Utilizing Technology to Enhance Communication

in the Classroom
John HOLTHOUSE*

英語コミュニケーション能力向上のための授業におけるテクノロジー利用

ジョン・ホルトハウス

Abstract :
The question of how to motivate Japanese university students to study harder is almost cer-
tainly a recurring theme among educators across the nation. It would be fanciful to suggest that
any single adaptation to teaching practice could produce a revolution in student behavior, but im-
provement is always possible. Clues as to how to achieve this may be found by identifying the
ways in which students spend their time and what interests them. It is worth noting that the
younger generation of people today is the first to have grown up in an environment in which ac-
cess to, and utilization of, Internet tools and social media are taken for granted. Consequently,
teachers need to consider the implications of this fact and decide how, and to what extent, to im-
plement such technology in their courses. This article represents a small step in this direction,
and includes specific observations about the integration of technology as a learning tool in Eng-
lish courses at the School of International Studies.

概要：日本の大学で教鞭をとる教育者にとって、授業中の学生のモチベーションをいかに
高められるかは、永遠の課題である。どのような方法を用いても学習態度に効果が現れる
としたら夢のような話であるが、実際はそうではない。しかし、改善は可能である。改善
のためには、学生が時間をどう使っているのか、学生が何に興味を示すのかを理解するこ
とに鍵がある。現代社会の若者は、インターネットツールやソーシャルメディアにアクセ
スし利用することが当たり前の環境に育っている。よって教師には、この現実を受け入
れ、これらテクノロジーをどのように、どの程度、授業に取り入れるべきかを見極めるこ
とが求められる。当論文では、この課題に対する方向性を探り、国際学部の英語の授業で
活用できる、学習ツールとしての様々なテクノロジーについて、見解を論じた。

Key words : Internet, technology, motivation

1 Introduction
The notion that the typical Japanese university student is not necessarily enthusiastic about study
is hardly new, but before complaining too bitterly educators would do well to reflect on areas of
possible improvement in their own practice. It seems probable that teachers are prone to reaching a
────────────────────────────────────────────
＊
Kwansei Gakuin University, School of International Studies I. E. F. L. (Instructor of English as a Foreign Language)

― ８７ ―
 関西学院大学国際学研究 Vol.2 No.1

point in their careers where they feel confident in their abilities and become more or less set in their
pedagogical ways. However, as professionals, teachers owe it to themselves and their students to re-
main alert to ways in which they can improve their teaching. It is not unreasonable to maintain the
hope that advances in teaching practice can bring about a degree of corresponding improvement in
student motivation. An area that teachers, particularly older ones, might consider exploring more
thoroughly is the way in which technology can be utilized in the classroom to promote learning.

2 Understanding our Students

Needless to say, developing an understanding of one’s students is a basic fundamental of teach-
ing. In recent years, plentiful space in both scholarly journals and mainstream media has been de-
voted to the subject of the younger generation, the so-called Millennial Generation (or Generation
Y), which is usually defined as including people born between 1980 and 2000. The “Millennials”
are said to differ markedly to people of previous generations at the same age in many ways, but per-
haps most strikingly, it is the first in which individuals have lived their whole lives surrounded by
computers, the Internet, video games, and all the other products of the digital age. This is what fa-
mously led Prensky (2001) to coin the phrase digital natives to describe the youth of today (as dis-
tinct from digital immigrants, who were raised in pre-digital times). In recent years, the so-called
Web 2.0 revolution has ushered in an era in which a wide range of software allowing cheap, easy to
use online voice and video communication is available. Reports indicating that Millennials are more
enthusiastic about using digital technology than older people are commonplace these days. For ex-
ample, figures for the United States in 2011 showed that “eighty-one percent have wireless access to
the Internet, compared to 59% overall, and 83% are active users of social networking, compared to
65% overall” (Pacansky-Brock, 2012, p.4). Moreover, they participate more intensively in social net-
working activities, such as commenting on content, than other generations.
It seems highly likely that the situation in Japan is similar. Research shows that Internet use in Ja-
pan almost doubled between 2001 and 2006, and that “Internet users constitute a majority among
people in their teens to their forties, most markedly in their twenties” (Nakano and Watanabe, 2009,
p.237). Furthermore, data collected in five Asian cities, including Tokyo, revealed that familiarity
with digital technology is the norm among 12 to 17 year olds, with “96% of them being internet us-
ers, and having 6 years of computer experience on average” (Lin et al., 2010, p.839).
Faced with this demographic landscape, researchers have made concerted efforts in recent years to
explore the implications for student learning styles and beliefs about learning. Prensky (2001), for
instance, suggested that “as a result of this ubiquitous environment and the sheer volume of their in-
teraction with it, today’s students think and process information fundamentally differently from their
predecessors” (p.2). According to (Brown, 2000) Millennials are more adept than earlier generations
at absorbing a number of media at once, or “multiprocessing”. Others have reported that they can be
viewed as experiential learners (those who prefer to learn by doing), and to be “more comfortable in
image-rich environments than with text” (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005).
Of particular significance is the finding that Millennials typically expect their teachers not only to
be experts in their fields, but to be able to utilize technology creatively to pass on their knowledge
(Roberts, 2005). Therefore, regardless of how comfortable teachers feel about using the new tech-
nologies as teaching tools, the inescapable fact is that they are here now and are not going to go

― ８８ ―
 John HOLTHOUSE：Utilizing Technology to Enhance Communication in the Classroom

away. The students of today expect educators to be aware of this and to respond positively. “They
want learning experiences that are social and that connect them with their peers” (West and West,
2009, p.2). The question is not whether technology should be utilized in educational settings or not,
but how, and to what extent.

3 The Need to Keep a Pedagogical Purpose in Mind

Some researchers have claimed that technology has a limited role to play in English language
teaching. For instance, Graddol (2006) argued that rather than offering anything new, computers
have simply changed the venue of learning, in that the kind of tasks language learners use them for
can be conducted just as well in an ordinary classroom. According to Bax (2006), technology can
only really serve a useful purpose when it becomes “normalized”, or not viewed as somehow special
or distinct from other tools around it that are being used toward the same purpose. In other words,
he contends that there is a danger of teachers simply using technology for the sake of using it, and
not giving enough thought to how the technology-based tasks contribute towards achieving curricu-
lum goals. This is clearly a valid point. Hurst (2007) also notes that bits (binary digits) have the po-
tential to be used either productively or unproductively for language learning purposes, which places
the onus on teachers to achieve “bit literacy”, or an understanding of how technology can be used to
help their students. Technology in itself will never replace language instruction based on a sound
knowledge of second language acquisition research, pedagogical methodology, and a thoughtfully
prepared curriculum.
By and large though, consensus among researchers in support of a blended approach to language
teaching appears to have solidifed significantly over recent years (Garrison & Vaughan, 2008 ; Sta-
cey & Gerbic, 2008). Although it has been defined and implemented in various ways, blended learn-
ing basically entails “the thoughtful fusion of face-to-face and online learning experiences” (Garri-
son & Vaughan, 2008, p.5). Different teachers and institutions are bound to arrive at their own in-
terpretation of blended learning, depending on their own familiarity with the technology, the needs
and abilities of their students, budgetary considerations, and so on. There is no single template for
carrying out a blended approach, and doing so requires an acknowledgement by all involved of the
element of trial and error inherent in the process. Stacey and Gerbic (2008) identified numerous fac-
tors that are likely to affect the success of blended programs, including the level of readiness of stu-
dents, teachers, and institutions to carry them out, the degree of ongoing communication between
participants, and the strength of integration between the two environments. Implementing a blended
approach is likely to involve taking some missteps along the way, but educators should not allow
that to discourage them.

4 Student Attitudes toward Technology Use in the SIS English Program

Bearing in mind the factors that affect the success of a blended approach, it is perhaps timely to
review how students of the School of International Studies (SIS) at Kwansei Gakuin University are
responding to the fledgling experiment with integrating technology into their English course. In the
first year of the program, blogging was introduced into writing classes for fluency-based tasks, and
proved to be very popular with students (Ballou, Holthouse, & Marlowe, 2011). In the following
year, students started using English Central in conjunction with their Oral Communication classes in

― ８９ ―
 関西学院大学国際学研究 Vol.2 No.1

order to promote vocabulary acquisition, plus further develop the students’ listening and pronuncia-
tion skills. After the first year, research found that only 50% of those surveyed rated English Central
as useful for improving their English (Holthouse, 2012). In response to this disappointing statistic,
an attempt has been made in the current year to more closely integrate the classroom and online en-
vironments by introducing in-class activities related to the content of the videos that students have
watched. Students have been free to select the videos that they want to watch, but now have to use
some of them as sources of group work with their peers. They have to explain some vocabulary that
they learned, describe what the video was about, their reaction to it, create conversation questions
and lead a group discussion on a theme related to the content of the video.
A follow-up survey was conducted this year to determine whether the new approach to English
Central had affected the students’ perception of its value as a learning tool. A total of 159 students
were surveyed, including 68 freshmen and 91 sophomores. The sophomore group was presented
with the four statements below (Figure 1), to which they indicated the extent of their agreement or
otherwise (SD＝strongly disagree, MD＝moderately disagree, MA＝moderately agree, SA＝strongly
agree). The results are displayed in Table 1, below. Ideally, one would have hoped to include all of
last year’s freshmen respondents in this year’s sophomore sample. Although it proved impossible to
contact all of those students, the vast majority were included in this year’s group. In any case, the
total sample size is almost double last year’s, which should remove doubt about the veracity of the
data’s implications.
As demonstrated by comparing the results of item 1 with the feedback from last year, there has
been a notable improvement in the proportion of students (73%) who believe English Central to be
useful for them. This is confirmed by the response to item 4, with 68% claiming to be more positive
about it this year. Items 2 and 3 indicate that although students didn’t necessarily consider the newly
added, in-class discussion component to be enjoyable, a significant proportion (63%) rated it as use-
ful. This might explain the overall upswing in approval for English Central.
Finally, as a means of supporting the implications of the sophomore group’s response, 68 fresh-
men were presented with a similar survey. Item 4 was changed to “I would prefer to just do English

1. I think English Central is useful for improving my English.

2. Speaking with classmates about videos I’ve watched on English Central is enjoyable.
3. Speaking with classmates about videos I’ve watched on English Central is useful for improving my English.
4. I feel more positive about English Central now than I did last year.
Figure 1 Survey questions

Table 1 Sophomore Attitudes

Boys (40) Girls (51) Total (91)
SD MD MA SA SD MD MA SA SD MD MA SA
1 2 9 16 13 1 13 35 2 3 22 51 15
2 9 15 14 2 3 23 20 5 12 38 34 7
3 9 10 13 8 3 17 26 5 12 22 44 13
4 6 6 17 11 3 14 26 8 9 20 43 19

― ９０ ―
 John HOLTHOUSE：Utilizing Technology to Enhance Communication in the Classroom

Table 2 Freshman Attitudes

Boys (24) Girls (44) Total (68)
SD MD MA SA SD MD MA SA SD MD MA SA
1 1 2 17 4 1 5 23 15 2 7 40 19
2 3 8 12 1 3 9 22 10 6 17 34 11
3 3 3 12 6 1 6 28 9 4 9 40 15
4 3 14 7 0 16 22 6 0 19 36 13 0

Central by myself and not talk in class about the videos with classmates”. As seen below, the over-
all response towards English Central, supplemented by related in-class discussion, was overwhelm-
ingly positive.
Given that both blogging and English Central are now recognized by students as enhancing the
quality of learning opportunities available to them, perhaps the time is right to consider the options
for further integration of digital tools into the SIS English program.

5 Future Directions for Integrating Technology into the SIS English Program
Perusal of the literature strongly suggests that the next step should involve injecting a more “hu-
man” element into the online experience of our students (Pacansky-Brock, 2012). Bergman and
Sams (2012) developed one model of how this might be achieved, with what is now widely known
as the “flipped classroom”. The flipped classroom involves shifting the focus away from the teacher
by moving lecture or instruction time out of the classroom and bringing what has traditionally been
seen as homework into the classroom. Lectures or key concepts that were previously presented in
class can now be recorded on video and made available online using screen capture software. Stu-
dents study the content at home, and then come to class ready to work on tasks that would previ-
ously have been considered “homework”.
There are a number of advantages associated with having class content constantly accessible on-
line. Students who are busy with other aspects of their lives such as job hunting can catch up on
material that they missed due to absence. Furthermore, students are free to view video lectures at
their own pace. That is, they can pause or rewind as many times as they feel necessary to allow the
content to sink in. In this way, slower learners are not left behind. They can take notes about what
they have watched and come to class with questions prepared for the teacher, if necessary. Once any
areas of uncertainty are cleared up, and all students have begun performing in-class tasks, the
teacher is free to take on the role of advisor because the flipped model allows more time for interac-
tion. Students that need help the most are able to ask for it. Another result of increased interaction
can be that the teacher is more likely to observe and note common errors for future class discussion.
From an EFL teaching perspective, the drawback with the flipped model as implemented by
Bergman and Sams is that the online component is comprised mostly of lectures. While this is well
suited to teaching science and mathematics, its applicability to English classes is more limited (to,
for example, instruction on particular essay writing skills or points of grammar). Voice tools that re-
tain the previously mentioned advantages of the flipped model but also promote student-student in-
teraction in various ways almost certainly represent the best option for language programs. Pop
(2010), for instance, found that Romanian university EFL students who incorporated voice tools

― ９１ ―
 関西学院大学国際学研究 Vol.2 No.1

(Voice Thread and Voxopop) into their learning reported greater motivation to speak English and
elevated levels of confidence in their ability. Similarly, Elam & Nesbit (2012) claim that Korean
college EFL students “make improvements in motivation” (p.125) when asked to use Voice Thread
and Ning as part of their courses.
If the SIS continues along the path of integrating technology into its English courses, decisions
about which tool to utilize next will not be made by one person alone. Nevertheless, it appears that
a strong case can be made for Voice Thread. For those unfamiliar with Voice Thread, the best way
to gain a better understanding of it is to visit the site (www.voicethread.com), but in essence it is a
tool that allows secure, online group conversations stimulated by photos, videos, documents or pres-
entations on any number of slides. After participants have made a comment (which they may do by
cell phone, webcam, microphone, text, or file upload) on a particular slide, their profile picture ap-
pears around the edges of it. Comments can be deleted and re-recorded by participants any number
of times until they feel satisfied with their production. The benefits of this are obvious. “Students
from certain cultures that discourage public disagreement discover a freedom to disagree provided
by the impersonal nature of technology. Threaded discussions free them from embarrassment” (Mor-
gan, 2008). Furthermore, knowing that they will have an audience encourages students to be particu-
larly thoughtful about both the content and the delivery of their contributions to a discussion. Pop
(2010) noted that his students tended to feel a sense of pride in hearing themselves speak online.
They were also able to gain insights into the strengths and weaknesses of their oral production, and
to develop confidence over time. Moreover, given the luxury of repeated listening, teachers tend to
find the tasks of assessing and advising their students much easier.
As mentioned previously, technology should be selected on the basis of its compatibility with cur-
riculum goals and current theories of language acquisition. In the words of Klopfer et al (2010),

“Throughout the past few decades, the emergence of new technologies has been paralleled by
the evolution of theories on cognition and learning. Where learning and the mind were once
viewed as “filling of the bucket,” the “social mind” is now a much more prevalent model. Of
course, educators have long been aware that learning is a social activity, where learners con-
struct their understanding not just through interaction with the material, but also through col-
laboratively constructing new knowledge with their peers” (p.13).

When using Voice Thread in their courses, teachers would expect to create some of the media,
particularly in the early stages (for example, to create models). However students (at times individu-
ally, but also in collaboration with classmates) should gradually become the primary creators of con-
tent. Voice Thread is an ideal platform for collaborative student projects such as digital storytelling,
which is regularly promoted these days as an effective means of enhancing language learning
(Robin, 2008 ; Sadik, 2008).

6 Conclusion
Motivating Japanese university EFL students to devote maximum effort to their studies is prob-
ably an ongoing struggle for the majority of teachers. However, we live in an era of rapid techno-
logical innovation. Keeping an open mind to the opportunities this presents for language programs is

― ９２ ―
 John HOLTHOUSE：Utilizing Technology to Enhance Communication in the Classroom

both a responsibility and a possible source of optimism for teachers. Our students are part of the
first generation to have grown up surrounded by digital tools. Consequently, they tend to be adept at
using them, and inclined to expect teachers to explore ways of utilizing them in the classroom. This
article has indicated the progress toward the integration of such technology into the SIS English pro-
gram, and potential avenues for further development.

References
Ballou, K., Holthouse, J., & Marlowe, P. 2011. Exploring Japanese EFL university student attitudes toward blogging. Kwan-
sei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 16, 111−120.
Bax, S. 2006. A first step to second nature. Guardian Weekly Online. Retrieved from : http : //www.guardian.co.uk/education
/2006/apr/07/tefl3
Brown, J. 2000. Growing up digital. Change, 32, 2, 10−11.
Elam, J. and Nesbit, B. 2012. The effectiveness of project-based learning using Web 2.0 tools in EFL. JALT Call Journal, 8
(2), 113−127.
Garrison, R., and Vaughan, H. 2008. Blended learning in higher education : Framework, principles and guidelines. San
Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Graddol, D. 2006. Still waiting for the bright new age. Guardian Weekly Online. Retrieved from http : //www.guardian.co.uk/
education/2006/mar/10/tefl5
Holthouse, J. 2012. Thoughts on understanding and influencing Japanese university students’ motivation to study. Journal of
International Studies, 1, 111−122.
Hurst, M. 2007. Bit literacy. New York : Good Experience, Inc.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Groff, J., and Haas, J. 2009. The instructional power of digital games, social simulations, and how
teachers can leverage them. Retrieved from http : //education.mit.edu/papers/GamesSimsSocNets_EdArcade.pdf
Lin, W., Cheong, P., Kim, Y., and Jung, J. 2010. Becoming citizens : Youths’ civic uses of new media in five digital cities
in east Asia. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25(6) 839−857.
Morgan, M. 2008. More productive use of technology in the ESL/EFL classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 14(7).
Nakano, S. and Watanabe, Y. 2009. The virtual doubling of Japanese Internet use : 2001−2006. Social Indicators Research,
93(1), 235−238.
Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. 2005. Is it age or IT : First steps toward understanding the Net generation. In D. Oblinger & J.
Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation. Retrieved from : http : //www.educause.edu/research−and−publications/
books/educating−net−generation
Pacansky-Brock, M. 2012. Best practices for teaching with emerging technologies. New York : Routledge.
Pop, A., 2010. Raising our students’ confidence in their speaking with Web 2.0 speaking tools. Proceedings 10 th Quest Ro-
mania Conference. Retrieved from : http : //www.optima−bg.org/docs/ad%203%20QUEST%20Anisoara%20Pop_Web
2%20Tools.pdf
Prensky, M. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 2−6.
Roberts, G. 2005. Technology and learning expectations of the Net generation. In D. Oblinger and J. Oblinger (Eds.), Edu-
cating the Net Generation. Retrieved from http : //www.educause.edu/research−and−publications/books/educating−net−
generation
Robin, B. 2008. Digital storytelling : A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory Into Practice, 47,
220−228.
Sadik, A. 2008. Digital storytelling : a meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 487−506.
Stacey, E., and Gerbic, P. 2008. Success factors for blended learning. In Hello! Where are you in the landscape of educa-
tional technology? Proceedings Ascilite Melbourne 2008. Retrieved from http : //www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/mel-
bourne08/procs/stacey.pdf
West, J., & West, M. 2009. Using wikis for online collaboration. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.

― ９３ ―