Mobile-Assisted Writing Performance of Chinese EFL Students at Tertiary Level

Abstract

With the rapid development of mobile technology, mobile learning (M-Learning) has evolved to an approach to EFL learning. In recent years, mobile technologies are mostly exploited in listening, speaking and reading skills, however, it is worthy to explore how to optimize mobile technologies in writing skills. In China, the studies on how M-Learning assists the writing performance of Chinese EFL students at tertiary level are scarce, so this study aims to bridge this gap and explore its implication. More specifically, the study focuses on the current use of M-Learning in EFL writing, the factors affecting the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing, EFL students’ perceptions of conducting their writing through M-Learning and the effect of M-Learning supports EFL students’ writing performance in Chinese context.

The study adopted a mixed-method design. Questionnaire (n=659), focus group interview (n=26), semi-structured interview (n=6) and written texts (n=6) were used for data collection. Specifically, the 26 participants in the focus group interviews were selected from the 659 participants in the questionnaire, and 6 participants were selected from the 26 participants in the focus group interviews and each participant wrote three IELTS writing drafts (the first, second and third drafts) each week on the same topic in the eight-week writing intervention assisted by M-Learning. The improvements of the written texts in the first, fifth and eighth weeks and in the pre- and post-tests on the four IELTS writing aspects (task response, coherence and cohesion, lexical response and grammatical range and accuracy) were analyzed through qualitative text analysis. The 6 participants attending the writing intervention were invited to do the semi-structured interviews on their perceptions of conducting writing performance through M-Learning pre, mid (the fifth week) and post (the eighth week) the writing intervention respectively.

In the 1st research phase, the findings presented that smart phones, laptops and tablet computers were mainly utilized in EFL writing. WeChat was most used in EFL writing. M-Learning was mainly used for learning various writing samples, searching background information, collecting learning materials, communicating information through interaction with peers and teachers and getting the feedback on written texts through artificial or machinery corrections. Furthermore, the findings on the factors affecting the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing in the questionnaire revealed that perceived ease of use was found to positively affect perceived usefulness of mobile technologies, and perceived usefulness, M-Learning readiness and personal innovativeness were identified to positively affect the adoption of M-Learning, but anxiety was found to have negative effect. However, perceived ease of use and perceived self-efficacy were identified not to affect the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing. In addition, convenience, rich resources of teachers and education, requirements from teachers, exam-oriented, useful functions, elegant format and low cost of time and money in the focus group interviews were also taken as the factors.

In the 2nd research phase, first, the findings of the ‘pre-’ interviews revealed that all the six participants had the experience of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning. Mobile devices were used as writing tools, such as digital dictionaries, electronic databases or typewriters. The participants took expectations of enjoyment, difficulty and potential on M-Learning in conducting EFL writing. Second, the findings of the ‘mid-’ interviews presented that the mobile devices used were different from those in the ‘pre-’ interviews. M-Learning affected EFL writing performance through the assistive help of mobile affordances, usefulness on improving the four writing aspects and utilized spare time. Conducting EFL writing performance through M-Learning was perceived to be enjoyable due to different characteristics of mobile affordances. Task response was regarded as the most improved aspect, but lexical resource was the least one. Flexibility of time and place, convenience, active online self-learning, various interactions and potential trend of online exams were regarded as the benefits of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning, but distraction, inefficient interactions, over-reliance on mobile technologies and cognitive burden were considered as the challenges. Third, the findings of the ‘post-’ interview demonstrated that the same mobile devices were used with the same purposes as in the ‘mid-’ phase. M-Learning was perceived to affect EFL writing performance from the convenience of getting access to learning materials online and revising written texts, the habit of getting accustomed to conducting EFL writing through mobile affordances and the potential of “think in English”. Understanding the enjoyment in conducting EFL writing through M-Learning would help explore EFL writers’ experience through M-Learning. Task response was perceived to be the most improved aspect, but grammatical range and accuracy was the least improved one. In addition, convenience, flexibility of time and place, non-restricted interactions, rich functions and active online self-learning were considered as the benefits of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning, but distraction, inauthentic features, cognitive burden, personal habits, time-consuming and specific skills were regarded as the challenges. ‘Interaction’ and ‘time’ were regarded as the double-edge swords. One third of the participants did not change their perceptions of the improvements on conducting EFL writing through M-Learning between the ‘pre-’ and ‘post-’interviews, but two thirds of them changed their views. Furthermore, the findings on the improvements of the written texts supported by M-learning during the writing intervention and in the pre- and post-tests were identified by linking six participants’ perceptions revealed that M-Learning could support EFL students’ writing performance on each aspect. In addition, most of the participants’ perceived improvements of EFL writing performance through M-Learning in the ‘post-’ interviews concurred with the writing improvements in their post-test.

The findings have significant implications for both theory and practice and the integration of M-Learning into EFL writing status quo. In addition, although there are limitations to the current study, they may broaden the understandings of the effectiveness of using M-Learning in conducting EFL writing at tertiary level in China. The contributions to knowledge on how M-Learning assists EFL writing performance regarding its originality in not only the mixed-method design but also the findings having been made by the thesis. The researcher may study how to design the relevant research studies on EFL writing assisted not only by mobile technologies but also other technologies from the mixed-method research pattern in different phases. The findings are also sustainable in the face of changes in technologies, languages and pedagogies. In addition, the significance includes that EFL students in or out of China and in other local or international communities may obtain deep insights into how to make use of M-Learning to support their writing performance, and their teachers could study how to design writing classes assisted by M-Learning or other technologies and how to motivate them to utilize technologies in writing. The recommendations for future research are finally presented.

With the rapid development of mobile technology, mobile learning (M-Learning) has evolved to an approach to EFL learning. In recent years, mobile technologies are mostly exploited in listening, speaking and reading skills, however, it is worthy to explore how to optimize mobile technologies in writing skills. In China, the studies on how M-Learning assists the writing performance of Chinese EFL students at tertiary level are scarce, so this study aims to bridge this gap and explore its implication. More specifically, the study focuses on the current use of M-Learning in EFL writing, the factors affecting the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing, EFL students’ perceptions of conducting their writing through M-Learning and the effect of M-Learning supports EFL students’ writing performance in Chinese context.

The study adopted a mixed-method design. Questionnaire (n=659), focus group interview (n=26), semi-structured interview (n=6) and written texts (n=6) were used for data collection. Specifically, the 26 participants in the focus group interviews were selected from the 659 participants in the questionnaire, and 6 participants were selected from the 26 participants in the focus group interviews and each participant wrote three IELTS writing drafts (the first, second and third drafts) each week on the same topic in the eight-week writing intervention assisted by M-Learning. The improvements of the written texts in the first, fifth and eighth weeks and in the pre- and post-tests on the four IELTS writing aspects (task response, coherence and cohesion, lexical response and grammatical range and accuracy) were analyzed through qualitative text analysis. The 6 participants attending the writing intervention were invited to do the semi-structured interviews on their perceptions of conducting writing performance through M-Learning pre, mid (the fifth week) and post (the eighth week) the writing intervention respectively.

In the 1st research phase, the findings presented that smart phones, laptops and tablet computers were mainly utilized in EFL writing. WeChat was most used in EFL writing. M-Learning was mainly used for learning various writing samples, searching background information, collecting learning materials, communicating information through interaction with peers and teachers and getting the feedback on written texts through artificial or machinery corrections. Furthermore, the findings on the factors affecting the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing in the questionnaire revealed that perceived ease of use was found to positively affect perceived usefulness of mobile technologies, and perceived usefulness, M-Learning readiness and personal innovativeness were identified to positively affect the adoption of M-Learning, but anxiety was found to have negative effect. However, perceived ease of use and perceived self-efficacy were identified not to affect the adoption of M-Learning in EFL writing. In addition, convenience, rich resources of teachers and education, requirements from teachers, exam-oriented, useful functions, elegant format and low cost of time and money in the focus group interviews were also taken as the factors.

In the 2nd research phase, first, the findings of the ‘pre-’ interviews revealed that all the six participants had the experience of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning. Mobile devices were used as writing tools, such as digital dictionaries, electronic databases or typewriters. The participants took expectations of enjoyment, difficulty and potential on M-Learning in conducting EFL writing. Second, the findings of the ‘mid-’ interviews presented that the mobile devices used were different from those in the ‘pre-’ interviews. M-Learning affected EFL writing performance through the assistive help of mobile affordances, usefulness on improving the four writing aspects and utilized spare time. Conducting EFL writing performance through M-Learning was perceived to be enjoyable due to different characteristics of mobile affordances. Task response was regarded as the most improved aspect, but lexical resource was the least one. Flexibility of time and place, convenience, active online self-learning, various interactions and potential trend of online exams were regarded as the benefits of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning, but distraction, inefficient interactions, over-reliance on mobile technologies and cognitive burden were considered as the challenges. Third, the findings of the ‘post-’ interview demonstrated that the same mobile devices were used with the same purposes as in the ‘mid-’ phase. M-Learning was perceived to affect EFL writing performance from the convenience of getting access to learning materials online and revising written texts, the habit of getting accustomed to conducting EFL writing through mobile affordances and the potential of “think in English”. Understanding the enjoyment in conducting EFL writing through M-Learning would help explore EFL writers’ experience through M-Learning. Task response was perceived to be the most improved aspect, but grammatical range and accuracy was the least improved one. In addition, convenience, flexibility of time and place, non-restricted interactions, rich functions and active online self-learning were considered as the benefits of conducting EFL writing through M-Learning, but distraction, inauthentic features, cognitive burden, personal habits, time-consuming and specific skills were regarded as the challenges. ‘Interaction’ and ‘time’ were regarded as the double-edge swords. One third of the participants did not change their perceptions of the improvements on conducting EFL writing through M-Learning between the ‘pre-’ and ‘post-’interviews, but two thirds of them changed their views. Furthermore, the findings on the improvements of the written texts supported by M-learning during the writing intervention and in the pre- and post-tests were identified by linking six participants’ perceptions revealed that M-Learning could support EFL students’ writing performance on each aspect. In addition, most of the participants’ perceived improvements of EFL writing performance through M-Learning in the ‘post-’ interviews concurred with the writing improvements in their post-test.

The findings have significant implications for both theory and practice and the integration of M-Learning into EFL writing status quo. In addition, although there are limitations to the current study, they may broaden the understandings of the effectiveness of using M-Learning in conducting EFL writing at tertiary level in China. The contributions to knowledge on how M-Learning assists EFL writing performance regarding its originality in not only the mixed-method design but also the findings having been made by the thesis. The researcher may study how to design the relevant research studies on EFL writing assisted not only by mobile technologies but also other technologies from the mixed-method research pattern in different phases. The findings are also sustainable in the face of changes in technologies, languages and pedagogies. In addition, the significance includes that EFL students in or out of China and in other local or international communities may obtain deep insights into how to make use of M-Learning to support their writing performance, and their teachers could study how to design writing classes assisted by M-Learning or other technologies and how to motivate them to utilize technologies in writing. The recommendations for future research are finally presented.