Thai. This might be due to the fact that Pichet required all of his students to deliver their presentations in English, whereas in Naree’s class the students could choose to deliver their presentations in either English or Thai (Teacher interviews, 3/2/09). As a result, the lower proficiency group A2 chose to use Thai, possibly because of their limited proficiency in 158  

English. For those groups who used English to deliver part of their presentations, most students only used it to read points on the slides while they still discussed the information presented in their L1. Therefore, in the oral presentations, English was used mainly to read information from the PowerPoint slides. The three excerpts below present how the higher proficiency groups A1 and B1 and the lower proficiency group B2 used English when reading points from the slides, then further explained them in Thai. (1)

Wan: Our group doesn’t agree with plastic surgery. No, they shouldn’t enhance their looks by plastic surgery. Next we’ll talk about the reasons why we disagree with plastic surgery. Wan: The first part is the reasons why we disagree with plastic surgery. First, beauty depends on beholders. It is value in society. There is no consistency of what you look at in the media compared to average looking people. Many articles from the media role said that the media puts pressure on people in society about beauty standard. They made people believe that beautiful people have to be slim and have light skin. It makes many people in society, especially women, want to follow them. This is just a value or trend in society that most people accept but we don’t need to follow that trend. Kanya: The next point is outer look is non-permanent but inner look is more important. It will be with us for entire life. Our looks will not stay with us forever. They will deteriorate one day. The most important thing is our mind. Even if we are very beautiful, if we have bad mind, nobody will want to be our friends. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group A1, 1/13/09)

(2)

Pim: The cosmetic surgery could cause many bad effects to people who have undergone the operation such as social isolation, family problems, and self-destructive behaviors. The physicians had made mistakes during the malpractice and people have risked and suffered the worst outcome when the plastic surgery gone wrong. Pim: There are risks in doing plastic surgery. If the results of a plastic surgery are not what he or she has expected, the person would isolate himself/herself and it can cause problems in the family. Some people just isolate themselves and lock themselves up. They might have strange behaviors. Many research studies show that mistakes in plastic surgeries occurred often so there are many risks in doing plastic surgery. If the results 159

 

are not what one has expected, the person has to suffer from it. An article I read gave an example of a person who paid 5,000 Baht for a nose job and the doctor said it would last 3 years. But it did not last as long as what the doctor said. Also, the nose became crooked so she had to pay 5,000 Baht to remove the silicone. Pim: Another reason is that it is hard to monitor unqualified surgeons. Many doctors are allowed to do the cosmetic surgery without any certificate in a specialized field. It’s hard to specify the qualities of doctor. Most doctors are allowed to do plastic surgeries even though they are not specialized in the field. This allows mistakes to occur. Nid: Lastly, having cosmetic surgery is not the last answer to solve the body problems. There is another way to be as a good-looking people. Moreover, it reduces the value of self-esteem. Plastic surgery is not a solution to fix appearance. There are alternative ways to do it [fix appearance]. Women in the entertainment business need to be beautiful to get a job, so they do plastic surgery to make them look better. However, there are dangers in doing so like Michael Jackson who had so many cosmetic surgeries that his face looks strange. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B1, 1/22/09) (3)

Sita: The next point is aiming to turn back the years. For older people, plastic surgery will make them look younger. Sita: The next point is good health and quality of life. It will make a person have a good quality of life, good health, and good looking. Am: The next point is from body image viewpoint. It will improve self-esteem to make people feel good about themselves. Plastic surgery will make a person have a higher selfesteem. Am: Next, it will make people love themselves, and they will love and respect the other. If someone loves himself, he can love and respect others. Another point is that it will make family life happier. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group B2, 1/22/09) In contrast, the excerpt below shows how the lower proficiency group A2 exclusively

used Thai in their presentation.

160  

(4)

Dew: Our group thinks that people should have cosmetic surgery. The first reason is self esteem. They will feel good about themselves. When they feel good about themselves they will have more courage to do more things. Bam: The next point is they will have more opportunity to get a job. Some jobs require good looks such as flight attendants, movie stars or singers. For these people, looks are important for them to get a job. If they do plastic surgery, and it helps their career, we should let them do it. Aey: Next point is about attractiveness. If we are good looking we can attract more people to be our friends. (Cosmetic Surgery oral presentation, Group A1, 1/13/09) On the PowerPoint slides, the results from the participating groups show that even though

all the slides were composed in English, the higher proficiency groups mostly used their own words while the lower proficiency groups, although they used some of their own words, copied a number of sentences from the articles, as previously discussed in chapter 4 (PowerPoint slides, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). Group A2 mostly used copied sentences from the articles in their PowerPoint slides whereas another lower proficiency group, Group B2, used their own words in the reasons for their position but used some copied sentences from the articles as examples (PowerPoint slides, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). The information from student group interviews suggests that the higher proficiency students used their own words because they believed that this would make their presentation easier for the audience to understand. On the contrary, the fact that the lower proficiency groups used some copied sentences might be attributed to their insufficient ability to compose English sentences in a limited amount of time during the class period. The two excerpts below explain why the higher proficiency groups A1 and B1, with their presumably more advanced linguistic ability to write in English, mostly used their own words 161  

when composing the PowerPoint slides. They found it easier to use their own words in presenting their ideas. (1)

Researcher: I’ve noticed in your presentation that you used your own words a lot while other groups copied from the text. Why did you do so? Kanya: It’s easier for the audience to understand our presentation. I noticed that it was more difficult for the audience to understand if a group copied words directly from the texts. But if we simplified the texts and made it easier for the audience to understand, it would be easier for the presenters as well as the audience. It’s like we have digested and interpreted the texts and selected only the important points so that the audience need not listen to all the texts, including less important points. (Student group interview, Group A1, 2/12/09)

(2)

Researcher: When you did the slides, did you usually use your own words or copy the words from the texts? Nuj: We mostly used our own words. Researcher: Why did you choose to use your own words? Nuj: I think it’s easier to use our own words to tell or present something to our classmates. If we copied the words from the text, we might have to simplify or explain the words again. It makes it more difficult for us to explain something. (Student group interview, Group B1, 2/12/09) For the lower proficiency groups, even though Group A2 justified their use of copied

sentences from the texts to provide supporting evidence drawn from the articles, their reasons for doing so were likely due to the fact of their limited writing ability in English, as admitted by Aey. (3)

Researcher: From your slides, you seemed to use most of the words from the articles, instead of using your own words. Are there any reasons for that? Thida: We tried to show that we’ve used the information in the articles to support our position, not just our own opinions. We selected the information presented in the text that reflects our opinions so that we would have evidence to support them. Researcher: Was the English language a barrier for you when doing the presentation slides? 162

 

Aey: Yes. I think so. (Student group interview, Group A2, 2/12/09) For the lower proficiency group B2, they explained that they used their own words when presenting their opinions, while using sentences from the articles as supporting evidence. Their PowerPoint slides reflected their responses in the interview (PowerPoint slides, Group B2, 12/2/08, 1/13/09). The excerpt below illustrates these points: (4)

Researcher: When doing the PowerPoint slides, did you usually use your own words or the words in the texts? Sita: We sometimes cut and paste some words from the texts. We would use our own words to write our opinions or explain something. It’s the opinions that are not provided in the texts. But we would use the words from the texts when we used those examples to support our opinions. We also used our own words when summarizing all the information. (Student group interview, Group B2, 2/12/09) Another assignment that the students had to complete was a written assignment for each

of the two WebQuests. They had to write a one- to two-paragraph response to a question similar to the main question of the WebQuest. Because the length of the writings was specified by the teachers, the amount of English used was generally similar across the groups, although a few higher proficiency students elaborated more than others (Written assignments, 12/2/08, 12/11/08, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). Even though the writing was short, both teachers believed that this coupling of the written assignment with the composition for PowerPoint slides gave students a chance to use English and practice writing skills when the majority of class time was dedicated to reading skills (Post-project interviews with Naree and Pichet, 3/2/09). The students’ questionnaire results reflected what the teachers perceived about the written assignments. Many students claimed that 163  

their writing had improved from doing the WebQuest activities; thirteen students (65%) in class A and 16 students in class B (84%) believed that they had improved their writing skills following these activities (Questionnaire results, see Appendix H). From both classes, the open-ended section of this item in the questionnaire indicates that the students felt they learned how to organize ideas and express opinions in written English; they also stated that they had learned new vocabulary words and used them in their writing. Many students indicated that they learned to support their opinions using evidence from the texts along with that from their personal experience. It is noteworthy that the majority of the students in class B (84%), where the teachers provided some feedback on their writing, believed that they had improved their writing skills, while only a little more than half of the students (65%) from class A thought so. This might have been due to the fact that the teachers in Class B provided feedback on the students’ writing and thus the students were more fully aware of their own improvements. Summary of the amount of English used during the WebQuest activity The amount of English used during the WebQuest activity was examined according to (1) how the language of instruction was used; (2) how English was used during the class discussion; and (3) how English was used in the end products of the WebQuest. The results show that both teachers used English as the language of instruction only to a certain extent. They usually used English to direct the students in the class. However, they mostly used Thai when explaining more complex concepts to the students or speaking with the students in their group discussions; the exception to this was during the whole-class pre-activity discussion, when they used English more frequently. 164  

In terms of how the students used English during the WebQuest activity, the overall results show that the students only sparingly used English during the group discussions, the main activity in the WebQuest class. This might be due to the fact that the teachers did not require students to speak in English but gave them the option of using either English or Thai, since they viewed the course objective as more focused on reading skills than other language skills. In addition, they believed that requiring students to speak only in English could prevent lower proficiency students from expressing their ideas thoroughly or participating fully in the discussions, and could possibly result in less critical thinking use. However, higher proficiency students thought that they used spoken English as much in the WebQuest class as in the regular class, if not even more. Most students stated that they read much more in the WebQuest class and that their reading skills had improved in vocabulary, guessing strategies, and speed. In the end products of the WebQuest activity--the oral presentations and written assignments--the students used English to a certain extent. During the oral presentations, most groups, except the lower proficiency group A2, read the slides in English and explained the points on the slides in Thai. On the PowerPoint slides, even though all the groups composed the points using English, the higher proficiency groups mostly used their own words while the lower proficiency groups copied some sentences from the texts. In sum, the overall results indicate that the amount of English used during the WebQuests activity was somewhat limited. The students did not use much English speaking skills when discussing information during the WebQuest activity. However, the students had the opportunity to practice English reading skills extensively along with writing skills, albeit to a limited extent.

165  

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This chapter will discuss the results of the three research questions and the implications of this study. To recapitulate, the study investigated how intermediate EFL students in Thailand used critical thinking in WebQuest classes based on three research questions: 1) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use critical thinking when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? 2) What was the role of the teacher in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest lesson? 3) To what extent did the students with intermediate English proficiency use English when completing a WebQuest task in an EFL reading course? This chapter will be presented in four parts. First, it will re-examine the results of the three research questions. Second, it will suggest the implications for future WebQuest classes. Third, it will describe the limitations of the present study. Finally, it will suggest possible areas for future research. Discussion of the results The section below discusses how students used critical thinking during the WebQuest activity. It also discusses the role of the teacher in promoting critical thinking and the amount of English the students used during the activity. Students’ use of critical thinking during the WebQuest activity Taken collectively, the study results indicate that generally most students displayed a relatively high degree of critical thought throughout the activity, considering how they discussed and synthesized the information provided on the WebQuests to arrive at group decisions. Each 166  

group presented their position on the WebQuest issues to the class while supporting their opinions with evidence drawn from texts on the WebQuests, prior knowledge, and personal experience. According to the three-dimensional model adapted from that proposed by Damico, Baildon, and Campano (2005), which includes the operational, critical, and reflexive dimensions, the results show that in order to arrive at group positions on a WebQuest issue, the students analyzed the articles using the “operational” lens; they would use language to find the main ideas of each article and summarize them to their group members to attain an understanding of the issue. In addition, the students viewed the information from the “critical” dimension when discussing and synthesizing information from all perspectives involved in deciding how they would make a judgment on the issue. Regarding the “reflexive” dimension, they reflected on the information using their prior knowledge and personal experience, as well as engaging in critical reflection with their peers during the group discussions. How students reflected on the information resonates with what Vidoni and Maddux (2002) suggest: that WebQuests have potential to engage students in the reflective learning process, an element in the critical thinking framework proposed by Weinstein (2000). The process of how students used critical thinking in the WebQuest class could also be interpreted according to the higher levels of thinking featured in Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom et al., 1956). The students “analyzed” the information provided on the WebQuests by comparing, contrasting, and categorizing the information during the group discussions. They also “synthesized” information from all the perspectives as well as prioritizing information in order to create a presentation of their opinions on the issue. Additionally, they “evaluated” claims and evidence provided by articles on the WebQuests using prior knowledge and personal experience. 167  

These aspects of higher order thinking seem to generally overlap with the three-dimensional framework described above. According to the “claims continuum” suggested by Baildon and Damico (2006), most of the students in these classes were at the intermediate level in evaluating claims and evidence. Readers with an intermediate level in evaluating claims state their understanding of various perspectives on an issue, but they mostly rely on prior knowledge and personal experience to assess claims and probably do not rigorously evaluate these claims or question why they exist (Baildon & Damico, 2006). The results from the present study show that even though the students generally used critical thinking throughout the WebQuests activity, they did not engage in evaluating credibility of the information systematically. They mostly relied on prior knowledge and personal experience in assessing the information. This may have been due to the time constraints, which limited the class focus to text comprehension, and left little time for students to search for additional information on the Internet, as previously discussed in chapter 4. If more time were allowed for the WebQuest activity, teachers could encourage students to spend more time searching the Internet for alternative resources; students would thus have the opportunity to evaluate the sources of information more thoroughly. The ratings of the amount of critical thinking used could also be influenced by the “relevant contexts” as described on the second aspect on the Critical Thinking Rubric (How students consider relevant contexts). The results show that the students received a higher rating on the Euthanasia WebQuest when they considered the legal, social, and cultural contexts of Thailand than on the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, in which they did not consider context as much. A reason why they considered the contexts more in the Euthanasia WebQuest could have been that “Thailand” was specified in the question “Should euthanasia be legealized in 168  

Thailand?”, whereas in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, the question did not indicate Thailand (Should people have cosmetic surgery to enhance their looks?). It can thus be inferred that if we want the students to consider various contexts, the teacher should direct the students with a cue in the way the question is phrased. The teacher can encourage the discussion and consideration of contexts by specifically identifying a particular setting or providing information specific to a context for the students to think about, such as the number and types of cosmetic surgery done in Thailand. In addition, teachers can elicit from the students the types of contexts that should be considered when thinking about an issue and how these contexts could influence their decision. For example, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuests, the students can discuss how contexts, such as social class, socio-economic status, or urban/suburban lifestyles, could affect a person’s decision to have a cosmetic surgery. Similarly, how critical thinking is regarded specifically in the “Thai contexts” could also have influenced how students in this study used critical thinking. As mentioned earlier in the introduction chapter, “moral values” are considered a desired goal of the Thai educational system. Jantrasakul (2004) reported that the Thai teacher participants in her study viewed EFL classrooms as a place to integrate Thai values and virtues. For example, they perceived it one of their duties to guide students towards desirable values, such as values against consumerism. However, the results in her study indicates in EFL classes the notion of critical thinking was presented only in the form of a moral lesson at the end of each class while opportunities for the students to exercise critical thinking or express their opinions were still limited. In this study, the two teachers did not explicitly express that they intended to integrate moral values or consider virtue education as a part of their EFL teaching. However, it was inevitable that students’ use of critical thinking would be affected by the “moral values” 169  

transmitted to them in general from their teachers or the overall educational system. To illustrate this point, the students’ moral values played a role in how they considered euthanasia, both in how they evaluated what was right or wrong and in how they expressed concerns for others. For example, the students’ conversations suggested their views that people should have an equal opportunity to receive good medical treatment regardless of their socio-economic or social status, or that it seemed unethical for doctors, who are supposed to be rescuers, to assist someone to die. Similarly, in the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, the students’ discussions suggested that people should not be evaluated on their appearance but should be considered with regard to their merits. Applying moral values could also be considered as a type of critical thinking that occurred during the WebQuest activity. Even though the results suggest that students engaged in critical thinking when discussing and synthesizing information from all perspectives during group discussions, not every group was able to effectively transfer their critical assessments into the final products of the WebQuest, resulting in fewer examples of critical thinking on the presentations and written assignments. This may be because some students’ linguistic skills limited their reading and writing ability (Carrell, 1991; Ortega, 2003; Sasaki, 2000). The students’ proficiency levels seemed to affect their ability to express their thoughts; in other words, lower proficiency students’ limited vocabulary and writing skills prevented them from thoroughly expressing their ideas through writing and thus made their reasoning in the writing seem simplistic and rather weak. The Power Point presentation and written assignment data from group A2, the least proficient group in this study, indicate that although they had synthesized and evaluated all perspectives on the issue during the group discussion, most performed more poorly than other groups on many aspects of critical thinking, such as including relevant perspectives on an issue, providing refutations, using 170  

original thoughts on their slides, and using appropriate evidence to support their opinions. This could become a problem for lower proficiency students when thinking is predominantly assessed by English writing ability in academic context (Atkinson, 1997; Leppa, 2004). To help lower proficiency students, the teachers could provide more time for the students to compose the PowerPoint slides and prepare for the presentations. Part of this activity could be planned or completed outside the class. In addition, the teachers could provide feedback for the students to help them improve expression of their thoughts in the presentations and in the written assignments, as evident in how the students from both higher and lower proficiency groups in Class B received a higher rating for critical thinking on the second written assignment (on Cosmetic Surgery) after receiving teacher feedbacks on their first assignment. Sharma and Hannafin (2004) suggest that feedback could encourage students to delve deeper into their thinking and modify their work to better suit the expectations of the course or teacher. Without feedback, students would not be able to assess how their efforts were received by the teacher, thus limiting their chances to improve. The particular topic of the WebQuest was also pertinent to the students’ use of critical thinking. Engaging the students with authentic problems (such as considering whether they would legalize euthanasia in Thailand or have cosmetic surgery to improve appearance), was seen as a factor that could promote cognitive involvement and complex thinking skills (Bradshaw et al., 2002). The results in this study indicate that students drew more on their prior knowledge and personal experience when a topic was more relevant to their life (such as cosmetic surgery), while depending more on texts when finding evidence to support their opinions on a less familiar topic (such as euthanasia). However, the results from this study also 171  

suggest that the students put the same depth of thought into both familiar and unfamiliar issues when they considered the factors involved and synthesized all information to form their opinions. These findings seem to contradict the results of a study conducted by Stapleton (2001), which suggested that content familiarity played a greater role in critical thinking where a more familiar topic generated more abstract discussion and stronger critical thinking use in the writing of EFL Japanese students. The findings of this particular study show that Japanese students elaborated more thoughtfully and with greater abstract reasoning when they wrote an essay on Japan’s rice import policy while using fewer arguments and less evidence for the topic of gun control. The structure of the WebQuest is another factor that could influence the students to think critically (Murray, 2006). A study by Kanuka, Rourke and Laflamme (2007) suggests that highly structured activities such as WebQuests encourage the participants to use critical thinking; this was evident in how WebQuest received the greatest number of responses reflective of the highest levels of “cognitive presence” according to the theoretical model of practical inquiry proposed by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2001). The clearly defined roles in a WebQuest also encourage such higher levels of thinking because they help students see the problem from perspectives they might not ordinarily see (Ikpeze & Boyd, 2007). Besides the formal WebQuest structure, informal structures could also facilitate students’ use of critical thinking. The results from this study show that in class B, Pichet provided informal structures in the form of guidance when he did comprehension checks with the students and asked questions to stimulate students’ critical thinking. Furthermore, activities aimed at stimulating students’ prior knowledge on the issue and supporting students’ understanding of the role were added to the WebQuest activity. These activities will be further discussed in the next section. 172  

The pre-defined structure of a WebQuest could serve as a foundation that teachers can modify, adjusting the content and activities to suit their class objectives (March, 2004). In this study, a pre-activity discussion was added to generate opinions on the issue before the students engaged in the WebQuest. The pre-WebQuest discussion involved sub-activities deemed to generate students’ curiosity and interests, including reading texts, viewing pictures, watching YouTube video clips and participating in small group and whole-class discussions. This process of activating learners’ prior knowledge is thought to be necessary to facilitate engagement in critical thinking (Sharma & Hannafin, 2004). This preliminary activity familiarized the students with the problem and helped them reflect on their initial position prior to engaging in the activity. The results in this study show that after participating in the pre-activity discussion on the Euthanasia WebQuest, the students became more familiar with this topic, usually one considered distant and unfamiliar to most Thai students, and thus were able to reflect on the issue actively and thoughtfully later. This step is similar to the “What do you think?” stage suggested by Young and Wilson (2002) when they proposed an additional step after students are introduced to the task of the WebQuest. During this additional step, students can propose possible solutions to the WebQuest problems based on their current knowledge of the issue. Another activity added to the WebQuest in this study was the role discussion, during which the students were grouped according to their assigned role to summarize and discuss the information from each perspective. It was aimed at helping EFL students make connections between the information from the articles and their prior knowledge so that they had fuller understanding of the role assigned to them. The results from the present study show that the role discussion provided the students with a better understanding of the articles and perspectives involved before reading the texts in more detail later. The results from the role sheets, where 173  

students had to write a summary of the main points of the articles, suggest that most students went through the articles in more detail later at home, as evident in how they summarized information, while some lower proficiency students used the summary received during the discussion to substitute for their reading. The role discussion, therefore, generally helped the students to see the role or perspective assigned to them more clearly, as Ikpeze and Boyd (2007) and Lim and Hernandez (2007) suggest in their research. However, a caution for teachers who want to incorporate this step is that they should ensure that students read the articles in more detail later at home to prevent students from using the discussion to substitute for the actual reading of the articles. One way to assure students’ reading is to ask the students to write out a summary of the main points of the articles and turn it in as an assignment. Pertaining to the rubrics used in this study, such as the WebQuest Evaluation Rubric and the Critical Thinking Rubric, I would like to suggest some modifications that can be useful for future research. For the WebQuests evaluation rubric, an aspect on “topic” should be incorporated to assess whether the topic of a WebQuest can generate critical thinking. The description of this aspect can explain whether a topic is controversial, has multiple perspectives, and is something students can relate to. In addition, another aspect on “prior knowledge activation” could also be included. This aspect may be used to evaluate whether students’ background knowledge on the issue is activated adequately and appropriately as part of the activity so that the students can engage with the issue of the WebQuest. This prior-knowledge activation activity would be especially important if the topic of the WebQuest were unfamiliar to the students in the class.

174  

For the Critical Thinking Rubric, I think that the rubric could incorporate some subaspects for Aspect 2: How students consider relevant contexts. These sub-aspects can take into consideration the contexts specifically mentioned in the main question of the WebQuest and the students’ own cultural contexts. These sub-aspects could evaluate how students consider specific contexts that are connected to the problem, such as the context of Thailand when students considered whether euthanasia should be legalized there. Similarly, the sub-aspects could also assess how the cultural and social backgrounds of the students play a role when they consider an issue. For example, for the Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest, the rubric could be used to examine how the students explicitly provided arguments using information from their immediate contexts, which in this case included living in urban areas in Thailand, studying at a university, and having been taught certain moral values. These contextual aspects could have impacted how they viewed the issue of cosmetic surgery. In addition, for Aspect 5, How students discuss relevant perspectives, a sub-aspect could be added to investigate whether students discuss perspectives that are not provided in the WebQuests. It would allow us to probe further into how students think about the issue. In conclusion, the results in this study resonate with a number of research studies which claim WebQuest is a well-structured activity with the potential to promote higher levels of thinking for both L1 and L2 students in various contexts (Allan & Street, 2007; Bradshaw et al., 2002; Kanuka, 2005; Kanuka, 2007; Laborda, 2009; Luzon, 2007; Murray, 2006; Sox & Rubinstein-Avila, 2009; Vidoni & Maddux, 2002; Young & Wilson, 2002). This web-based activity motivates the students to read, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, and make judgments on real problems (Strickland, 2005). However, contrary to other WebQuest studies which mostly reported how students used critical thinking as a whole, this study probed further into students’ 175  

use of critical thinking on various sub-aspects, based on a rubric adapted from the Washington State University Critical Thinking Rubric. As a result, the findings in the present study suggest that students take into account the contexts, diverse perspectives, prior knowledge, and personal experience on the issue when they actively discuss, analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information from various perspectives. Specific to EFL contexts, WebQuests have potential as an activity in an English language class that promotes students’ use of critical thinking. In an EFL course, which is mostly focused on English skills, students often lack an opportunity to express their opinions or exercise complex thinking. Critical thinking, even though often cited as one of the desirable goals in formal education, is frequently seen as detached from an English language course. WebQuests in this study were, therefore, adapted and contextualized not as isolated activities, but were used in the larger context of the course ENG 123; Young and Wilson (2002) point out that a WebQuest has potential as a powerful tool that connects a specific classroom activity and the main educational objectives of a class. The overall results of how the students in this study used critical thinking skills suggest that WebQuests could be effectively used to promote critical thinking and motivate the students to use English in a meaningful way. They provide authentic information which motivates students to use English to solve a problem (Laborda, 2009; Sox & Rubinstein-Avila, 2009). Many students in this study found that the WebQuest activity motivated them to learn English and recommended this activity for future English classes (Questionnaire results, see Appendix H). In addition, WebQuests allow students to learn about a new topic that they might not have thought about before. In this study, the Euthanasia WebQuest engaged Thai students who 176  

were initially not familiar with euthanasia into a discussion in which they had a chance to reflect on the issue. They seemed to realize how this topic was closer to their lives than they had thought. The diverse perspectives and roles on the WebQuest allowed students to examine the issue from different angles and gain insight into the main reasons that supporters and opponents used in their arguments. The results from the students’ discussions suggest that they could see why euthanasia was a controversial subject and how it could affect their personal lives and the society they lived in. Thus, critical thinking can also be seen as generative of curiosity that motivates students to learn more about a new topic. Even though WebQuests should be used with EFL students to promote critical thinking skills and language learning, in a college-level English course such as the one in this study, I would suggest using WebQuests as a supplementary activity rather than using them as the primary curriculum. The course objectives of these college-level courses have often been set and are difficult to change, so it would be more practical to use WebQuests as supplementary. From my experience in observing the use of WebQuests with a number of college-level EFL classes, even though they have potential in motivating the students to learn English, many teachers and students still valued traditional activities such as providing detailed grammar instruction or checking understanding of sentence structures and vocabulary. Moreover, particular to a reading class, WebQuests seem to emphasize reading for main ideas over close reading for details. In college-level classes where the course objectives often focus on examinations, WebQuests might not provide all the instruction needed to prepare students to successfully sit for tests. Additionally, in classroom contexts where not every teacher is comfortable with using technology, requiring all teachers to use a computer-based activity such as WebQuests could be seen as an obstacle rather than a support. It would be more useful to introduce WebQuest as an 177  

alternative reading activity and let the teachers decide if they want to continue using WebQuests or would rather choose other types of activities that do not require technology. The role of the teachers in supporting critical thinking in a WebQuest class Since the role of the teacher has generally shifted from the teacher as leader in the traditional English class to the teacher as facilitator in a WebQuest class, the teacher in a WebQuest class has to adapt to his/her new role in this learner-centered, technology-based classroom. He/she must balance providing guidance and scaffolding for text comprehension with encouraging students’ autonomy in learning. Pichet acknowledged that he was not sure whether he had provided too much intervention in the students’ reading, while Naree was uncertain whether her involvement with the students was enough (Teacher post-project interviews, 3/2/09). These findings resonate with what Noordin, Samad and Mohamed (2008) suggested; the quality of the teacher’s monitoring of students’ progress might be incomplete during WebQuest classes due to the novelty of WebQuest in EFL classrooms. There seem to be minimal studies conducted on the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class, especially in EFL contexts, where learning a language was an additional dimension to the normal objectives of content learning in a WebQuest. However, even though both teachers’ assumptions about their role in this study seemed to be different, the results suggest that both Naree and Pichet played strong positive roles in assuring that students comprehended the texts and were not misunderstanding. The success of the students in this study could, therefore, have been diminished, had the teachers been less active and considerate of the students’ needs and obstacles in learning.

178  

Naree’s assumption of the teacher’s role as a class manager influenced how she monitored the students’ working progress at greater distance while Pichet, assuming the continuation of the teacher’s role in a traditional class, remained the class expert who provided close guidance in text comprehension. Lam and Lawrence (2002) found in their study that the main role of the teacher in a computer-based second language class was to answer students’ questions because the teacher was considered the primary source of answers. These findings seem divergent to the example of Naree’s class, since the students in this class mostly sought help from online and electronic dictionaries or higher proficiency students in their group first and looked for teacher help only when these sources were not successful. The WebQuest structure thus seemed to offer an opportunity for the learners to adopt an expert role. On the other hand, the role of Pichet seemed to confirm claims stated by Lam and Lawrence (2002) that, although the students recognized that there was a shift from the teacher to the students for the leading role, Pichet still continued his traditional role of the teacher in providing close text guidance to students. As a result, the role of the teacher in the technology-based class seemed less changed in Pichet’s class and was rather similar to the teacher-student role in a communicative classroom where the teacher remains the facilitator and source person of the class (Lam & Lawrence, 2002). Even though Pichet played a stronger role as teacher in the WebQuest class, the results show that the students in both classes in this study used critical thinking equally well. This suggests that the role of the teacher in a technology-based learner-centered class could vary while student positive results can still be obtained. These findings seem to reinforce the claim stated by Lim (2004) that the role of the teacher in a technology-based class can differ broadly depending on many factors such as the subject area, teaching style, and learner characteristics. 179  

As a result, the challenge for the teacher in a web-based class is to determine how to coordinate the web-based activity and to facilitate learning (Lim, 2004). In essence, teachers should monitor to see whether the students comprehend and are learning what they need to, no matter which role is taken. In Naree’s case, if the students had not been able to receive “expert” help from other students and online resources, the teacher might have adapted by taking a more active role. Specific to an EFL learner-centered class (where the students are still learning the language), even though learning autonomy should be encouraged, the teacher should provide extensive assistance to students, especially lower proficiency students, to help them with text comprehension and critical thought on the issue. Even though the results from this study suggest a similar amount of critical thinking used during the activity despite different types of instructor support, based on my observations of the WebQuest classes, the students who received close attention from the teachers tended to feel that the teachers were part of their learning process and valued the activity more. In Naree’s class, some respondents to the questionnaire stated that they would have liked to receive some feedback from Naree during group discussions and possibly hear her opinions on the issue (Questionnaire results, 1/13/09, 1/22/09). In any case, teachers should balance guidance with the provision of opportunities for students to develop autonomy. Teachers should provide systematic support for students to ensure text comprehension and understanding of the issues. They can observe whether the students understand the texts and periodically check their comprehension. However, the teachers should first allow students to do the reading on their own. This study suggests that the right amount of guidance could lie between what the two teachers did in their classes. A teacher should give more student support that Naree provided in her class. Too little involvement, even though with 180  

good intentions, could limit opportunities for the teacher to help students who might not ask for the help they need. The teacher can also identify the lower proficiency students in the class and give them extra help while allowing the higher proficiency students to work on their own. On the other hand, the support Pichet provided for his in text comprehension could be seen as too controlling, especially for higher proficiency students. The teacher should therefore allow ample space for the students to work on their own before intervening. Essentially, systematic support should be provided but the teacher should ensure that the students have a chance to work on their own and receive the teacher’s support when needed. To assist students’ reading of the texts, the teacher can also remind students of the strategies that could be used in reading the articles, as well as provide examples of how to support opinions with convincing evidence from the texts and other resources. They could also provide samples of language use necessary to complete the assignments, such as words and phrases that can be used to support or question a statement or to provide refutation. In order to encourage a deeper probe into an issue, the teacher could also ask thought provoking questions to reinforce students’ use of critical thinking. In addition, the teacher can provide conceptual scaffolds in the format of worksheets to help the students sort out and organize information received from the articles (Hill & Hannafin, 2001). Even though teacher support is crucial in a WebQuest class, to make the most effective use of WebQuest for EFL students, the teacher should select a WebQuest with an appropriate level of English for the students. If the articles in the WebQuests are too difficult for the students to comprehend, that WebQuest would not be suitable. The teacher can spend the first few classes informally or formally evaluating students’ reading proficiency, so that they can choose or 181  

modify the selection of articles to fit the students’ language levels. Similarly, the teacher should also observe which students are the least proficient so that he/she can channel the most support to those students. Careful selection of WebQuests, combined with scaffolding, feedback, and support from the teacher are all key factors that will make WebQuest a valuable learning experience for students. The amount of English used during the WebQuest activity During the WebQuest class, the students seemed to use English across the four English skills to varying degrees. The overall results suggest that the students had a chance to read English extensively through the articles provided on the WebQuests and learned a great deal of vocabulary and various reading strategies, such as word guessing, finding main ideas or skimming. They also had a chance to write in English when they composed the PowerPoint slides and when they completed the written assignments. However, they seemed to speak and listen in English sporadically, possibly due to the fact that reading skills were considered the objectives of this course while other skills were seen as supplementary. However, compared to the traditional classroom sessions of this particular course, the results show that many students used an equivalent amount of spoken English in the WebQuest, if not even more. The teachers used both English and Thai as languages of instruction. Naree seemed to use English more often whereas Pichet mostly used English alongside Thai when providing explanations of a class procedure or leading a whole-class discussion. Pichet considered offering parallel instruction in L1 and L2 as helping lower proficiency students to understand what he explained so that they could fully participate in the activity. Both teachers in this study seemed to

182  

use L1 more often when explaining difficult concepts, a strategy which resonates with how the teachers in a study by Schweers (1999) justified using L1 in EFL classes in Puerto Rico. Generally, predominant use of L2 as the language of instruction is considered most appropriate in English language classrooms, while the use of L1 is often minimized; the reasoning for this is that the teacher should promote the exposure of L2 as extensively as possible so that the students can learn. However, Cook (2001) suggests that L1 could be used as an instructional language to explain meanings of words or sentences in L2. It could also be used to organize the class or explain what has been communicated in the target language so that the students can thoroughly understand what is required to carry out a task. As an example of this, the results from the present study suggest that, in an EFL class, requiring all students to use English in the class might prevent lower proficiency students from fully engaging in the discussions. To maximize the full potential of a WebQuest to promote critical thinking, using both L1 and L2 enables students from all proficiency levels to actively participate in the discussion. Cummins (2007) proposed that students’ L1 is not obstructing the achieving of L2 proficiency; instead, when L1 is used in the classroom, it can scaffold the learning of the L2. Students could also use L1 as collaborative dialogue with group members when completing group work (Cook, 2001). The results in this study suggest that the communicative competence goal of English learning could be compromised by a curriculum that divides the four language skills into different courses such as a reading course, a speaking course, and so on. For example, the reading objectives of the course in this study limited other skills such as speaking, to only presentations. This single focus could compel the teacher and students to only use the skills 183  

considered as objectives of the course while neglecting others, which seems to be contrary to the communicative approach that promotes integrated skills. Course examinations could also influence how the teachers and students tend to focus excessively on the skill that was targeted in the course. In this particular context, the students and teachers focused only on reading the texts in the target language while mostly speaking in their native language throughout the activity. In addition, the proficiency of the students could determine the amount of English used for communication during the class. The higher proficiency students spoke more English. From my observations of another section of ENG 123 taught by Pichet, which comprised mostly higher proficiency students, it was evident that the students discussed more in English. It could suggest that the higher proficiency the students have, the more they are willing to discuss in English. Therefore, two obstacles to integrating language skills and encouraging communicative competence could be the skills specific organization of instruction and the language proficiency of students. In order to encourage the students to use English as much as possible, the teacher can explicitly require students to use English during a certain part of the activity, as suggested by Pichet. For example, the teacher can require the students to deliver the oral presentation in English. Even though the results in this study reveal that many students only used English to read the slides, most students perceived it as an opportunity to practice speaking English, which was generally infrequent in this kind of reading course. The teacher can also encourage the students to provide more explanation in the target language rather than only reading from the PowerPoint slides. Furthermore, the teacher can promote the use of English in the group discussion by explicitly encouraging the students to discuss in English. The smaller number of group participants coupled with the acquaintance of familiar faces could lower the students’ anxiety, 184  

and they may feel less pressured in this case compared to speaking during the whole-class discussion. In any case, the students should be assured that using L1 is optional for them while using L2 is encouraged to promote language learning. WebQuests, therefore, can help EFL students to use English, although at varying levels. Even though many factors may play a role in how EFL students use English in a WebQuest class, including course objectives, time available, teacher’s support, and students’ proficiency levels, the results from this study indicate that the teacher played a dominant role in determining the level of English expected from students during the activity. This is evident in how the teachers’ willingness to accommodate the students’ language needs in this study played an important part in supporting students to actively participate in the discussion and thus engage in critical thinking. Conclusion WebQuests are shown in this study to motivate students to use critical thinking and read extensively. It is different from other activities that aim for students to exercise critical thinking, such as debates or group discussions, in the way that it provides a structure for the students to consider the information and share opinions on the issue. It places students in a well-structured learning activity, guided by the teacher, so that they will make the most use of time available to develop complex thinking skills while they learn English. WebQuest provides students with necessary resources of information to discuss the issue. Students are, therefore, not overwhelmed by the task of searching the internet to find the right information. Different roles in a WebQuest also help students see different perspectives on the issue being discussed; the students are informed of important issues pertinent to the topic so that they know what the main arguments 185  

are and why the advocates and opponents of the issue see the problem differently. Other activities for promoting critical thinking may not provide all the information necessary for problem solving and decision making. If students have to search for the information and learn about the issue by themselves, they may choose the first information they find and miss important arguments. The teacher’s advance planning and guidance during the activity also make the search for information more effective within the time available so that the students can spend the class time more on discussing the issue. WebQuest activity is, therefore, a well-structured activity appropriate for students to exercise critical thinking and read extensively in a limited amount of time. From this study, it could be inferred that critical thinking is a complex concept that can manifest itself in many forms, such as in writing, in conversation, in decision making, or in action. In an educational setting, critical thinking can be thought of as how students analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information from diverse perspectives as they attempt to form their positions or opinions on an issue. Critical thinking can also be affected by many factors such as a person’s prior experience, cultural and social context, or the task they are performing. Students in EFL settings often find it difficult to exercise and express critical thinking because either they lack the opportunity to use critical thinking or they merely have nothing to say due to their lack of knowledge on the issue. A class activity such as WebQuest can, therefore, introduce students to the concept of critical thinking and provide a well-structured task for students to practice it. I believe that the activity can help them develop a better idea of what critical thinking is and be able to apply what they learn to other situations in their schooling and their lives.

186  

Suggestions for future WebQuest implementation Even though WebQuests show potential for encouraging critical thinking, the mere use of WebQuests does not guarantee effective thoughtful learning. A number of pedagogical implications are provided below for teachers who plan to implement WebQuests to promote critical thinking and language learning in their EFL classes. 1. In formal EFL classrooms (where class activities are usually pre-determined by time and course objectives), in order to enhance the use of in-class time available, the teacher can ask the students to do part of their work from home. As Ikpeze and Boyde (2007) suggest, students should be encouraged to complete part of their work at home so that they can engage in active exploration of the materials. The teacher can ask the students to read the articles prior to the class to gain a brief understanding of the topic or to read again after the class to acquire more detail from the articles. In addition, in a class where time is limited and extensive Internet search of information is not an option, the teacher can introduce the students to ways to evaluate the sources of information and encourage them to do an Internet search outside the class to find at least one piece of information to support their position. Then the teacher can discuss the importance of evaluating the source of information in the class and work with the students to put appropriate information together so that the students can learn how to evaluate their sources. Students can also work with their group members to practice selecting the most appropriate and reliable information among that obtained from each student in their group. 2. The results in this study suggest that lower proficiency students seemed to need more help in developing the end products of the WebQuests. The teacher should pay extra attention to these students and assure them that they can always seek help from him/her if they need to. In 187  

addition, the teacher can provide feedback to the least proficient students, especially when there is no grade or other traditional form of feedback, so that they can learn from their mistakes and improve their work in the subsequent assignments. The teacher may also need to help lower proficiency students monitor and manage the time needed for a task so that they can effectively complete the assignments in class. 3. Topic and the difficulty level of materials are important matters that the teacher should pay attention to when selecting a WebQuest to be used in the EFL classroom. The teachers can assess the students’ interests by asking for potential topics in the class or administer a short questionnaire on possible topics. If more than one WebQuest will be used for the course, the teacher can select a variety of topics that seem likely to draw diverse students’ interests. March (2004) suggests the teacher choose a topic that the students would find compelling and then build an authentic learning task around it. If the topic seems to be unfamiliar to most students, a pre-WebQuest activity similar to the one in this study can be used to activate the students’ prior knowledge on an issue, a factor found to be critical in promoting higher levels of thinking (Sharma & Hannafin, 2004). In addition, an article containing real cases of peoples’ experience in a situation similar to the topic of the WebQuest has been shown in this study to be successful in placing the students in the position of people facing the problem. For example, the article about the French woman who sought court approval in obtaining euthanasia in this study was successful in helping the students to imagine if they were a terminally-ill patient or had a relative who suffered from an incurable disease, and then to think about what they would do in these situations. For EFL teachers who plan to build their own WebQuests, in addition to choosing a topic of the students’ interest, they need to consider how they can obtain the articles related to their topic 188  

of choice in English, especially if the topic revolves around local contexts. They should consider the appropriate article length and level of English suitable to the activity and the students. A balance between interesting topics and appropriate materials should be considered when selecting a topic for an EFL WebQuest. The teacher could use a rubric suggested by Prapinwong and Puthikanon (2008) or by Sox and Rubinstein-Avila (2009) when selecting an appropriate WebQuest for EFL students. 4. An activity similar to the role discussion activity could be used to provide scaffolding on the comprehension of the role or perspective assigned to the students. This step is especially important for an unfamiliar topic, such as euthanasia, where students might feel insecure when reading articles with unfamiliar topics or might find it difficult to understand the perspectives involved. The teacher could assign the role and ask students to read the articles prior to the class so that the majority of the class time could be devoted to the discussion. As mentioned earlier in the chapter, if the teacher asks the students to read articles during the role discussion in the class, he or she should make sure that the students actually read the article in more detail later outside the class. Teachers can ensure such reading by asking the students to complete a role discussion sheet, or an outline of important points of each article, so that the students would have to read the articles fully and could not simply use a summary of the discussion to substitute for the actual reading. 5. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the teacher plays a crucial role in supporting students’ use of critical thinking and language use in this learner-centered activity. Even though the learner is considered central, the teacher should actively monitor the students’ progress on the task and not hesitate to offer help when students need it. The two teachers in this study are 189  

good examples of teachers who were receptive to the students’ needs and problems so that they could provide the right level and type of support to the students. 6. Even though the teacher should encourage the students to use extensive amounts of English during the WebQuest class, an option to choose between L1 and L2 should be provided if the participation of students at all proficiency levels is desired. As earlier mentioned in this chapter, the teacher can specify which activity requires using English, such as during the presentation, to promote the use of L2 and for which activity English is suggested but not required, such as during the group discussion. These options encourage the use of English among lower proficiency students while still encouraging motivated learners to use extensive amounts of English in the class. Limitations of the study 1. The limited number of participants, the duration of classroom implementation in this study, and the characteristics of the course make it difficult to generalize the results to other classroom contexts. Two groups out of five from each class were selected to participate in the study; that is, 6-7 students from each class. Observation of such a small number of students may not provide a comprehensive understanding of how EFL students use critical thinking in a reading course. In addition, only two WebQuests were used in the data for this study, resulting in the observation of four class sessions. Though the use of two WebQuests in a semester language course may be the most one can realistically expect, the findings could differ if students had more time to adjust by doing several WebQuests. 2. The data collected from student conversations during group discussions were primarily used to determine the extent to which they used critical thinking skills. Even though a video and audio tape recorder were used alongside the researcher’s observations in an attempt to 190  

capture as much as possible from student discussions, it was impossible to ensure that all of what they said was recorded; parts were possibly left unrecorded and could perhaps alter the findings. However, at least 90% of the conversations were audibly recorded in this study. 3. The time constraints and course objectives limited the use of Internet searching for external information in this WebQuest activity, as previously discussed in chapter 4. This limited the full potential of WebQuests to engage students in evaluating and selecting the most appropriate sources of information. If the students had more time to conduct Internet searches, they might have learned to evaluate and question the credibility of information more carefully. Suggestions for future study This study suggests a number of avenues for further research on how WebQuests affect students’ use of critical thinking in EFL classes. These suggestions follow: 1. Study data appears to indicate that higher proficiency students perform better than lower proficiency students in the end products of the WebQuest, resulting in a higher level of thinking in the PowerPoint presentations and the written assignments. A more systematic study would be required to examine in more detail how student proficiency levels affect critical thinking use in a WebQuest activity. 2. The study results suggest that the topic and structure of the WebQuest may have an effect on how students exercise critical thinking during a WebQuest activity. Future research could probe further into how familiar and unfamiliar topics affect the extent and quality of critical thinking use. In the same manner, the structures and well-defined roles seem to affect how students perceive the issue from diverse perspectives. Future research could investigate how

191  

Webquest components such as the knowledge-pooling stage, the discussion of a role, or how well the role is defined, influence the use of critical thinking. 3. There seem to be preliminary results from this study that different types of instructors’ support, such as the use of L1 and L2 in giving instruction, and checks for student comprehension, may have relative benefits on students’ use of critical thinking in a WebQuest class. Future research may examine how different types of instructors’ support have an effect on students’ text comprehension and critical thinking use. 4. The results in this study suggest that students tend to use certain English skills more than others. Future research could investigate how teacher emphasis on the four language skills shapes students’ ability to think critically and learn language, in order to reap the full benefits of WebQuests. In a similar manner, a study could be conducted to assess how students’ use of critical thinking would be affected if they were required to use L2 exclusively or given an option to use a combination of L1 and L2 in an EFL WebQuest class.

192  

REFERENCES Abbit, J., & Ophus, J. (2008). What we know about the impacts of WebQuests: A review of research. AACE Journal, 16(4), 441-456. Allan, J., & Street, M. (2007). The quest for deeper learning: An investigation into the impact of a knowledge-pooling WebQuest in primary initial teacher training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 1102-1112. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (2006). Future foreign language teachers’ social and cognitive collaboration in an online environment. Language Learning & Technology, 10, 42-66. Atagi, R. (2002) The Thailand educational reform project: School reform policy (Report No. ADB TA 3585 – THA). Retrieved from Office of the Educational Council: http://www.edthai.com/publication/0003/fulltext.pdf Athanassiou, N., McNett, J., & Harvey, C. (2003). Critical thinking in the management classroom: Bloom’s Taxonomy as a learning tool. Journal of Management Education, 27, 533-555. Atkinson, D. (1997). A Critical Approach to Critical Thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 71-94. Aviles, C. B. (1999). Understanding and testing for “Critical Thinking” with Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, San Francisco, CA. 193  

Baildon, M. & Damico, J. S. (2006). Reading web sites in an inquiry-based social studies classroom. In D. W. Rowe, R. T. Jimenez, D. L. Compton, D. K. Dickinson, Y. Kim, K. M. Leander & V. J. Risko (Eds.) National Reading Conference Yearbook. Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference (pp. 204-217). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference. Barak, M. (2005). From order to disorder: the role of computer-based electronics projects on fostering of higher-order cognitive skills. Computer & Education, 45, 231-243. Benesch, S. (1993). Critical thinking: A learning process for democracy. TESOL Quarterly, 27(3), 545-548. Benesch, S. (1999). Thinking critically, Thinking dialogically. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 573580. Beyer, B. K. (1997). Improving student thinking: A comprehensive approach. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Bissell, A. N., & Lemons, P. P. (2006). A new method for assessing critical thinking in the classroom. BioScience, 56, 66-72. Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay. Bradshaw, A. C., Bishop, J. L., Gens, L. S., Miller, S. L., & Rogers, M. A. (2002). The relationship of the World Wide Web to thinking skills. Educational Media International, 39, 275-284. Carrell, P. L. (1991). Second Language Reading: Reading ability or language proficiency? Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 159-179. 194  

Chuo, T. (2007). The effects of the WebQuest writing instruction program on EFL learners' writing performance, writing apprehension, and perception. TESL-EJ, 11(3). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej43/a3.html Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-423. Coster, J., & Ledovski, V. (2005). Thinking outside the square: Promoting critical thinking through online discussions. Paper presented at the 18th Annual EA Education Conference, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.elicos.edu.au/index.cgi?E=hcatfuncs&PT=sl&X=getdoc&Lev1=pub_c0 6_07&Lev2=c05_coster Crawford, C. M., & Brown, E. (2002). Focusing upon higher order thinking skills: WebQuests and the learner-centered Mathematical learning environement. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED474086). Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational Research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Critical Web Reader. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://cwr.indiana.edu/AboutCWR/Tools/tabid/11036/Default.aspx Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 221-240. Damico, J. S., & Baildon, M. (2007). Examining ways readers engage with websites during think-aloud sessions. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(3), 254-263. Damico, J. S., Baildon, M., & Campano, G. (2005). Integrating literacy, technology and

195  

disciplined inquiry in social studies: The development and application of a conceptual model. Technology, Humanities, Education and Narrative, 2(1). Retrieved from http://thenjournal.org/feature/92/ Davidson, B. W. (1998). Comments on Dwight Atkinson's "A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL": A case for critical thinking in the English language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 119-123. Dodge, B. (1998). WebQuests: A strategy for scaffolding higher level learning. Retrieved from http://webquest.sdsu.edu/necc98.htm Durrant, C., & Green, B. (2001). Literacy and the new technologies in school education: Meeting the l(IT)eracy challenge. In H. Fehring & P. Green (Eds.), Critical Literacy: A collection of articles from the Australian Literacy Educators’ Association (pp. 142-164). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specific: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4-10. Felix, U. (2002). The web for constructivism approaches in language learning, ReCALL, 14, 215. Fox, S., & MacKeogh, K. (2003). Can eLearning promote higher-order learning without tutor overload? Open Learning, 18, 121-134. Fry, G. W. (2002). Synthesis report: From crisis to opportunity, the challenge of educational reform in Thailand (Report No. TA 3585- THA). Retrieved from Office of the Educational Council: http://www.edthai.com/publication/0002/fulltext.pdf Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and

196  

computer conferencing in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15, 1, 7-23. Gokhale A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7, 22-30. Green, B. (1988). Subject-specific literacy and school learning: A focus on writing. Australian Journal of Education, 32, 156-179. Hill, J., & Hannafin, M. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37-52. Hopson, M., Simms, R., & Knezek, G. (2001). Using a technology-enriched environment to improve higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 109-119. Ikpeze, C. H., & Boyd, F. B. (2007). Web-based inquiry learning: Facilitating thoughtful literacy with WebQuests. The Reading Teacher, 60(7), 644-654. Jantrasakul, P. (2004). School reform and critical thinking: Policy and practice in Thai EFL classrooms (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 2004). Kanuka, H. (2005). An exploration into facilitating higher levels of learning in a textbased internet learning environment using diverse instructional strategies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/kanuka.html Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260-271. Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. London: Oxford University Press. 197  

Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 4(1), 183-210. Koenraad, T. L., & Westhoff, G. J. (2003). Can you tell a LanguageQuest when you see one?: Design criteria for TalenQuests. Paper presented at the 2003 Conference of the European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning, Limerick, Ireland. Retrieved from http://www.feo.hvu.nl/koen2/Home/talenquest/TQEurocall.pdf Laborda, J. G. (2009). Using WebQuests for oral communication in English as a foreign language for Tourism Studies. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 258-270. Lam, Y., & Lawrence, G. (2002). Teacher-student role definition during a computer-based second language project: Are conputers catalysts for empowering change? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 295-315. Leppa, C. J. (2004). Assessing student critical thinking through online discussions. Nurse Educator, 29(4), 156-160. Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into Practice, 32, 131137. Lim, B. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the Web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 627-643. Lim, S., & Hernandez, P. (2007). The WebQuest: An illustration of instructional technology implementation in MFT training. Contemporary Family Therapy, 29, 163-175. Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking - What can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1), 38-43. Luzon, M. J. (2007). Enhancing WebQuest for effective ESP learning. Computer Resources for Language Learning, 1, 1-13. MacGregor, S. K., & Lou, Y. (2005). Web-based learning: How task scaffolding and web 198  

site design support knowledge acquisition? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 161-175. March, T. (1998). Why WebQuest: An introduction. Retrieved from http://tommarch.com/writings/intro_wq.php. March, T. (2004). What WebQuests are (...really!). Retrieved from http://bestwebquests.com/what_webquests_are.asp March, T. (2007). Revisiting WebQuests in a Web 2 world: How developments in technology and pedagogy combine to scaffold personal learning. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 15, 1-17. McPeck, J. (1990). Teaching critical thinking: Dialogue and dialectic. New York: Routledge. Meyer, K. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking [Electronic Version]. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 55-65. Retrieved from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/pdf/v7n3_meyer.pdf Murry, R. (2006). WebQuests celebrate 10 years: Have they delivered? Action Research Exchange, 5(1). Retrieved from http://teach.valdosta.edu/are Newman, F. (1990). Higher order thinking in teaching social studies: A rationale for the assessment of classroom thoughtfulness. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22, 41-56. Noordin, N., Samed, A. A., & Razali, A. B. (2008). ESL teacher-trainee reflections on the use of the WebQuest: Practical or just a hype? The English Teacher, 36, 66-80. Office of the National Education Commission. (2003). Education in Thailand 2003/2004. Bangkok: Office of the National Education Commission. Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518. 199  

Paul, R. (1990). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Rohnert Park, CA: Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, Sonoma State University. Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why and how. New Directions for Community Colleges 20(1), 3-24. Prapinwong, M. (2008) Constructivist language learning through WebQuests in the EFL context: An exploratory study (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3331410) Prapinwong, M. & Puthikanon, N. (2007). Constructivist Language Learning through WebQuests in EFL context: The learners‘ perspectives. Proceedings from the 5th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Education. Honolulu, Hawaii. Prapinwong, M. & Puthikanon, N. (2008). An evaluation of an Internet-based learning model from EFL perspectives. Asian EFL Journal: Professional Teaching Articles, 26. Retrieved from http://www.asian-efljournal.com/pta_April_08_mm&np.php Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45-75. Ramanathan, V., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996a). Audience and voice in current composition texts: Some implications for ESL student writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 2134. Ramanathan, V., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996b). Some problematic “channels” in the teaching of critical thinking in current L1 composition textbooks: Implications for L2 student writers. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 7, 225-249. 200  

Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259-291. Schweers, C. (1999). Using L1 in the L2 classroom. English Teaching Forum, 37(2), 6-9. Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (2001). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/university/defining.html Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. (2004). Scaffolding critical thinking in an online course: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(2), 181-208. Simina, V., & Hamel, M. (2005). CASLA through a social constructivist perspective: WebQuest in project-driven language learning. ReCALL, 17, 217-228. Sox, A., & Rubinstein-Avila, E. (2009). WebQuests for English-language learners: Essential elements for design. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 38-48. Stake, R. E. (2003). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (2 ed., pp. 134-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in the writing of Japanese university students: Insights about assumptions and content familiarity. Written Communication, 18, 506-548. Strickland, J. (2005). Using WebQuests to teach content: Comparing instructional strategies. Contemporary Issues in Technology Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2), 138-148. Sukkhakul, P. (1998). Reading for Opinions. Unpublished textbook, Department of English, Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand. Totten, S., Sills, T., Digby, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning: A guide to research. New York: Garland. 201  

Tsai, S. H. (2006). Integrating WebQuest learning into EFL instruction. Proceedings from the 2006 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference. P. 20612067 Vidoni, K. L., & Maddux, C. D. (2002). WebQuests: Can they be used to improve critical thinking skills in students? Computers in the Schools, 19(1/2), 101-117. Washington State University Critical Thinking Project. (2006) Guide to Rating Integrative and Critical Thinking. Retrieved May 5, 2009, from http://wsuctproject.wsu.edu/ctr.htm Weinstein, M. (2000). A framework for critical thinking. High School Magazine, 7(8), 40-43. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. (3rd ed.)Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Young, D., & Wilson, B. (2002). WebQuests for reflection and conceptual change: Variations on a popular model for guided inquiry. World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 1, 2116-2121.

202  

Appendix A Rubric for evaluating WebQuests that promote critical thinking Low (0) The main task/question

•

•

Roles/perspect ives

• •

Process that requires analysis thinking

 

•

Medium (1)

There is no main task/ question for the WebQuest. The task/question requires only lower order thinking or simply information retrieval.

•

There are no roles/perspecti ves. The use of roles is artificial and may lack inherent conflict of interest. The process requires students to only retrieve information from web resources. Students do not need to analyze/catego rize/compare/

•

High (2)

The main task/question requires only some of the higher order thinking skills (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation). The main task/question may target higher order thinking skills but this may not be clear.

•

The main task/question encourages students to develop all of the three higher order thinking skills.

Roles are clear and realistic, but they may be limited in the ability to evoke conflict.

•

Roles provide multiple perspectives from which to view the topic and they possibly evoke conflict.

The process requires students to analyze/catego rize/compare/ contrast information, but does not require students to make any 203

•

The process goes beyond simple analysis. It requires speculation or inference about the similarities and differences of

•

•

inference.

contrast information. Process that requires synthesis thinking

•

•

Process that requires evaluation thinking

•

•

The process does not require students to create any new ideas/opinions Students do not need to form their opinions - only to report what other people say about the issue.

•

Students do not need to evaluate information from different resources/pers pectives. The process requires students to only retrieve information.

•

The process requires students to create new ideas/opinions, but this may be unclear so students can choose not to do so.

•

•

•

The process requires students to evaluate information from different resources/pers pectives, but this may be unclear so students can choose not to do so. The process requires students to only select relevant information to form their opinion, not to

204  

the information.

•

•

The process requires students to synthesize information from different resources and rewrite or reorganize the information to form their own opinions. The process requires students to form their own opinions by incorporating divergent views into their account. The process clearly requires students to examine, evaluate, and judge information from different sources/perspe ctives. Students critique or debate and make judgment on each side of a controversial issue.

Resources

•

There are fewer than 2 resources per process necessary to complete the main question.

•

•

evaluate information on different perspectives. There is more than 1 resource per process for students to gather information from, but some of them may be too broad or do not contain information directly related to the issues. There are many dead links, resulting in a limitation of resources.

 

205  

•

•

•

There are enough resources for students to gather information. Most resources provided contain useful/specific information pertaining to the issues. Most of the links are working.

 

Appendix B Student interview questions WebQuest tasks 1. How did you read large amount of texts presented in multiple web pages? 2. How did you synthesize all the information? 3. Did you evaluate if a piece of information is credible? How did you decide whether a piece of information presented on a web page is credible? 4. How did your background, such as culture or personal beliefs, influence your decision on an issue? 5. How did the role discussion help you to understand the role assigned to you? 6. How did you select the information to be included in the role sheet? 7. What criteria did you use to reach a group decision? Were there any conflicts? How did you solve them? 8. How did you choose information to be included in the presentation? 9. How did you use external resources of information to support your arguments? 10. How did you choose between using experience or using information from the texts to support your arguments? WebQuest experience 1. How did you like the WebQuest activities? 2. If you could choose, would you like to have WebQuest activity in this course again in the future? Why? Language use 1. Did you speak English during the WebQuest class? When would you speak English during the WebQuest activities? When would you speak Thai? Why? 2. Which English skills did you use the most during the WebQuest class? 3. Did the WebQuest activities help you improve your English skills? How? 4. Comparing the traditional class and the WebQuest class, which class allowed you to use English more? Why? 5. Suppose the teacher required everyone to speak in English only. Would it affect how you think? Teacher’s role 1. Was the teacher’s role in a WebQuest class similar to or different from the one in the traditional class? How? 2. How did the teacher help you during group work?   206  

 

Appendix C Pre-project interview questions for teachers ENG 123 Course 1. What are the goals of the course? 2. In order to teach this course, how do you usually prepare the lessons, the materials, and the activities? 3. How do you encourage students to express their opinions in this course? 4. What activities are successful at encouraging students to participate in class discussion? 5. To what extent do you usually encourage the students to use English in this class? 6. What activities do you use to help students learn English? Role of teacher 7. What is the role of the teacher in ENG 123 course? 8. Do you think when WebQuest is used in an English classroom, the role of the teacher would change? 9. What do you think the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class is? Critical thinking 10. What do you think critical thinking is? Why do you think it is necessary for your students to use critical thinking? WebQuests 11. Are you familiar with WebQuest? What do you know about it?  

207  

Appendix D Post-project interview questions for teachers Overall WebQuest experience 1. What was your overall experience in using WebQuests? How did WebQuests benefit your students? 2. Would you continue using Webquests in this class? Why? 3. What were the drawbacks/problems of using WebQuests in your class? 4. How did WebQuest activity benefit your students compared to the traditional class? Teacher’s role 1. What was the role of the teacher during the WebQuest activities? Are there any concerns/problems when performing such a role? 2. How is the role of the teacher in a WebQuest class similar to or different from that of a traditional class? How do you feel about such similarity or difference? 3. What did you do to help students develop critical thinking skills in classrooms? 4. What is the difference between the role of the teacher in a regular class and a WebQuest class? Critical thinking 1. How do you think WebQuest activities help students practice critical thinking skills similarly to or differently from the activities you normally do in regular classes? 2. From your experience, what classroom activities can best help students develop critical thinking skills? Did WebQuest help students use critical thinking? 3. What did you do to help students think more critically during the WebQuest activity? English use 1. To what extent do you think that the teacher should encourage students to use English skills in a reading class? What skills should receive priority, if any? 2. To what extent should the students use English in a WebQuest class? 3. What are the factors that can affect students’ use of English in the class (such as class objectives, teacher, activities, grades, etc.)? 4. Do you think students benefit from participating in the WebQuest activity in terms of English language use? How? What skills were used most?

   

208  

Appendix E The Writing Rubric Rating Criteria

Rating Scale Low

1. Develops position

Fails to clarify the group position on the issue.

Medium

High

Group position is generally clear, although gaps may exist.

Appropriately identifies group position on the issue.

2. Integrates Look at the issue from information from only own perspective other perspectives without addressing any other perspectives.

Rough integration or discussion of some viewpoints.

Fully integrates information from all perspectives presented in the WebQuest.

3. Uses supporting data and evidence

Supporting evidence is Provides evidence to provided, although support group position treated separately or in a coherent way. not fully explained

Evidence is not related to topic.

 

209  

Appendix F Student Pre-project questionnaire

Name ชื่อ ______________________________ School and Major คณะและวิชาเอก _____________________ Age อายุ _____________ Male ชาย ______ Female หญิง ______ English subject score on the Entrance examination คะแนนเอ็นทรานซภาษาอังกฤษ ____________________ Please list English courses you have previously taken at this university โปรดระบุรายวิชาภาษาอังกฤษ ที่เคยลงเรียนที่มหาวิทยาลัยนี้ _________________________________________________________________________ Average grades obtained from English courses taken เกรดที่ไดรับจากรายวิชาภาษาอังกฤษโดยเฉลีย่ __________________________________________________________________________

210  

Appendix G  

Student Post-project questionnaire   Please complete this questionnaire and return it to the teacher at the end of the class.

กรุณากรอกแบบสอบถามนี้และคืนใหอาจารยผูสอนเมื่อสิ้นสุด ชั่วโมงเรียน Name

ชื่อ

Instructor

อาจารยผูสอน

Item 

ขอ

   

The statements refer to  the overall WebQuest  activities.  ขอความเหลานี้หมายถึง กิจกรรมใน WebQuest 

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

เห็นดวย อยางมาก

เห็นดวย

รูสึกกลางๆ

 

 

 

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

ไมเห็นดวย

ไมเห็นดวย อยางมาก

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

โดยรวม

1

Overall, I like The Right to Die WebQuest activity.

โดยรวมแลว ฉันชอบกิจกรรม The Right to Die Webquest

2

Overall, I like Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest activity.

โดยรวมแลว ฉันชอบกิจกรรม Cosmetic Surgery Webquest

3

The reading passages in The Right to Die WebQuest were difficult.

บทความที่ตองอานใน The Right to Die WebQuest

นั้นยาก

4

The reading passages in Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest were difficult.

บทความที่ตองอานใน 211  

Reading several passages on WebQuests helps me improve my reading skills. 5

การอานบทความตางๆใน

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WebQuest

ชวยใหฉันไดพัฒนาทักษะการอ านภาษาอังกฤษ The written assignment in the WebQuest activity helps me improve my English writing skills. 6

การเขียนแสดงความคิดเห็นในกิ จกรรม WebQuestชวยใหฉันพัฒนาทั กษะการเขียนภาษาอังกฤษ I recommend WebQuest activity for future ENG 123 courses.

7

ควรใชกิจกรรม WebQuest ในวิชา ENG 123 อีกในอนาคต

Put the numbers (1 and 2) in order from the WebQuest you like the most (1) to the least (2). Please state the reasons behind your decision.

8

ใสตัวเลข 1 และ 2 เรียงลําดับจากจาก WebQuest ที่ชอบมากที่สุดไปหานอยที่สุด กรุณาใสเหตุผลเบื้องหลัง ______ Cosmetic surgery การตัดสินใจดังกลาวดวย _____The right to die (Euthanasia) __________________________________________________________________________  ___________________________________________________________________________  Additional comments:

9 

________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

 

212  

Appendix H Results of student post-project questionnaires Class A (N=20) Statements

Mean

SD

Mean

SD

Overall, I like The Right to Die WebQuest activity.

4.45

0.61

4.05

0.41

1

Overall, I like Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest activity.

4.30

0.66

4.11

0.57

2

The reading passages in The Right to Die WebQuest were difficult.

3.60

1.05

3.58

0.84

3

The reading passages in Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest were difficult.

2.80

1.00

3.42

0.90

4

4.35

0.81

3.95

0.41

5

Reading several passages on WebQuests help me improve my reading skills.

3.95

0.83

3.95

0.52

6

The written assignment in the WebQuest activity helps me improve my English writing skills.

4.75

0.44

4.68

0.48

7

I recommend WebQuest activity for future ENG 123 course.

8

Put the numbers (1 and 2) in order from the WebQuest you like the most (1) to the least (2).

10 students preferred Euthanasia WebQuest

8 students preferred Euthanasia WebQuest

10 students preferred Cosmetic Surgery WebQuest

11 students preferred Cosmetic Surgery

213  

Class B (N=19)

Appendix I Summary of the results from the written assignments Group Group members

A1

Euthanasia

A2

B1

Cosmetic Surgery

B2

A1

A2

Critical Thinking Aspects Aspect 1

Aspect 2

Aspect 3

Develops position

Integrates information from other perspectives

Uses supporting data and evidence

Kanya

High

Med

Med

Wan

High 

High

High

Naphat

High 

Med

Med

Dew

High 

Med

Med 

Bam

High 

High

Med 

Thida

High 

Med

Med 

Aey

High 

Med

Med 

Pim

High 

High

High

Nid

High 

High

High 

Nuj

High 

Med

Med 

Sita

High 

High

High 

Am

High 

High

High 

Ploy

High 

High

Med 

Kanya

High 

Med

Med

Wan

High 

High

High 

Naphat

High 

High

High 

Dew

High 

Med

Med

214  

B1

B2

Bam

High 

High

High

Thida

High 

Med

Med

Aey

High 

High

Med

Pim

High 

High

High 

Nid

High 

High 

High 

Nuj

High 

High 

High 

Sita

High 

High 

High 

Am

High 

High 

High 

Ploy

High 

High 

High 

   

215  

Nunthika Puthikanon

Education Doctor of Philosophy Program in the Literacy, Culture, and Language Education Department Indiana University Bloomington, IN

2009

Master of Arts (MA in TESOL) Program in Teaching English to the Speaker of Other Languages Department of English, California State University, Sacramento, CA

1999

Bachelor of Arts Faculty of Arts (English major) Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

1996

Professional Experience Adjunct Instructor (Online) 2007- 2008 W505: Using WebQuests in EFL contexts Literacy, Culture, and Language Education Department, Indiana University Bloomington Full-time Lecturer English Department, Thammasat University, Thailand

2004 – present

Full-time Lecturer Twinning Engineering Programmes, Thammasat University, Thailand

2000-2004

English Tutor The Learning Center, California State University, Sacramento

1999-2000

Publications Prapinwong, M. and Puthikanon, N. (April, 2008). An evaluation of an Internet-based learning model from EFL perspectives. Asian EFL Journal: Professional Teaching Articles, 26, 1-23. Prapinwong, M. and Puthikanon, N. (2007). Constructivist Language Learning Through WebQuests: The learners‘ perspectives. Conference Proceeding, Hawaii International Conference

 

Conference Presentations How Community of Practice make a difference in implementing and supporting English teachers in classroom computer integration? Roundtable presentation at the 2007 National Council of Teachers of English Annual Convention, New York, November, 2007. How computer-assisted language learning can help develop higher-order thinking in ESL students. Presenter at the 7th Annual Instructional Systems Technology Conference, Indiana University Bloomington, March 2, 2007. Development of higher order thinking through computer-assisted language learning: WebQuests in EFL classrooms. Presenter at the 2th Thammasat University ELT Conference, May, 2006. Using WebQuests in an ESL/EFL classrooms. Presenter at the 2006 Annual Indiana Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Conference, November, 2006.