University students in the faculty of arts often come up against computer technology. This confrontation occurs when an arts student has to deliver a word-processed writing at school, because pitfalls lie in using a computer, particularly when someone studies a totally different discipline at university. Moreover, hindrances as "fear of machines, fear of failure, fear of looking stupid, fear of writing, fear of separation from all that's familiar and comfortable" (Zinsser 205) influence students' computer usage.
I carried out a survey among students of English at Janus Pannonius University (JPU) at Pécs about the use of a word-processing program. I examined the application of Word 6.0 for writing reaction papers for the British Cultural Studies course at the English Department of JPU. Students had to produce reaction papers once every two weeks, as "an expression of the student's reaction to the class" (Cunningham 5). I made an attempt to find out how many of the offered alternatives a student (with or without qualification of computer techniques) put to use to write an essay, when the tutor clearly had declared at the beginning of the semester that he would take outward appearance into consideration as well as content. "As with all written work your RPs should be legible and well-presented, preferably typed or word-processed. Sloppy or untidy work will be down graded" (Cunningham 6).
My assumption was that every student would deliver word-processed papers to get better evaluation, but I also presumed that the attempts to use a word-processor efficiently would meet with difficulties. I thought that students of English have little experience in computing, so I supposed that they cannot be effective users of a word-processing program. I postulated little experience, because I wouldn't be able to use a word-processor either, if I hadn't attended a computing course during grammar school.
Method
I carried out my research with a questionnaire, which I constructed particularly for finding out how arts students use the computer. I examined my personal computer at home and culled the alternatives from Word 6.0 which seemed useful for writing a reaction paper. After that, I produced six questions in connection with the alternatives the word-processor offers. The questionnaire included four yes or no questions and three open ones. In the main body of the questionnaire the students had to underline their answers from the options. I also gave the opportunity to students to write down comments and things which I did not ask but they found useful to add.
My questions were:
- Do you like using Word 6.0? Why?
- Have you learnt using it at school or somewhere else? Where?
- Which of these do you usually use to form a document?
- letters: size, type, Bold, Italic, Underlined
- text: Alignment: Left-Right-Centered-Justified, Margin, Indentation,
Spacing, Line Spacing, Page Numbers, Header/Footer
- Do you usually check spelling?
- Do you usually count the words?
- What other things do you use to form a Reaction Paper?
And I left space for students to write other comments about the topic.
I applied the Word 6.0 word-processing program for editing the form of my inquiry. After printing, I made 20 photocopies of the questionnaire.
Since John Cunningham, the tutor of British Cultural Studies, runs his course in three groups (two on Monday and one on Tuesday), I asked Horváth Nóra, a first-year English major from the Monday-group, to help me in the execution of the inquiry. On 27 April, 1998 I gave her a couple of questionnaires to ask her groupmates to fill them in before the class. On 28 April, 1998 I also asked my groupmates to participate in this research and fill in the form.
Although students seemed willing to help me, I faced a few obstacles. The main problem was that fewer students used a word-processor to write the reaction paper than I expected. So I confined myself to work with only 10 questionnaires instead of 15-20, as I planned in advance. A less serious problem was that students preferred answering to the yes or no questions, and they often omitted the open ones. But let's see what results came to light.
Results and Discussion
Eight students out of the 10 had learnt using the word-processor before. Only seven out of the eight answered the question about where had they learnt it. Two of the seven learnt it at a course, four at school and one at a former workplace. With the result that eight of the students had previous computer skills it turned out that I underestimated the possibilities of learning and practicing how to use a computer, and I also underrated the students' skills and intellectual curiosity. So my assumption about the relationship between arts students and computers proved false.
All of the students liked using Word 6.0, both those who had and those who hadn't learnt using it. Seven students answered the question about why did they like it. Five of them wrote that it was easy to use; the rest gave practicality as a reason.
To find out how students form a reaction paper, I gave five options for chosing letters, and eleven options for forming the page layout. Students had to underline the options they used. To form the letters each student changed size, and nine underlined the Type option. Everybody used bold letters, and seven used italic and underlined type. Changing features of the letters did not show prominent differences between students, since most of them used each option in the reaction paper.
The main difference between students' use of Word 6.0 appeared in shaping the page layout. Each student applied alignment, but in various ways: six used the left, three the right, five the centered and six chose the justified one. Four out of 10 underlined only one option, two underlined two options, one chose three options and the rest three underlined all four options. This variety of using alignment suggests that the outlook of the reaction paper differed from student to student.
Students used the less obvious features rarely, such as margin, indentation, and header or footer. Four of the students changed margin, three used indentation and five used header or footer. Line spacing and page numbers seemed the most widespread, maybe because double-spacing and numbering pages are often required in a word-processed writing.
The answers of the third yes or no question indicated balance between students who checked spelling and those who did not, since every second people checked spelling with the help of the program, and the rest neglected this opportunity.
In counting words the division of students is not balanced, since seven students used up the word-counting opportunity, and three did not.
None of the students could list other alternatives from Word 6.0 which I missed to list but they used to edit a reaction paper.
Conclusion
I suppose that in a research based on a questionnaire, the researcher has to offer clear options, and should not rest assured that people will answer what he or she expects. With this research I have learnt that if I want to produce an efficient questionnaire, I have to put my questions in a yes or no form, because people may be reluctant to answer open questions.
The results show crucial difference from my expectations. I expected an obvious separation of students who had learnt word-processing and those who had no computer skills. Whereas it turned out that it does not matter how a student is qualified in computing, the use of the word-processor differed from person to person independently of qualification. My other assumption about the tension between arts students and computer technology seems invalid as well, because the level of using a word-processor seems independent of what the student studies at university.
According to László Inotai's Egyszerûen Word for Windows, most computer users apply only a small proportion of the services the word-processor offers (7). I assume that this stands for these students as well, because the evaluation of answers shows that students use up alternatives they can safely apply, and try to avoid which they are unfamiliar with and afraid of them. Students, however, used the program efficiently.
I came to the deduction that Word 6.0 program can be easily handled by anybody, regardless of age, gender, qualification and turn of mind. Only experience counts.
No comments:
Post a Comment