Facilitating Learning of Generation Z Learners towards Effective Remote English Language Learning
Abstract
As remote English language learning has become widespread in the context of the global pandemic, it is essential to understand effective pedagogical practices specifically with the Generation Z population (born between 1997 and 2012) from economically less developed communities. Using a survey research design, the study identified the preferred remote teaching-learning modality and techniques among 75 Generation Z learners. An online survey was administered to randomly selected Junior High School students in the Philippines. The results revealed that synchronous learning was believed to be more helpful in enhancing the students’ English language learning, with techniques that encouraged them to speak and practice their
grammar. Interactive group activities were mostly preferred by the learners to enhance their viewing, reading, listening, and writing skills. The study concludes with a discussion about teaching-learning techniques for teachers to successfully carry out a meaningful, enjoyable, and engaging learning experience toward effective remote English language learning.
Keywords
ESL; Generation Z; remote learning; synchronous; teaching modality; techniques
References
Amin, F. M., & Sundari, H. (2020). EFL students’ preferences on digital platforms during emergency remote teaching: Video Conference, LMS, or Messenger Application? Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 362–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16929
Ancheta, R., & Ancheta, H. (2020). The new normal in education: A challenge to the private basic education institutions in the Philippines. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies, 1(1). https://iiari.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/The-New-Normal-in-Education-1.pdf
Asmara, R. (2020). Teaching English in a virtual classroom using WhatsApp during the COVID-19 pandemic. Language and Education Journal, 5(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.52237/lej.v5i1.152
Azhar, K. A., & Nayab, I. (2018). Effectiveness of google classroom: Teachers’ perceptions. Prizren Social Science Journal, 2, 52–66. http://www.prizrenjournal.com/index.php/PSSJ/article/view/39
Brown, J. S. (2000). Growing up: Digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways people learn. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 32(2), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380009601719
Giudice, M. D. (2013). Openness that matters: Net generation, higher education, and student entrepreneurship. In Unpacking open innovation (pp. 91–118). Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137354372_5
De Leon, M. L. T., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2024). Web-based instruction on improving the students’ academic performance in music and arts education. Scientia Paedagogica Experimentalis, 61(1), 69–102. https://doi.org/10.57028/S61-069-Z1054
DepEd Order No.13, s. 2020. Readiness assessment checklist for learning delivery modalities in the learning continuity plan of private schools. Retrieved from: https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/DO_s2020_013.pdf
Dimock, M. (2019). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and generation z begins. Pew Research Center, 17(1), 1–7. Retrieved 6 December 2022 from: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/
Finol, M. O. (2020). Asynchronous vs. synchronous learning: A quick overview. Retrieved 26 October 2020 from: https://www.brynmawr.edu/blendedlearning/asynchronous-vs-synchro-nouslearning-quick-overview.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55. Retrieved 6 December 2022 from: https://er.educause.edu/articles/2008/11/asynchronous-and-synchronous-elearning
Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2016). Learning by design. Common Ground Publishing.
Martin, F., Wang, C., & Sadaf, A. (2018). Student perception of helpfulness of facilitation strategies that enhance instructor presence, connectedness, engagement, and learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.01.003
Merriman, M., & Valerio, D. (2016). One tough customer: How Gen Z is challenging the competitive landscape and redefining omnichannel. Ernst & Young Report. http://retailwest.ca/sites/default/files/ErnstAndYoung.pdf
Mohr, K. A., & Mohr, E. S. (2017). Understanding Generation Z learners to promote a contemporary learning environment. Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 1(1), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.15142/T3M05T
Muir, T., Wang, I., Trimble, A., Mainsbridge, C., & Douglas, T. (2022). Using interactive online pedagogical approaches to promote student engagement. Education Sciences, 12(6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060415
Nardi, P. M. (2015). Doing survey research. Routledge.
Nihayati, A., & Indriani, L. (2021). EFL Students’ perspective on WhatsApp as media of online teaching and learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Language Education, 2(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.33365/jorle.v2i1.898
Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers gen-xers millennials. Educause Review, 500(4), 37–47. http://fyp.utk.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2013/08/Oblinger-D.-2003.-Boomers-Gen-Xers-Millennials-Understanding-the-new-students.-Educause-JulyAug-36-47..pdf
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2019). PhilippinesCountry Note–Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) Results from PISA 2018. Volumes I–III. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_PHL.pdf
Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. (2020). Pedagogical practice preferences among generational groups of learners: Towards effective twenty-first century higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 17(5). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.5.6
Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and asynchronous e-language learning: A case study of the virtual university of Pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21–39. International Council for Open and Distance Education. Retrieved 6 December 2022 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/171556/.
Postolov, K., Magdinceva Sopova, M., & Janeska-Iliev, A. (2017). E-learning in the hands of Generation Y and Z. https://doi.org/10.22598/pi-be/2017.11.2.107
Raines, C. (2002). Connecting generations: The sourcebook for a new workplace. Crisp Publications.
Ramoso, M. G. D., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2024). Adapting to the new normal: Remote teaching challenges among educators in higher education. Eureka: Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.56773/ejer.v2i2.26 https://eureka.id-sre.org/index.php/ejer/article/view/26
Rothman, D. (2016). A tsunami of learners called Generation Z. http://www.mdle.net/Journal/A_Tsunami_of_Learners_Called_Generation_Z.pdf
San Juan, R. (December 2019). The Philippines lowest reading comprehension among 79 countries. Philstar.com. Retrieved 30 August 2021 from: https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/12/03/1974002/philippines-lowest-reading-comprehension-among-79-countries
Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. (2015). Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning styles and academic performance of e-learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.453
Shatto, B., & Erwin, K. (2016). Moving on from millennials: Preparing for Generation Z. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 47(6), 253–254. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20160518-05
Schwieger, D., & Ladwig, C. (2018). Reaching and retaining the next generation: Adapting to the expectations of Gen Z in the classroom. Information Systems Education Journal, 16(3), 45–54.
Suadi, S. (2021). Students’ perceptions of the use of Zoom and WhatsApp in ELT amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. SALEE: Study of Applied Linguistics and English Education, 2(1), 51–64.
Torres, R. A. O., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2022). Remote learning: Challenges and opportunities for educators and students in the new normal. Anatolian Journal of Education, 7(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2022.717a
Wintemute, D. (2021). Synchronous vs. asynchronous classes: What’s the difference. Retrieved 6 December 2022 from: https://thebestschools.org/resources/synchronous-vs-asynchronous-programs-courses/
Wang, Y., & Chen, N. S. (2009). Criteria for evaluating synchronous learning management systems: arguments from the distance language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588220802613773
Welcomer, J. (2020, July 13). Getting to 100% student engagement in distance learning. https://edsource.org/2020/getting-to-100-student-engagement-in-distance-learning/634282
University of the Philippines Los Banos Philippines
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1118-7117
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holders of the submitted texts are the Authors. The Reader is granted the rights to use the material available in the TAPSLA websites and pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution - Share Alike (CC BY-SA 4.0). The user is free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.
