English Language Teachers' Educational Use of Technology

Is It All About The Computer?

English Language Teachers’ Educational Use of Technology Xuan Nguyen, M.A., University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi

Background

Discussion

  Vietnam’s NFL2020 Project   ULIS’ development plans in relation to the use of ICTs in ELT & TELL professional development for teaching staff   Enthusiastic support & involvement of the case

Literature Review Teachers’ use of technology   Vary across contexts   Differ in preferred tools, focused activities & instructional goals (Fitzpatrick & Davies, 2003; Suwannasom, 2010)   7 common uses: instruction, material development, administration, communication, referencing, (self-)publication, stimulation (Fitzpatrick & Davies, 2003) Factors influencing teachers’ technology adoption   External factors: financial & technical resources, administrative & technical support (Park & Son, 2009)   Most critical determinants are teacher-related (Ertmer, 2005; Lee & Son, 2006; Shin & Son, 2007)   Key elements: teachers’ experiences & pedagogical stances (Kim, 2002; Ertmer, 2005) Research gap   Related studies: Hong Kong (Lee, 2007), Korea (Lee & Son, 2006; Park & Son, 2009), Malaysia (Hassan, 2010)   Focus on pre-service teachers > in-service teachers (Choate & Arome, 2006; Kerin, 2009; Farooq, Asmari, & Javid, 2012; DelliCarpini, 2012)   Paucity of research into EFL teachers’ uptake of technology in Vietnam

Methodology & Methods Methodology: a single case study Sampling: 7 EFL teachers + 5 senior leaders

Semi-structured interviews (7 teachers & 5 leaders) Data collection methods Classroom observation

Data analysis

Interview

Teachers’   High frequency of use use of   Most commonly used: technology computers, projectors   Most common uses: lesson preparation, lecture delivery (presentation), stimulation, referencing (Internet)   Perceived effectiveness: mostly positive except for some leaders’ critiques of efficacy Influencing factors & common difficulties

TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008

www.PosterPresentations.com

Park and Son (2009); Son et al. (2011); Suwannasom (2010)

Predominantly teacher-oriented classroom use of technology, students’ use – not encouraged / allowed  digital divide Experienced difficulties: lack of resources (financial, technical assistance), expertise, and infrastructure factors Teachers - main actors and barriers in technology use

Lee (2007); Son et al., (2011); Yeung, Taylor, Hui, Lam-Chiang, & Low (2012); Smythe (2012) Afshari, Bakar, Luan, Samah, & Fooi (2009); Dang (2009); Khan, Hasan, & Clement, 2012; Ertmer (2005); Lam (2000)

Fitzpatrick and Davies (2003)

Dudeney (2012); Meurant (2009, 2010); Rahimi and Yadollahi (2011) Fitzpatrick and Davies (2003); Rahimi & Yadollahi (2011); Suwannasom (2010)

Crucial contributors: teachers’ Lam (2000); Abdullah et levels of interest, degrees of al. (2006) responsibility, sense of competence and confidence in self-efficacy, regulation, career advancement and promotion, recognition of accomplishment, working conditions and incentives & other benefits

Categorising

  Teachers’ positive attitudes and views about TELL educational benefits could not always be translated into their classroom practice   Correlation between teachers’ prior learning and teaching experiences and their adoption of technology   Low uptake of technology and inefficient use for educational purposes   Possible reasons: teachers’ insufficient digital literacy, low motivation, insufficient resources (infrastructures, technical and financial support), no institutional guidelines or particular plans, no appraisal   No sound understanding of/strong rationale for pedagogical technology use  lack of TELL awareness & expertise (Abdullah et al., 2006; Okey, 2006).   Misperceptions of the use of technology (especially, PDAs) for educational purposes by authorities including teaching and other staff

Reporting

Observation

Other observations

  Low frequency   Most commonly used: CD players, laptops, projectors   Most common uses: delivery of lecture notes & audio-visual materials   Ineffective, inefficient   Mismatch with interview findings: uses & frequency  Technical issues  Lesson focus  Students’ interest & learning styles  Teachers’ expertise

  Sparingly use outside classroom   Mostly for admin tasks: lesson planning, administration, communication   Most common use: Emails, Google Drive, Facebook (poor admin)   Not very effective

  Classroom facilities   Lesson focus   Students’ level   Information services   Technical support   Time constraints Attempts to   Prepare alternatives   Ask for students’ solve   Ask technicians, help mostly problems colleagues & students   Not much attempt for help to solve problems   Bring their own devices observed

Teachers mainly used what they were equipped with in the classroom No use of PDAs in class and sparing use outside class  gap: everyday use & professional use of technology 6 common uses evident (except for “publication”) At very basic levels

Different

Implications

Main Findings Findings

Similar

Coding

Intepreting

Observation of other related practices

Research findings

 Time constraints  Teachers’ & students’ motivation

 Not observed

Conclusion Technology is being undersold as a tool for learning and teaching and inadequate teachers’ digital literacy and low motivation in this aspect were among the main reasons.  It is no longer appropriate to blame merely or mainly on the infrastructures and services. On a final note, “computers will not replace teachers; however, teachers who use computers will replace teachers who don’t” (Ray Clifford, Defense Language Institute, as cited in Headley et al., 2008, p. 2). To conclude, “it takes time first, and a lot of patience too, but it will save a lot more time later, and we’ll thank it for that. We’re always talking about something new as it’s fashionable but it’s high time to walk that talk now” (L4).

References Abdullah, N. A., Abidin, M. J. Z., Luan, W. S., Majid, O., & Atan, H. (2006). The attitude and motivation of English language teachers towards the use of computers. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 3(1), 57-67. Abidin, M. J. Z., Luan, W. S., Majid, O., & Atan, H. (2006). The attitude and motivation of English language teachers towards the use of computers. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 3(1), 57-67. Afshari, M., Bakar, K. A., Luan, W. S., Samah, B. A., & Fooi, F. S. (2009). Factors affecting teachers' use of information and communication technology. International Journal of Instruction, 2(1), 77-109. Choate, A., & Arome, G. (2006). Teacher preparation for effective practices in integrating technology in the ESOL classroom. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006, Orlando, Florida, USA. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/22346 Dang, X. T. (2009). Major barriers to ICT integration in language teaching: A case study at Hanoi University. (Ph.D), La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. Dudeney, G. (2012). Digital literacies and the language classroom, The Consultants-E. Retrieved from http://e-language.wikispaces.com/file/view/Day4.doc Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 108-126. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39. Farooq, M. U., Asmari, A. R. A., & Javid, C. Z. (2012). A study of online English language teacher education programmes in distance education context in Pakistan. English Language Teaching, 5(11). doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n11p91 Fitzpatrick, A., & Davies, G. (2003). The impact of information and communications technologies on the teaching of foreign languages and on the role of teachers of foreign languages. Germany: International Certificate Conference. Hassan, W. S. (2010). Teachers' adoption of information and communication technology for learning in Malaysia: An ecological-complexity analysis of a professional development innovation. (Doctor of Philosophy in Education), Victoria University of Wellington. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10063/1580 Kim, H. (2002). Teachers as a barrier to technology-integrated language teaching. English Teaching Forum, 57(2), 35-64. Khan, M. S. H., Hasan, M., & Clement, C. K. (2012). Barriers to the introduction of ICT into education in developing countries: the example of Bangladesh. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 61-81. Lam, Y. (2000). Technophilia vs. technophobia: A preliminary look at why second-language teachers do or do not use technology in their classrooms. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(3), 389-420. Lee, S., & Son, J.-M. (2006). The use of ICT in Korean middle school English classrooms: Practices and challenges. English Language Teaching, 18(1), 49-73. Meurant, R. C. (2009). Developing critical L2 digital literacy through the use of computer-based internet-hosted learning management systems such as Moodle. In D. Ś. e. al. (Ed.), Developing critical L2 digital literacy (pp. 76-83). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Meurant, R. C. (2010). How computer-based Internet-hosted learning management systems such as Moodle can help develop L2 digital literacy. International Journal of Multimedia and ubiqutous Engineering, 5(2), 19-26. Okey, D. (2006). Where to after the cluster: Using lead teachers to sustain ICT PD after the cluster funding finishes. (Master of Education), Unitec, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10652/1312 Park, C. N., & Son, J.-B. (2009). Implementing computer-assisted language learning in the EFL classroom: Teachers' perceptions and perspectives. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 5(2), 80-101. Rahimi, M., & Yadollahi, S. (2011). ICT use in EFL classes: A focus on EFL teachers’ characteristics. World Journal of English Language, 1(2), 17-29. doi: 10.5430/wjel.v1n2p17 Raob, I., Al-Oshaibat, H., & Lan, O. S. (2012). A factor analysis of teacher competency in technology. New Horizons in Education, 60(1), 13-22. Smythe, S. (2012). Incorporating digital technologies in adult basic education: Concepts, practices and recommendations: Alpha Plus. Son, J.-B., Robb, T., & Charismiadji, I. (2011). Computer literacy and competency: A survey of Indonesian teachers of English as a foreign language. CALL-EJ, 12(1), 26-42. Suwannasom, T. (2010). Teacher cognition about technology-mediated EFL instruction in the Thai tertiary context. (Doctor of Philosophy in Second Language Teaching), Massey University, New Zealand. Retrieved from http:// hdl.handle.net/10179/1853 Yeung, A. S., Taylor, P. G., Hui, C., Lam-Chiang, A. C., & Low, E.-L. (2012). Mandatory use of technology in teaching: Who cares and so what? British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 859–870. doi: 10.1111/j. 1467-8535.2011.01253.

Contact: [email protected] / [email protected]