FLIPGRID: ONLINE PLATFORMS AS A CREATIVE AND INTERESTING TOOLS FOR SPEAKING IN BLENDED CLASSROOM

Rica Umrina Lubis (STAIN Mandailing Natal)

Abstract


In this study, 20 second-year English Education Department of STAIN Mandailing Natal students were introduced to Flipgrid, an online video discussion platform, as a means to facilitate communication and discussion with students in the absence of traditional face- to-face communicative activitie including speaking lesson. This paper presents how the students’ responses to the use of flipgrid as a creative and interesting tools in blended classroom that focuses on speaking. The research method is used qualitative method. The instruments used in this study were questionnaires and interview. The result from this study was found that 16 positive responses from the accessibility, internet connectivity, psychological fulfillment, the interactive features and 8 negative responses of students to the use of the Flipgrid application ranging from competitiveness, equipment, and originality. The most positive responses that arise are that this application is easy to use, while the most negative responses are difficulties in uploading process is quite long. It can be concluded that the flipgrid provides creative and interesting tools for speaking in blended classroom

Full Text:

PDF

References


Birch, D., & Volkov, M. (2007). Assessment of online reflections: Engaging English second language (ESL) students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3).

Blake, R. J. (2005). Bimodal CMC: The glue of language learning at a distance. CALICO Journal, 22(3) 497-511

Carrie, T., & Timothy, H. (2020). Strategies for Using Flipgrid in Education. US-China Education Review B, 26-31. doi:10.17265/2161-6248/2020.01.003)

Chapelle, c. (2002). English language learning and Technology: Lectures on Applied Linguistic in the Age of Information and Communication Technology. Philadephia: John Benjamin Publishing.

Clark, C., Strudler, N., & Grove, K. (2015). Comparing asynchronous and synchronous videovs. text based discussions in an online teacher education course. Online Learning, 19(3),48-69.

Conference Proceedings (Vol. 73, No. 1). Iowa State University Digital Press.

Goda, Y., & Yamada, M. (2013). Application of CoI to design CSCL for EFL online asynchronous discussion. In Z. Akyol & D. R. Garrison (Eds.), Educational Communities of Inquiry: Theoretical Framework, Research and Practice (pp. 295- 316).IGI Global.

Hammond, M. (2005). A review of recent papers on online discussion in teaching andlearning in higher education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 9- 23.

McClure, C., & McAndrews, L. E. (2016). Going native to reach the digital natives: Newtechnologies for the classroom. In International Textile and Apparel Association Annual

Stoszkowski, J., McCarthy, L., & Fonseca, J. (2017). Online Peer Mentoring and Collaborative Reflection: A Cross-Institutional Project in Sports Coaching. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 118-121.

Svokos, G. R. (2019). Video Vs. Text in Discussion Boards: Exploring Asynchronous Video Communication among Second Language Undergraduates in a Blended US English Composition Course (Publication No. 13856767) [Doctoral dissertation, Northeastern University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Voorn, R., & Kommers, P. (2013). Social Media and Higher Education: Introversion and Collaborative Learning from the Student’s Perspective. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments, 59-73

Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159- 18


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.