investigating the implementation of blended …e-learning software such as learning management...

IssuesinLanguageStudies(Vol.7No.2–2018)

Investigatingtheimplementationofblendedlearninginaparagraphwritingcoursetopromotestudentengagement

87

INVESTIGATINGTHEIMPLEMENTATIONOFBLENDEDLEARNINGINAPARAGRAPH

WRITINGCOURSETOPROMOTESTUDENTENGAGEMENT

AnggriMUHTIA1SUPARNO2SUMARDI3

EnglishEducationDepartmentofGraduateProgram,UniversitasSebelasMaretJl.Ir.SutamiNo.36A,Surakarta,JawaTengah57126,Indonesia

[email protected]

[email protected][email protected]

Manuscriptreceived:6September2018Manuscriptaccepted:22December2018

ABSTRACT

Blendedlearning,theinstructionalapproachintegratingonlinelearningintoface-to-face learning, is one of the approaches gaining widespread acceptance amongeducationalpractitioners.Oneofitsadvantagesistopromotestudentengagement,which is viewed beneficial to ensure deep learning among students and addresssome educational issues. Although there is no specific formula for engaging allstudents intoacourse,blendedlearningisbelievedtoenablestudentengagementfurtherawaythanwhatispossibleinaface-to-faceinstruction.ThispaperreportsacasestudyconductedatauniversityinIndonesia.Thepurposeofthestudywastoinvestigatetheimplementationofblendedlearninginaparagraphwritingcoursetopromote student engagement. Data were collected through observations,interviews, and document analysis, and analysed using Miles, Huberman andSaldana’s(2014) interactivemodel. Itwasrevealedthattheinstructionalstrategiesin the course focused on the benefits of face-to-face learning as the maininstructionalmethodwhiletheonline learningwasthesupplementarytoreinforcestudents’knowledgeandunderstanding.Theimplementationofblendedlearninginthe course was able to promote student engagement particularly through theactivitiesofuploadingcoursematerials,onlinewritingassignments,onlinequizzes,student-teacherconferencing,classdiscussion,andgroupwork.Keywords:blendedlearning,paragraphwritingcourse,studentengagement



88

Introduction

Advanced technologieshave theirplace in shaping the21steducation.Oneof thebreakthroughs the technologieshaveestablished ineducation is theemergenceofe-learningoronlinelearning.Thislearningmethodhasbeenviewedasapromisingwaytoimprovethequalityofteachingandlearning.TheInternettechnologies,likeWeb 2.0 technologies, become more established as the instructional tools toenhancestudentengagementandfostermoreparticipatory learningactivities.TheNationalResearchCouncil&InstituteofMedicinestatedthatstudentengagementisconsideredoneof the solutions to addressing educational problems, such aspoorachievement, boredom, and dropout (2004, as cited in Fredricks, Blumenfeld, &Paris, 2004). Stein and Graham (2014) asserted that “instruction that does notengage learnerswillnotbeeffective in the long run” (p.51).Studentengagementcouldensuredeeplearningamongstudents(Downing,Spears,&Holtz,2014). Online learning alone, however, is considered not sufficient becausestudents have different learning preferences and there are practical skills stillrequiringhands-onexperiences(EpignosisLLC,2014).Moreover,traditionalface-to-face instruction is still preferred by contemporary students. Stein and Graham(2014) admitted that there is no exact formula for engaging all students into acourse because students have different interests, aims, and limitations. Providingthe students with multichannel learning method is apparently one of the bestoptions to engage students. This multichannel learning method, called blendedlearning, is seen as the instructional approach that could provide the answers forenhancing student engagement and learning experience. It is believed to enablestudent engagement further away than what is possible in face-to-face learningalone (Wankel & Blessinger, 2013). Additionally, the instruction taking place bothonlineandface-to-facecanprovideamixofapproachesthatallowsall learners toengageinmeaningfulways(Stein&Graham,2014). Ma’arop and Embi (2016) asserted that in spite of immense support inliteratureforextensiveacceptanceofblendedlearning,educationpractitionersarestill trying to find the appropriate ways in implementing blended learning. Inaddition, integrating technology into teachingpractices seemsnotmuchappealingtoteachers.Teachersstillstrugglewiththe integrationoftechnology intoteachingand learningpractices,andsome look resistant to it (Howard,2013),whichmakesthem labeled “risk averse”. Indeed, using technology in teaching and learningprocess may have some risks; it might just waste teaching time and jeopardizestudents’achievement if theapproachuseddoesnotworkasexpected. Insteadofstaying in familiar traditional teaching methods, a writing lecturer at an EnglishDepartment of an Islamic University in Indonesia took the challenge byimplementing blended learning using technology in a paragraphwriting course topromotestudentengagement,whichwasthecaseinvestigatedinthisstudy.

There are someprevious studies revealing the successful blended learningprogramsinwritingcourses.Purnawarman,Susilawati,andSundayana(2016)foundthat integratingonline learning througha learningmanagementsystem(LMS) intothe face-to-face instruction increased student engagement in the writing course,particularly through the use of a feature on the LMS called Note menu which



89

facilitated the students with interactivity and meaningful writing tasks. Challob,Bakar, and Latif (2016) revealed that in addition to the improvement of students’writing ability and performance, the use of blended learning using online learningmodes, namely, the class blog and online Viber discussion, enhanced students’interaction and increased students’ motivation in learning, which indicated theimprovement of student engagement. These previous studies apparently focusedmore on the learning activities on the online platforms in blended learningenvironments while this present study investigated not only the activities on theonlineplatformbutalsointheface-to-facesettingintheparagraphwritingcourse.The research question addressed in this studywas how the blended learning in aparagraph writing course was implemented to promote student engagement.Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the implementation ofblendedlearninginaparagraphwritingcoursetopromotestudentengagement.

LiteratureReview

BlendedLearningSome scholars have suggested the concepts of blended learning. Bersin (2004)definedblendedlearningasatraditionalteacher-ledinstructionsupplementedwithelectronicformats.LittlejohnandPegler(2007)assertedthattheterm“blending”inthe pastwas for instructional practices integrating various kinds of resources andactivities, but recently it has been linked to e-learning so blended learning is thecombination of e-learning and traditional instructional methods. Thorne (2003)stated that blended learning blends online learning with traditional methods oflearning.Meanwhile, Garrison and Vaughan (2008) viewed blended learning as “adesignapproachwherebybothface-to-faceandonlinelearningaremadebetterbythepresenceoftheother”(p.5).Itcanthereforebeinferredthatblendedlearninginrecentdaysisdefinedasaninstructionalapproachthatcombinestraditionalface-to-facelearningandonlinelearning,inwhichbothcomplementoneanother.

Different scholars, however, propose different ideas of blended learning.Garrison and Vaughan (2008) argued that blended learning is not an addition ofonline learning into traditional learning method but “restructuring and replacingtraditionalclasscontacthours”(p.5).Meanwhile,Thorne(2003)suggestedthatonelearningmethodcanbe“asupplement toother typesof trainingand learning” (p.47). Twigg (2003) identified several models of blended learning: supplemental,replacement,emporium,andbuffet.Amongthesemodelsthesupplementalmodeland replacement model are apparently the most relevant models of blendedlearning (Auster, 2016). The supplemental model is in line with Thorne’s (2003)interpretationofblendedlearningwhilethereplacementmodelsuitswhatGarrisonandVaughanhaveproposed.

StudentEngagementThere are various interpretations of the term “student engagement”. Stein andGraham (2014) referred engagement as “the emotional and mental energy that



90

students are willing to expend during a learning experience” (p. 51) while Astin(1999) defined it as “the amount of physical and psychological energy that thestudent devotes to the academic experience” (p. 518). Shernoff (2013) definedstudentengagementas“theheightenedsimultaneousexperienceofconcentration,interest,andenjoymentinthetaskathand”(p.12).MartinandTorres(2016)usedthetermtodescribe“themeaningfulstudentinvolvementthroughoutthelearningenvironment”. These diverse definitions show that there is no definite, agreeddefinition of student engagement. Indeed, the holistic concept of studentengagementisdifficulttoconstructbecauseof“themulti-dimensional,dynamicandtemporalcharacteristicsofstudentengagement”(Zhang&McNamara,2018,p.23).From the interpretations suggested by the scholars, we define the studentengagement ina simplewayas themeaningful student involvementanddevotionduringalearningexperience.

Reviewingfromresearch literature,Fredricks,Blumenfeld,andParis (2004)identified three types of student engagement, which are interrelated to oneanother:

1.Behavioralengagement,referringtostudents’adherencetoclassroomrulesand

behavioral norms such as attendance and absence of negative behavior, andstudent involvement in academic tasks including student effort, persistence,attention,andcontributiontoclassdiscussion.

2.Emotional engagement, referring to affective reactions such as interest,enjoyment,happiness,sadness,boredom,anxiety,orasenseofbelonging.

3.Cognitive engagement, referring to students’ investment in learning whichincludes a desire to meet and exceed the requirements and a preference forchallenge, andbeing strategic or self-regulatedwhichmeans student strategiestoremember,organize,andunderstandmaterials.

Frompreviousresearch,somescholarsalsoreviewanddigestthestrategies

for fostering student engagement through instructional practices andexperiences.ThefollowingtableshowsstrategiesproposedbyWankelandBlessinger(2013),andSteinandGraham(2014).

Table1Strategiesforfosteringstudentengagementproposedbyscholars

WankelandBlessinger(2013)

SteinandGraham(2014)

1. Offeringdifferentchannelsofcommunicationtoindividualizethelearningexperiencebyparticipantpreference.

2. Creatingtheactivestudent-studentcollaborationandparticipation

3. Providingfeedbacktothe

1. Engagingheartandmind.• Face-to-faceforengagingheart(affective)andmind(cognitive)

• Onlineforengagingmind(cognitive).2. Designinghumaninteraction.• Face-to-face:activeparticipationinclass.

• Online:noconstraintsbytimeandplace.



91

studentonthecontentandprocesslevel.

3. Engagingthroughcontentinteraction.• Staticcontent:e-books,web-pages,etc.• Dynamiccontent:simulation,onlinetutorial.

4. Engagingthroughthecombinationofinteractions.• Student-instructor:personalthroughface-to-face,email/message,oringroupthroughaclasslectureanddiscussion.

• Student-student:discussion,groupwork.

• Student-content:readingtextbooksanddigitalcontent.

Thefollowingisthesummaryofthestrategiessuggestedbythescholars,whichareusedtoidentifythestrategiesthatthelecturerusedintheinstructionalactivities.

1. Offering different learning and communication channels, face-to-face andonline,toindividualizelearningexperience.

2. Creatingtheactivestudent-studentcollaborationandparticipationeitherinface-to-facechannelorononlinechannel.

3. Creating the active student-instructor interaction either in face-to-facechannelorononlinechannel.

4. Providingthecontentinteraction,eitherstaticordynamiccontent.5. Providingfeedbacktothestudentonthecontentandprocesslevel.

Almostallthethreetypesofengagementareincludedineachstrategy,butthelevelof one type may be greater than the other(s). Fredricks, Blumenfeld, and Paris(2004) stated that the three types of student engagement are interrelated to oneanother.LearningManagementSystem(LMS)Theselectionofonlineplatformforblended learningisessentialtominimisemoreworkload and technical problems the academics would encounter during theinstructional process. E-learning software such as Learning Management System(LMS) is one of decent choices as it works like social media while providing thefeatures for classmanagementandadministration. The LMS isused to createandassigncoursematerial,tracestudentprogress,andassessaswellasreportstudentoutcomesonline.Notonlydoesitenablestudentstoaccessmaterialsthroughtheirmobiledevices,suchas laptopandsmartphone,andgetconnectedtodataandtoone another but it also enables teachers to diversify their teachingmedia and becreativewith their teaching resources. Fenton (2018) listed thebesteight learningmanagement systems in 2018, namely, Google Classroom, Schoology, Edmodo,



92

Quizlet, Canvas, Moodle, Blackboard, and D2L Brightspace. Of these platforms,teacherscanchooseonefortheirclasses. Schoology as one of the most popular online learning platforms keepsimprovingitsservicesbyprovidingthetoolseasytooperate.Asasocialnetworkingdevice, Schoology works like Facebook in which users are able to haveconversations, sendmessages, update statuses, and share information within thenetwork.Asalearningmanagementsystemitsystematicallyintegratestheactivitiesofcontentdevelopment,assessment,andmoresothattheteacherscanspendlesstime on administrative tasks andmore on instructional activities. It also providesbeneficialtoolsforinstructionalfeedbacks,suchasfortheassignmentsthatcannotbe automatically assessed like writing.When a piece of writing is submitted, theteacher can utilize the rich text editor tool to give comments and other kinds offeedbacktothestudentwork.ApproachestowritingThree approaches and one synthesised approach to writing are available forteachers toselectanduse in teachingwriting.Product-basedapproach focusesonlinguistic knowledge (e.g., vocabulary, syntax, and cohesive devices) and the endproduct.Nunan(1999)explainedthatthisapproachconcentrateson“tasksinwhichthe learner imitates,copies,andtransformsmodelprovidedbytheteacherand/orthetextbook”(p.272).Ithasfourstagesincludingfamiliarisation,controlledwriting,guidedwriting,and freewriting.Process-basedapproachemphasises thestagesofwriting development. Brown (2001) asserted that this approach includes “theprocessofprewriting,drafting,revising,andediting”(p.337).Thetypicalmodelofthisapproachinvolvesprewriting,composing/drafting,revising,andediting. The third approach is genre-based approach which focuses on linguisticknowledge and the communicative purpose of a writing genre. Hyland (2003)describes three main stages of a genre-based approach, which include modeling,joint construction, and independent construction. The approach synthesises theexisting approaches, especially the process and genre based approach, to get thestrengthsofoneapproachtocomplementtheweaknessesoftheother.BadgerandWhite(2000)proposedthestagesofasynthesisedorprocessgenreapproachthatlead froma situation to a text, namely, situation, purpose, considerationofmodefieldtenor,planning,draftingandpublishing,andtext.

MethodologyParticipantsTheparticipantsofthisstudyweresixundergraduatestudentsandone lectureroftheEnglishdepartment,theFacultyofTeacherTrainingandEducationatanIslamicuniversity in Indonesia. The six students were selected purposively among 27students of a paragraph writing class, based on their level of English proficiency,high,medium,low.ThestudywasconductedfromMarchtoJuly2018.



93

DataCollectionandAnalysisProceduresQualitative research was used as the approach in this study, and the type of thequalitative research was a case study. Harrison, Birks, Franklin, and Mills (2017)asserted that case study research is effective for researching and understandingcomplex issues in real world settings. Data were collected through observations,interviews,anddocumentanalysis.Theinterviewswithopen-endedquestionswerecarriedoutonsixstudentsandonelecturerwhiletheobservationswereconductedduring face-to-face and online learning processes in the writing course. Thesupporting data were taken from some documents including syllabus, students’writingassignments,anddigitaldocumentsfromSchoology.

DatawereanalysedusingMiles,HubermanandSaldana’s(2014)interactivemodel of data analysis. Three major steps of the analysis consist of datacondensation, data display, and drawing and verifying conclusions. Datacondensation involves the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting,and/or transforming the data from field notes, interview, documents, and otherempiricalmaterials,whichoccursrepeatedlythroughoutthestudy.Datadisplayisacompressed assembly of information that allows conclusion drawing and action,helpingtheresearcherunderstandwhatishappeningandtodosomethingeithertoanalyzefurtherortotakeaction.Drawingandverifyingconclusionsarecarriedoutfrom theonsetof data collectionby identifyingpatterns, explanations, and causalflows. The three steps are interwoven before, during, and after data collection inparallelform.

FindingsandDiscussion

CourseDescriptionThe ParagraphWriting is a 2-credit university course which is an introductory towriting course series consistingofBasicWriting, ParagraphWriting, EssayWriting,andAcademicWriting.BasicWritingistheprerequisitecourseforParagraphWritingand so forth. The topics covered in the Paragraph Writing course included theelements of a paragraph, process of paragraph writing (pre-writing), process ofparagraphwriting (developingparagraph),unity,coherence,descriptiveparagraph,process paragraph, classification paragraph, definition paragraph, comparison-contrastparagraph,cause-effectparagraph,andopinionparagraph(seeAppendix).The ParagraphWriting, offered in semester four, consisted of fourteen scheduledmeetings for instructions and twomeetings formid-test and final-test. Each 100-minute meeting was set face-to-face while the online learning was thesupplementarywithoutreplacinganyface-to-facesession.Theface-to-facemeetingwas held once a weekwhile the online learningwas provided for students to doanytime and anywhere with a deadline set for each online assignment. Theapproachtowritingusedinthiscoursewasaprocess-basedapproach,whichcouldbeseenfromthesyllabus,classobservation,andteacher’sstatement,butthestepswere simpler including pre-writing, organising, andwriting,while the steps of the



94

typical process approach include pre-writing, composing/drafting, revising, andediting.

StudentEngagementinMainInstructionalActivitiesFromtheobservations intheclassroomandonSchoologytherewereseveralmainactivitiesconductedbythelecturertopromotestudentengagement.Uploading course materials. All course materials were uploaded online onSchoology based on the topics one by one a few days before each face-to-facemeetingsothatstudentscouldaccessanddownloadthematerialsbeforeaclass.Intheinterviewthelecturerstated:

The materials including the syllabus are uploaded before face-to-faceinstructions. Students can read the materials anywhere and anytimethroughtheirphonesand learnthematerialsthataregoingtobeusedforthenextmeetingsothattheycanbewellpreparedforthecourse.(L)

During the observation in the classroom, it could be seen that several studentsseemed to have pre-read the materials because they already completed theexercisesrelatedtothetopictobediscussedinthemeeting,andtheylookedmoreprepared for deeper discussion about the topic (a type of paragraph). It is in linewithwhatBowyerandChambers(2017)statedthatifthematerialsareuploadedonthe online platform for pre-reading, the classroom time can be used to focus ondeeper analysis or discussion of the course topics. Moreover, Stein and Graham(2014) asserted that uploading the materials enables students to access thematerials anytime and anywhere, creating the content interaction to enhancestudents’cognitiveengagement.However,somestudentssaidthattheyrarelyreadthematerialsbeforeaclass.Onestudentsaid:

SometimesIpre-readthematerialsbutmostofthetimeIpreferlisteningtothelecturer’sexplanationfirst.(S1)

For suchacaseGarissonandVaughan (2008) suggested that thepre-class readingactivityshouldbefollowedbyaself-assessment,quiz,ordiscussionsothatstudentswouldbeencouragedtoreadthematerialsbeforeaclassinordertocompletethetasks. However, overall the student participants appreciated the course materialuploading for its practicality and easy access, and stated that it made it easy forthemtolearnthematerialsanytimeandanywhere;before,during,orafterclass.



95

Figure1.Studentsusedtheirhandphonestoviewcoursematerials

Online writing assignments. When the course topics came to the types ofparagraph, the lecturer assigned students to write a different type of paragraphevery week after each face-to-face instruction. The work was submitted onSchoologybutnotthroughSubmissiontoolbutpostedanddisplayedontheUpdatespagewhereeveryclassmembercouldsee.Thelecturersaid:

Students can do thewriting practices outside classroom hours and submittheirworkonSchoologysothattheycanreadeachother’sworkand learnfromeachother’,andIcangivefeedback.(L)

From the observation onSchoology, it could be seen that therewere interactionsbuiltbetweenstudentsandteacher,andamongstudentsontheUpdatespage.Onthispageeveryonecouldpost theirwork,givecomments,andpress“like”button,andthelecturercouldgivefeedbackonstudents’work,asshowninFigure2.Suchinteractions and feedback enhanced student engagement (Stein & Graham, 2014;Wankel & Blessinger, 2013). The writing assignments were not graded directlybecause they were intended to be the writing practices. It is in line with whatGarrisonandVaughan(2014)statedthatassigninggradescanbedemotivating,soitis better to give actionable feedback that students can apply to the next writingexercise.



96

Figure2.Theinteractionandfeedbackonastudent’swork

The lecturer stated that displaying students’ writing assignments wasintended tomotivatestudents towriteand to readeachother’spiecesofwriting,and during the observation most students seemed motivated although a fewstudentsmightbe lessmotivated. It is similarwithwhatBerger (2003) stated thatmakingworkpublictoone’speersisoneoftheinterventionstoincreasemotivationand engagement. Generally, the activity of online writing assignments, includingdisplaying and giving feedback on students’ work, increased student engagementbehaviorally,emotionally,andcognitively.

Online quizzes. Online quizzes were given three times in early meetings, namelyidentifying the topic sentences of several paragraphs, paragraph unity, andtransition signals for coherence. These quizzes were given after the classinstructions,andcouldbecompletedoutsideclassroomhours.Thelecturersaid:

I do not give the quiz everyweek because it iswriting so the quizzes areused to strengthen what needs to be reinforced, such as the transitionwordsthatstudentsneedtoknowalotandunitylikewhichsentencedoesnotfitintheparagraph.(L)

The lecturer’s statement indicated that the quizzes were intended to develop in-depthunderstandingofwhathadbeenlearned.Thiskindofactivitycanalsobeusedas the way to check student understanding of the content (Briggs, 2014). In thefollowingface-to-facemeetingtheteacherdiscussedthequizwithstudentsthroughteacher-studentconferencingandgavesomecommentsasthefeedbacktostudent



97

work. This allows students to significantly reinforce their perceived learning ofcontentknowledge (Shernoff,2013).Figure3 showsaquizaboutparagraphunity,whichaskedstudentstoidentifythesentencethatdidnothavethesameideawiththeothersentencesinatext. All student participants showed positive responses to the online quizzes.Onestudentsaid:

Throughtakingthequizzes Icangetnewinformationand Ialsocanassessmyknowledge. Inaddition,sincetheonlinequizzesallowmetoretakethequizzesseveraltimesinordertoattainthe100score,theretakemakesmerememberthematerial.(S1)

This student’ statement indicated that the quizzes helped the student assess andretain the knowledge she already learned and to obtain new information. Inaddition,theformatofthequizzeswhichwasmultiplechoiceswasfavorable.Davis(2018) reveals that the repeatable quizzing can improve knowledge retention andstudentmotivation.

Figure3.Aquizaboutparagraphunity



98

Student-teacherconferencing.Whenaskedthereasonwhyusingblended learningfortheparagraphwritingcourse,thelecturersaidthatshehopedbysubmittingthewritingassignmentsonlineonSchoology,thestudentscouldlearnfromeachotherbyreadingeachother’spiecesofwriting,andshecouldgivenecessaryfeedbacktostudents’work.DuringtheobservationsintheclassroomandonSchoology,itcouldbeseenthatthefeedbackwasgivennotonlyonSchoologybutalsointheclassroomthrough teacher-student conferencing. Students’ pieces of writing/paragraphspostedonSchoologyweredisplayed in frontof the class throughaprojector. Thelecturer gave feedback on some of students’ paragraphs and students askedquestionsrelatedtothefeedback.Thisactivitywasdoneatthebeginningofface-to-facesessionintheclassroombeforeanewtypeofaparagraphwasintroduced.

The feedback was mostly about the ideas and the organisation of theparagraph but vocabulary, grammar and mechanics were also discussed. Spencer(2015) stated that the teacher-student conferencing about students’ work couldguide students in self-reflection, provide needed advice, and review mastery ofstandards. Wankel and Blessinger (2013) asserted that providing feedback to thelearneronthecontentandprocesslevelcouldenhancestudentengagement.Groupwork.Theexercisesintheclassroomweremostlydoneinpairsorgroups.Asrevealedduringtheobservationintheclassroom,studentsweredividedintogroupsandaskedtoworkingroupstoidentifytheelementsofamodelparagraphanddrawtheoutlineoftheparagraph.Then,theymadetheoutlinefortheirownparagraphswith the steps of finding a topic, generating ideas through brainstorming, andmakingtheoutlinefromtheideasgathered.Groupworkwasconductedtodevelopactiveandcollaborativelearning.Onestudentstated:

Doing the exercises together with friends is very helpful. My friendssometimessuggestideasIneverthinkabout.(S1)

Althoughduringtheobservation intheclassroomitcouldbeseenthatthereweresome students less active in group work, in general most students activelyparticipatedingroupwork.Thisgroupworkmadethecoursebecamemorestudent-centered because students could share ideas and knowledge together. A similarfinding was reported by Challob et al. (2016) who found that group work andcollaborationwere the positive factors in learningwriting, and through the groupwork and communication within the group, students could decrease their writinganxiety. Wankel and Blessinger (2013) stated that student engagement can bepromotedthroughtheactivestudent-studentcollaborationandparticipationinpairorgroupwork.Class discussion. Class discussion was one of the dominant activities in theclassroom.During theclassobservation it couldbeseen thatafter introducing theday topic, the lecturer showed the class a model paragraph of a new type ofparagraph and asked students to identify the paragraph for the topic sentence,supporting sentences, and concluding sentence. The results were then discussedtogetherandstudentsappreciatedthisactivity.Onestudentstated:



99

The discussions are usually carried out after group work and exercises.Through the discussions we can ask questions and deepen ourunderstanding.(S1)

Anotherstudentrevealed:

Not all ofmy friends ask questions but the discussions over the results ofourworkclarifymisunderstoodconcepts.(S6)

From these students’ statements it could be revealed that class discussion coulddeepen understanding of the content and clarifymisconceptions. It is in linewithwhat Twigg (2003) asserted that discussion sessions can reinforce what studentshave learned and clear upmisconception. It is corroboratedby Stein andGraham(2014), stating that class discussions provide “opportunities for teachers to directstudent exploration of a topic, and for students to test ideas, ask questions, anddebatepoints”(p.150).

In addition to the aforementioned learning activities, the studentengagement couldalsobeenhanced through thecommunicationafter classhourscarriedoutthroughSchoology.Severalstudentssaidthattheysometimesaskedthelecturerforsomethingtheydidnotunderstandwhetheraboutthelessoncontentorabout the assignment submission through the direct message on Schoology. Itincreased student-teacher interaction that could promote student engagement(Stein&Graham,2014). Ingeneral, the lecturer focusedthe instructionsongroupwork, discussions, and student-teacher conferencing activities in the face-to-facelearning channel. On the online platform students could obtain or download thematerials, take quizzes, and do/submit the writing assignments as well as givingcomments/feedbackoneachother’piecesofwriting.

Sincetheaccesscode isneededto joinaclassonSchoology, itcanbesaidthattheonlineclassisaclosedsystem.Ononehanditisgoodforstudentsafetybutontheotherhandit limitsthestudentaccesstowideraudienceasaglobalvillagecommunity (Catapano, n.d.). However, this drawback could be solved by invitingother students fromother classesorevenother countries toparticipate in sharedgroups.Allthestudentparticipantslookedenthusiasticwhenofferedthepossibilityforhavingonlinediscussionswithotherstudentsfromothercountries.TheysaiditwouldbegreatbecausetheycouldlearnandpracticenotonlytheEnglishlanguagebut also others’ culture and communication manners. It is indeed possible to dosuchdiscussions,forexample,aclassfromPhilippine,Malaysia,orSingapore,whereEnglish is their second language, getting connected to a class from IndonesiathroughasharedgrouponSchoology.

Conclusion

Student engagement can be intensified through the combination of two differentlearningchannels,whichiscalledblendedlearning.Forwritingcoursewhichneedsalotofpractice,theclasstimeonface-to-facesettingisconsideredrelativelyshortor



100

evennotenough.TheuseofSchoologyastheonlineplatformthatsupplementsthelearning in face-to-face setting can provide more time and increase studentengagement.Itisfrequentlyadmittedthatthereisnosinglebestmodelforblendedcourses, but teachers can learn which combination of approaches works best fordifferent students and different subjects through experience. Although the use ofSchoologyastheonlinelearningplatforminthestudiedclasswasnotoptimal,onlyfor uploading course materials, submitting assignments, giving quizzes, andcommunicating ina limitedway, thecombinationof theonline learningmodeandface-to-facelearningmodepromotedstudentengagementintheparagraphwritingcourse, particularly through the activities of uploading course materials, onlinewriting assignments, quizzes, student-teacher conferencing, groupwork, and classdiscussions.

References

Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher

education.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,40(5),518-529.Auster,C. J. (2016).Blended learningasapotentiallywinningcombinationof face-

to-faceandonlinelearning:anexploratorystudy.TeachingSociology,44(1),39-48.

Berger, R. (2003).An ethic of excellence: building a culture of craftsmanship withstudents.Portsmouth,NH:Heinemann.

Bersin, J. (2004).Theblended learningbook:bestpractices,provenmethodologies,andlessonslearned.SanFrancisco,USA:JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.

Briggs, S. (2014). 21 ways to check for student understanding. Retrieved fromhttps://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/21-ways-to-check-for-student-understanding/

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to languagepedagogy(2nded.).NewYork:AddisonWesleyLongman.

Catapano, J. (n.d.). Schoology:a learningmanagement systemoverview.Retrievedfrom http://www.teachhub.com/schoology-learning-management-system-overview

Challob,A.I.,Bakar,N.A.,&Latif,H.(2016).Collaborativeblendedlearningwritingenvironment: effects on EFL students’ writing apprehension and writingperformance.CanadianCenterofScienceandEducation.9(6),229-241.

Downing, C. E., Spears, J., & Holtz, M. (2014). Transforming a course to blendedlearningforstudentengagement.EducationalResearchInternational,2014,1-10.

Epignosis LLC (2014). E-learning: concepts, trends, applications. Retrieved fromhttps://www.talentlms.com/elearning/elearning-101-jan2014-v1.1.pdf.

Ebner,H.K.(2016).Workconferencesandstudentengagement.MastersofArts inEducationActionResearchPapers.Paper153.

Fenton,W. (2018). The best (LMS) learning management systems for 2018.Retrieved from http://sea.pcmag.com/absorb-lms/10984/guide/the-best-lms-learning-management-systems-for-2018.



101

Fredricks,J.A.,Blumenfeld,P.C.,&Paris,A.H.(2004).Schoolengagement:potentialoftheconcept,stateoftheevidence.ReviewofEducationalResearch,74(1),59-109.

Garrison,D.R.,&Vaughan,N.D.(2008).Blendedlearning inhighereducation.SanFrancisco:USA:JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.

Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017). Case study research:foundations and methodological orientations.forum qualitativesozialforschung /forum: qualitative social research,18(1). Retrieved fromhttp://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1701195.

Hinkel,E.(2004).TeachingacademicESLwriting:practicaltechniquesinvocabularyandgrammar.LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.

Howard, S. K. (2013). Risk-aversion: understanding teachers’ resistance totechnologyintegration.Technology,PedagogyandEducation.

Hyland,K.(2003).Secondlanguagewriting.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPressMa’arop,A.H.&Embi,M.A.(2016).Implementationofblendedlearninginhigher

learning institutions: A Review of the Literature. International EducationStudies,9(3),41-52.

Martin, J. & Torres, A. (2016). User’s guide and toolkit for the surveys of studentengagement:thehighschoolsurveyofstudentengagement(HSSSE)andthemiddle grades survey of student engagement (MGSSE). Retrieved fromhttps://www.nais.org/Articles/Documents/Member/2016%20HSSSE%20Chapter-1.pdf

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014).Qualitative data analysis: amethodssourcebook(3rded.).California,USA:SAGEPublications,Inc.

Nunan,D.(1989).Secondlanguageteaching&learning.Heinle&HeinlePublishers.Purnawarman, S., Susilawati, & Sundayana, W. (2016). The use of edmodo in

teachingwritinginablendedlearningsetting.IndonesianJournalofAppliedLinguistics,5(2),242-252.

Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Optimal learning environments to promote studentengagement.NewYork,NY:Springer.

Spencer, J. (2015). The power of student conferencing. Retrieved fromhttp://www.spencerauthor.com/the-power-of-student-conferencing/

Stein, J.&Graham,C.R. (2014).Essentials forblended learning:astandards-basedguide.ThirdAvenue,NewYork:Routledge.

Thorne,K.(2003).Blendedlearning:howtointegrateonlineandtraditionallearning.London,UK:KoganPageLimited.

Wankel,C.&Blessinger,P.(2013). Increasingstudentengagementandretentionine-learning environments: web 2.0 and blended learning technologies.HowardHouse,UK:EmeraldGroupPublishingLimited.

Zhang,Z.&McNamara,O.(2018).UndergraduateStudentEngagement.Singapore:Springer.



102

Appendix

Syllabus

CourseName : ParagraphWritingCourseCode/Credits : PBI2311/2CreditsSemester : 4Status : CompulsoryPrerequisite : BasicWritingSkillCourseDescription : Thiscourseisdesignedtoequipthestudentswiththe

skilltobeabletowritedifferenttypesofparagraphs.Thiscoursealsointroducesthestudentstosomepre-writingtechniques,elementsofparagraph,unity,andcoherence.Thetypesofparagraphsselectedforthiscoursearedescriptive,explanation,comparisonandcontrast,cause–effect,andopinionparagraphs

GeneralObjectives : Todevelopstudents’abilityinwritingdifferenttypesofparagraphsinEnglishasthebaseforthestudentstowriteacademicessays

TeachingandLearningModes

: Blendedlearning(face-to-faceandonline)

CourseOutlineWeek Topic Subtopic Indicatorofachievement1 Introduction Courseoutline

AssignmentsRules&regulation

Thestudentsknowtheobjectives,thetopicscoveredinthecourse,thereferences,andtheassignmentsforthecourse

2

Elementsofaparagraph

Topicsentence(position,criteriaofgoodtopicsentence)SupportingdetailsConcludingsentence

Thestudentsareabletoidentifytopicsentence,supportingdetails,andconcludingsentenceThestudentsareabletowriteagoodtopicsentence

3 ProcessofParagraphwriting(pre-writing)

ChoosingatopicDevelopingideas(brainstorming,listing,clustering,freewriting)Planningaparagraph(outlining,organizing)

Thestudentsareabletochooseatopic,anddevelopideasthroughbrainstormingandfreewritingThestudentsareabletomakeanoutlineofaparagraph

4

ProcessofParagraphWriting(writingsupportingsentences)

DevelopingaparagraphTechniquesofsupport(facts,example,personalexperience,anecdotes)

Thestudentsareabletowritesupportingdetailsthroughvarietyoftechniques



103

5 Unity Controllingideaand

supportingsentencesThestudentsareabletowriteaunifiedparagraph

6

Coherence

SmoothflowofideasLinkingdevices

Thestudentsareabletowriteacoherentparagraphusingappropriatelinkingdevices

7

Descriptiveparagraph

PhysicaldescriptionOrderoforganization

Thestudentsareabletowriteadescriptiveparagraph

8 MidTest 9

Processparagraph OrganizationChronologicalconnectors

Thestudentsareabletowriteaprocessparagraph

10 Classificationparagraph

OrganizationLogicalsequence

Thestudentsareabletowriteaclassificationparagraph

11

Definitionparagraph

OrganizationConnectors

Thestudentsareabletowriteadefinitionparagraph

12

Comparison-contrastparagraph

BlockorganizationPointbypointorganization

Thestudentsareabletowriteacomparison-contrastparagraph

13

Cause-effectparagraph

OrganizationConnectors

Thestudentsareabletowriteacauseeffectparagraph

14

Opinionparagraph ExpressingViewpoint/attitudeDevelopingarguments

Thestudentsareabletowriteanopinionparagraph

15 Classproject Classbulletin(optional)

16 Finaltest

References:

1. TheProcessofParagraphWritingbyJoyM.Reid2. TheProcessofCompositionbyJoyM.Reid3. Blueprints1:CompositionSkillsforAcademicWritingbyKeithS.Folseetal.4. IntroductiontoAcademicWritingbyAliceOshima&AnnHogue5. EssentialofEnglishbyAnnHogue6. ParagraphDevelopmentbyMartinL.Arnaudet&MaryE.Barrrett7. WriteWellbyBarliBram