Technophilia or Technophobia - Complete MA Dissertation - Full 144 Page Version

Technophilia or Technophobia: Exploring Teacher Autonomy in Learning ICT and Web Tools for the English Language Teaching
Classroom
Philip Longwell 1163612
Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MA in English Language Teaching (with a Specialism in Multimedia)
September 2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are a number of individuals that I would like to thank for their advice, guidance and practical assistance in preparing this dissertation. Firstly, I need to acknowledge the incredible amount of inspiration and influence that my personal tutor and dissertation supervisor, Russell Stannard, had on this work. On many occasions he reassured me that I was capable of great things, but he also pushed me constantly to aim high. Throughout the dissertation process his suggestions and criticisms were never far from my mind. It, therefore, made the whole process tough at times, but ultimately rewarding. In addition, he allowed me to use his Teacher Training Videos website newsletter to advertise my research. Secondly, I wish to thank Teresa Mackinnon at Warwick Language School for considerable help in getting me set up with Blackboard Collaborate and granting me access to a room so that I could conduct my interviews, even if on five occasions, I had to revert to Skype. Thirdly, I thank David Dodgson, a fellow MA student and teacher of young learners in Turkey, who was one of the founding members of my Personal Learning Network which grew from nothing at the start of 2012. I could name several others people from my PLN, some of whom became my focus group for this research project, but it would be too many to mention. It was certainly as a result of my newly found PLN that I managed to generate a lot of interest in my research and obtain so many responses in such a short space of time. Fourthly, I would like to thank a good friend of mine, Mark Warnes, an experienced researcher at Anglia Ruskin University, who gave me guidance on several occasions. Penultimately, I would like to thank Gavin Dudeney for introducing and discussing the residents-visitors paradigm with me and for sharing his work on digital literacies with Nicky Hockly and Mark Pegrum. Finally, I would like to give general thanks to my fellow MA students on the MA ELT Warwick Facebook group and the feedback received in essays from several tutors in the Centre for Applied Linguistics, most notably Steve Mann, Keith Richards and Richard Smith, whose own definition of teacher-learner autonomy features here. PL - September 2012
Technophilia or Technophobia: Exploring Teacher Autonomy in Learning ICT Tools for the ELT classroom.
I/D: 1163612
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER ONE BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1.1 Introduction / Purpose of Study 1.2 Professional Development in ICT 1.3 Computer-Assisted Language Learning CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Previous Studies 2.2 Teacher-Learner Autonomy 2.3 Paradigm 1 Technophilia-Technophobia 2.4 Paradigm 2 Digital Natives vs Digital Immigrants 2.5 Paradigm 3 Digital Residents vs Digital Visitors CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN 3.1 Research Questions 3.2 Methodology 3.3 Survey Questionnaire Design 3.4 Sampling Procedure CHAPTER FOUR SURVEY FINDINGS 4.1 Demographics 4.2 Experience and Employment and Training 4.3 Relationship with Technology 4.4 Taxonomy of Current Practice 4.5 Autonomy and Barriers 4.6 Assessing Effectiveness of Tools 4.7 Main Points
i ii
1 1 3
7 10 13 14 16
18 19 20 21
23 26 29 30 35 38 39
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER FIVE INTERVIEWS 5.1 Methodology 5.2 Interview Findings 5.3 Relationship With Technology 5.4 ICT/Web Tool Usage 5.5 Barriers 5.6 Institutional Support or Training 5.7 Autonomous Behaviour 5.8 Discussion CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION AND FURTHER RESEARCH 6.1 Conclusion 6.2 Further Research BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES Appendix A Survey Questionnaire with Covering Letter Appendix B Survey Results Appendix C Email Template Information re: Interviews Appendix D - Interview Guide Appendix E Sections of Transcribed Interview Data 54 55 56 40 42 42 44 46 48 50 52
ABSTRACT
The learning of Information Communication Technology (ICT) and web tools within English Language Teaching (ELT) has not been researched as widely as the use of technology in general education. In addition, the concept of teacher-learner autonomy has rarely been used in relation to the extent to which language teachers are self-directed and take responsibility for their own learning in this area. This dissertation uses this theoretical perspective as well as paradigms which typify an individuals relationship with technology. Taxonomy of current practices was first generated through a widely advertised survey questionnaire, for which 106 responses were received. From this emerged a picture of the kinds of technology and types of web tools that are currently being used and why. Findings suggested that self-directed learning was fairly widespread and that training was not expected by employees. The amount of autonomous behaviour and responsibility that language teachers take for learning ICT tools was further explored by a series of 14 interviews with teachers in very different contexts. This included the perspective of teacher-trainers who painted a slightly different picture of the amount of training which takes place in institutions. What emerges will be of interest to language teachers wishing to find out how they compare with others in this area and those possibly seeking ways to create more autonomy for themselves in the workplace.
LIST OF FIGURES (Q indicates the related question from the survey)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
Which category below includes your age? (Q2) Country of teaching (Q3) First (or native) language (Q4) How many years have you been teaching English as a Foreign Language (Q5) How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? Detail (Q16) How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? Full (Q16) Who should provide training in relation to ICT and web tools? (Q17) Would you describe yourself as either a Technophile or a Technophobe or are you somewhere in between? (Q7) What are you currently doing in respect of professional development in ICT and technology? (Q8) How often does the following technology get used in your teaching (Q9) How often do you use or have you used the following kinds of ICT/Web Tools? (Q10) (as above) continued How do you learn about (discover) new ICT/Web Tools? (Q11) Cross-tabulation of self-discovery (Q11) with current professional development activities (Q8) How important are or would be the following when selecting an ICT/Web Tool? (Q12) How autonomous are you? How frequently do you the following (Q14) What are the barriers to learning about and then implementing ICT/Web Tools in respect of your teaching practice (Q15) Correlation between reliability (Q15) and technophobia (Q7)
23 24 25 26 27 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 36 37
ii
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER ONE - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1.1 INTRODUCTION / PURPOSE OF STUDY In the field of English Language Teaching (ELT) there are many professionals who are actively learning about new ICT (Information Communication Technology) and online web tools. There are numerous ways that they are discovering, learning about and integrating these technologies and tools into their teaching practice. Conversely there are other professionals who are not as pro-active, but would be very interested to learn of the benefits and the practical ways of developing in this area. This paper examines current teachers attitudes and practices, therefore, with the purpose of being helpful to those currently being left behind and those who feel the pressure of needing to incorporate ICT knowledge and skills into their teaching. What kind of support or training is received? What do they know about the latest online tools and to what extent are those tools used? How do teachers learn how to use them? Do teachers have an instinctive, positive relationship with technology or are they sceptical at first? These are some of the questions this study will investigate, seeking answers which could be of benefit to others. It begins with a discussion of the wider issue of professional development and a brief account of computer technology in language learning. The paper discusses previous research, three paradigms which typify peoples relationship with technology and uses definitions of teacher-learner autonomy to underpin the research questions. 1.2 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN ICT The learning of new technologies can be seen as just one area of an English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers professional development (PD) and any existing teachers continuous (or continuing) professional development (CPD). While these terms seem interchangeable and there is some ambiguity in what the definition of each is, there are distinctions. The term Professional Development suggests acquiring new knowledge and skills, or to change role or position. It can also mean staying abreast of [the] evolving field (Bailey, Curtis and Nunan, 2007: 7). Although an EFL teachers physical teaching environment may not change, the outside world does. It is career orientated and has a narrower, more instrumental and utilitarian remit (Mann, 2005: 104). Pre-service teachers
1
I/D: 1163612
entering the ELT arena may have skills and knowledge lacking amongst in-service teachers. This is where continuous professional development comes in, at the institutional level (ibid), which for many professionals means training in order to keep them[selves] up-to-date (Friedman and Phillips, 2004). security: CPD promises to deliver strategies of learning that will be of benefit to individuals, foster personal development, and produce professionals who are flexible, selfreflective and empowered to take control of their own learning. (ibid: 362-3) The personal benefits, often promoted under the banner of lifelong learning, however, may conflict somewhat with an institutional requirement to train professionals to fulfil specific work roles (ibid: 363). One of the core themes of teacher development is the comparison between bottom-up, individual or group lead process and top-down professional development programmes (Mann, 2005: 105). There is an important difference here, as I have begun to suggest above, in terms of the kind of professional development which begins with the individual, in this paper, the English language teacher, and the kind which emanates from above. The latter can be seen in research carried out where top-down enforcement has taken place. For example, a government identified and defined a framework of ICT competencies for expected outcomes in primary school students in Belgium (Tondeur, van Braak and Valcke, 2007: 962), a joint European Commission/Greek ministry of education launched a project to enable teacher communities to integrate new ICT practices (Jimoyiannis and Komis, 2007: 153) and a ministry of education introduced national reform to bring in ICT use into tertiary education in southern China (Hu and McGrath, 2011). Quite often, government regulations or policies change to reflect growing ICT use in wider society. Similarly, educational institutions often bring in policies or strategies which require implementation of greater use of Information Communication Technology among its practicing teachers or lecturers (ibid). These are not limited, of course, to English language teaching and are often strategies which can affect the whole of an institution or level of schooling. This allows those professionals already established to increase their income, accept roles with greater prestige or to provide greater employment
I/D: 1163612
Information Communication Technology (ICT) is far more than just a secondary school subject. It is something that can be integrated into most subjects at any level, depending on how it is used. One relevant framework for this study is to what extent teachers have found themselves increasing their knowledge of ICT from more autonomous self-directed learning or to what extent have they waited for, possibly because they expect it from, externally driven training, either by the institution they work for or by an external training agency. Institutions reacting to government policy or initiatives may well be a key topdown motivational force for teachers taking up new technologies in their practice, which begs the question of what expectations are there by institutions for their teachers to adopt these? Does CPD in the area of ICT awareness, knowledge and implementation come from external pushes, as and when the need arises? Do language teaching professionals actively seek to empower themselves separately from top-down pressure or do these happen in concert? Many more established professionals, it must be clearly stated, do not seek to take steps in this area and according to a recent snapshot selection of current practicing EFL teachers opinionsi, they stubbornly refuse to take part until they know what are they getting out of it, are they getting paid for it and checking whether they are contractually obliged (Wade, 2012). There is also the issue, therefore, that some professionals simply do not or will not use technology and/or ICT tools in their practice, commonly for sound reasons. 1.3 COMPUTER-ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING The use of computer technology within language learning has, like the use of ICT in general education, been in existence for decades. The Internet has, more recently, played a pervasive role in institutionalised and non-institutionalised language learning (Benson, 2007: 26) and a vast literature exists which emphasizes opportunities for learner autonomy within CALL and how technologies have been developed with self-study in mind (ibid). CALL can be broken down into several periods: behaviourist CALL (1960s-1970s), communicative CALL (1980s), integrative CALL (1990s-). Beatty (2010) outlines some examples of Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and so on. These began in the late 1950s, with machine translations (ibid: 18-21), through linear simulations (ibid: 21-25), the
3
I/D: 1163612
introduction of microcomputers, videodisc and CD-ROM formats in the 1970s, initiatives such as Macario, a videodisc program for learning Spanish (sic, ibid: 27), Interactive Digame and the Athena Language-Learning Project, ALLP in the 1980s (ibid: 29). One particular software program called Eliza was an example of a computer being used to simulate human intelligence (Beatty, 2010: 32). Another way to look at the development of CALL is how technology has influenced the method used. The grammar-translation method relied on blackboard and chalk, still used today in many ELT contexts. The blackboard was replaced by the overhead projector, which is still commonly used, requiring the teacher to skilfully position the device in the classroom for maximum readability. Early computer software drew on drill and practice grammar exercises and linear simulations, as we saw above. The audio-tape was the perfect medium for the audio-lingual method, most popular in the 1970s and 1980s, and still available now as CDs or downloadable mp3s. Self-study aids, such as offered by Berlitzii, remain widely available for the individual learners wishing to pick up a language, often in a short space of time. Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) is another term used for the delivery of lessons. Skill requirements in CMC are greater than for the typical classroom-bound instructor. This has been examined, amongst others, by Hampel and Sticker (2005) who presented a pyramid of skills needed for online tutors. The challenges of delivering online courses are different from face-to-face settings. Listing the skills required would not do justice to the complexity of the training and development needed [although] a pyramid, from the most general skills forming a fairly broad based to an apex of individual and personal styles can be generated (ibid). The delivery of online language courses has received much interest (ibid: 313). The initial focus was on asynchronous text-based mediated interaction, (Warschauer, 1997; Kelm, in ibid) but more recently the focus has been on online conferencing systems (Kern, in ibid; Sykes, in Levy 2009; Mullen, Appel and Shanklin, 2009), which enables synchronous tuition and distance learning to take place. An example would be Voice-over Internet Protocol (VOIP) technologies, such as Skype.
4
I/D: 1163612
Other developments, from a cognitive perspective, include text-reconstruction software, featuring scrambled texts, and concordancing software, where users look at collocations and the behaviour of particular words (Warschauer and Meskill, 2000: 2). In addition, there is multimedia simulation software, allowing learners to explore simulated environments, such as those created in Second Life. Collaborative learning and constructivist negotiation of meaning is a more recent trend. Technologies which support a cognitive approach to language learning are those which allow maximum exposure to language in meaningful context (ibid, 2000). Here it is assumed that knowledge is an objective interpretation of ideas and that such interpretations are best developed through the learner discovering and struggling with ideas (Beatty, 2010: 105). One inquiry-based tool which has been used by language teachers is the WebQuest. This initiative took a constructivist approach to learning and an integrative approach to CALL. One empirical study found that WebQuests were an effective way to use technology with students and an excellent educational innovation when used correctly (Perkins and McKnight, 2005). More recent innovations include wikis and walled gardens (Pegrum, 2009: 20) in the form of password-protected, collaborative, virtual learning environments (VLE). The former represents forums suited to honing communicative and intercultural literacies (Pegrum, 2009: 42), which most obviously turns collective intelligence into a structural principle (ibid: 30) and are inherently incomplete: A wiki is a social constructivism in motion: collaboratively constructed, constantly added to and modified, and always provisional. The collective intelligence which emerges from contributors cooperative efforts is never fixed but constantly evolving. (ibid: 33) The unrestricted authorship has meant a shift from expert-generated taxonomies to individually-created folksonomies (Beatty, 2010: 41), which are underpinned by organic indexing processes (Pegrum, 2009: 29). An Internet-enhanced object-oriented multiple-user domain (MOO), meanwhile, serves as a tool to select and enhance Internet resources (Schwienhorst, 1999), while at the same time, expanding the possibilities of the traditional classroom. One such popular innovation in this area is Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (MOODLE), which is a free
5
I/D: 1163612
source e-learning software platform. The implementation of MOODLE superseded the successful use of language management systems (LMS) such as WebCT, a VLE system sold to institutions and now owned by Blackboard, who recently developed the video conferencing software, Collaborate, which can be used by language teachers for sharing and training purposes, or for facilitating interviews, as this paper will show later. The brief examples shown above are used to illustrate that there is nothing particularly new in the existence of computer-assisted language learning, or the more appropriate description of technology-assisted language learning (TALL). What might be newer is the requirement on language teachers operating in certain contexts to learn how to use institutionally bought technologies. Do language teachers feel pressure to learn these and, consequently, what expectations do they have of their institutions? Or are teachers, themselves, now leading the institutions, discovering and learning new tools for themselves? This needs investigating, as autonomous behaviour in this area may well be greater than believed.
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 PREVIOUS STUDIES Before investigating the area of ICT integration into ELT, I will discuss some of the previous empirical research in the field, followed by a discussion of the theoretical construct of teacher-learner autonomy, which underpins this new investigation. There is not much literature on the uptake of ICT or web tools by English language teachers or how they go about learning them, which is a gap needing investigation. There is, however, a lot of research into the uptake of ICT in more general education (Mumtaz, 2000), while this adoption can be traced back to the early 1970s (Levy in Hu and McGrath, 2011: 42). Romeo and Walker (2002) summarised two perspectives. The first, influenced by behaviourist learning theories, focuses on the computer as a mechanism by which to deliver information. In this instructionist pedagogy the main focus is on the delivery of materials in which information can be more effectively transmitted by teachers and understood by learners. The second, influenced by constructivism, focuses on the use of computers as a system to enhance teaching and learning. (Hu and McGrath, 2011: 43). Mumtaz (2000) provided an extensive, international overview of the literature at that point which highlighted a number of factors involved in the take up of ICT in schools. It separated factors which discouraged the uptake of technology from those that encouraged its integration. A lack of experience, specialist staff support and training, computer availability and a lack of time to successfully integrate technology into the curriculum were highlighted (ibid: 320). In addition, many teachers saw technology as a challenging force and only relevant for teachers of computer science or ICT (ibid). Robertson et al (1996, in ibid), particularly, dwelt on resistance to organisation change, outside intervention and issues of time management (ibid: 320-321). Several articles, however, highlighted factors which encouraged teachers to use technology. Examples included making the lessons more interesting, more motivating for the pupils (Cox, Preston and Cox, 1999 in ibid: 323), gains in learning and using computers for their own teacher development (Sheingold & Hadley 1990 in ibid: 324) and if the software matched the teachers pedagogy, they used it (Veen, 1993 in ibid: 323). Constructivist pedagogy, in which learners make sense of new concepts
7
I/D: 1163612
through use of their own knowledge experiences, was also highlighted. Becker & Riel (2000, in ibid: 324) found that teachers regularly involved in professional interactions and activities beyond their classroom were more likely to have teaching philosophies compatible with constructivist learning theory. The benefits of ICT use in language education have been discussed previously, in one qualitative study (Chambers & Bax, 2006), in terms of its potential to involve learners in a variety of activities and support learners autonomous learning. In addition, a central aim for CALL practitioners has been to strive for normalisation, where teachers and learners reap its full benefits: When computers are used every day by language students and teachers as an integral part of every lesson they will be completely integrated into all other aspects of classroom life, alongside coursebooks, teachers and notepads. They will go almost unnoticed. (Bax, in Chambers and Bax, 2006: 465-466) A sense of normalisation is thus when technology is not used to amaze or engage students and is not treated with exaggerated respect, but becomes a normal part of everyday teaching. This is the difference, probably, between computer-assisted language learning and fully integrated teaching with technology. ICT use is not without problems as it requires certain skill levels for both students and teachers to operate technology and integrate materials successfully (McGrath in McGrath and Hu, 2011: 43). A key study is one which questioned EFL teachers attitudes towards the adoption of ICT in the wider context of a college English reform programme, in Southern China. Hu and McGrath (2011) examined whether teachers were ready to integrate ICT in light of their CPD training or lack thereof. Despite the perception that the researchers already suspected the teachers involved were not ready to integrate ICT fully, the findings did indicate that limited ICT skills and pedagogic reasons for using ICT were obstacles. Despite having generally positive views, enthusiasm waned in the light of inadequate support and CPD opportunities (ibid: 47). A strong connection is made in this research towards the autonomy shown by the teachers in learning about ICT tools for themselves. The article makes many references to deep rooted, traditional teacher-centred pedagogy. The apparent failure at the institutional level to respond to top-down demands to integrate
8
I/D: 1163612
ICT usage, because of, for example, a lack of funding or inadequate training may not apply everywhere. The findings showed that teachers had little knowledge of autonomy (ibid: 52). Without teachers being autonomous in their own learning of new technology; they couldnt possibly expect students to become autonomous learners themselves. To what extent teacher autonomy plays a role in ICT learning and their own training is worthy of investigation. In addition, how does CPD in ICT actually happen is it institution-lead through compulsory CPD programmes or does it come down to autonomous teachers learning ICT for themselves or a combination? One area which has been investigated by many previous researchers are the beliefs and attitudes of both pre-service (Teo, Chai, Hung and Lee, 2008, Hismanoglu, 2012) and inservice language teachers (Mumtaz, 2000; Albrini 2004; Tondeur et al, 2007; Li and Walsh, 2010; Hismanoglu; 2012, Salam and Sert, 2012) of ICT adoption or implementation. Personal factors, such as gender, teaching experience and the perception of English as a foreign language compared with other subjects affected some studies (Mumtaz, 2000; Jimoyiannis and Komis, 2007) as is the extent to whether the teachers studied receive sufficient training and support to make this increased deployment of technology come to fruition (for example, Mumtaz, 2000; Granger, Morbey, Lotherington, Owston and Wideman, 2002; Hampel and Stickler, 2005; Jimoyiannis and Komis, 2007; Hu and McGrath, 2011; Hismanoglu, 2012). Others (for example, Zhong and Shen, 2002) have looked at the changes that have taken place in technologically integrated classroom practice. Most of the selected studies selected above focus on a particular language-learning context. Albrini (2004), for example, examined high school EFL teachers attitudes in Syrian education and explored the relationship between their attitudes and factors thought to be influencing them. This included a perception of their computer competence and the cultural relevance of going against traditional styles of instruction. Personal characteristics (gender, age, income, experience etc) were built into the design. A strong correlation between teachers attitudes towards ICT in education and their perceptions of their computer attributes were found. A strong reference is made to Rogers Innovation Decision Process (1995), which states that peoples attitudes toward a new technology are a key element in its diffusion An innovations diffusion is a process that occurs over time through five stages: Knowledge,
9
I/D: 1163612
Persuasion, Decision, Implementation and Confirmation (Rogers in Albrini, 2004: 375). The conscious learner, therefore, goes through a process which either rejects the innovation (stage 3) or continues to adapt it, use it and re-use for its own purpose (stages 4 and 5). This has a direct relevance to how teachers might choose a piece of technology or an ICT tool, which I will return to when I discuss a teachers relationship with technology. For now, I wish to move onto the concept of teacher-learner autonomy, which has been already mentioned. This is relevant to this new research in light of the proliferation of web and ICT tools and how teachers go about learning them. 2.2 TEACHER-LEARNER AUTONOMY Teacher autonomy or more correctly, teacher-learner autonomy, has been be defined as the ability to develop appropriate skills, knowledge and attitudes for oneself as a teacher, in co-operation with others (Smith, 2003:1). In an analogous relationship to learner Little (1995) rightly autonomy, it has also been defined as the capacity, freedom, and/or responsibility to make choices concerning ones own teaching (Aoki, in Benson, 2007: 31). asserts that learner autonomy is nothing new. Genuinely successful learners have always been autonomous but it is important to pursue learner autonomy as an explicit goal, to help more learners to succeed (ibid: 175). of the learner. Little (1991) establishes a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision making and independent action (ibid: 4) on the part This capacity is displayed in the way that the learner transfers what has been learned to wider contexts (ibid). There is a strong link between definitions of learner autonomy and the expectations to foster this amongst students and a teachers own willingness to be autonomous themselves. Much of the literature treats teacher autonomy as a professional attribute, involving a capacity for self-directed professional development (Benson, 2007: 30). More recently, the emphasis has been on freedom from constraint and the teachers efforts to promote autonomy amongst their learners in constraining settings, often outside of their control (ibid: 30). In their extended, working definition of teacher autonomy, Barfield at al (2001), emphasised the contextually based relationship between teaching, learners and institutions. Teacher autonomy is closely linked to confronting constraints, being collaborative with
10
I/D: 1163612
other teachers and negotiating with the institution. This development and characteristics of the individual teacher: is driven by a need for personal and professional improvement, so that an autonomous teacher may seek out opportunities to develop further. Teacher autonomy is a socially constructed process, where teacher support and development groups can act as teacher-learner pools of diverse knowledge, experience, equal power and autonomous learning. (Barfield et al, The Shizuoka Definition, 2001) Smith (2003) outlines some theoretical dimensions of teacher autonomy. Prior definitions, he argues, have tended to advocate one aspect to the exclusion of others, from teacher autonomy as a generalised right to freedom from control to teachers capacity to engage in self-directed teaching to teachers autonomy as learners (Smith, 2003: 1, emphasis in original). McGraths (2000) attempt to identify different dimensions proves a noteworthy exception, as does the Shizuoka definition already mentioned. McGraths separation of teacher autonomy as (1) self-directed action or development and (2) as freedom from control by others influenced Smith who extracted a further meaning. Action and development is not necessarily the same thing. In addition, a further similar distinction is required between capacity for and/or willingness to engage in self-direction and actual selfdirected behaviour (Smith, 2003: 4). In this definition involving distinctive parts, there are three dimensions in relation to professional action and three in relation to professional development:
In relation to professional action: A: Self-directed profession action (= Self-directed teaching) B: Capacity for self-directed professional action. (= Teacher autonomy (I)) C: Freedom from control over professional action. (=Teacher autonomy (II)) In relation to professional development: D: Self-directed professional development. (= Self-directed teacher-learning) E: Capacity for self-directed professional development. (=Teacher-learner autonomy (I)) F: Freedom from control over professional development. (= Teacher-learner autonomy (II)) (Smith, Dimensions of teacher autonomy, 2003: 4)
While some (e.g. Aoki, 2000; McGrath 2000 in Smith, 2003) have emphasised the importance of a capacity for the self-directed teacher (B, above) others (e.g. Benson, 2000; Lamb, 2000 in Smith, 2003) have stressed the importance of freedom from control over their teaching (C, above). In respect of A-C the autonomous behaviour shown is not limited
11
I/D: 1163612
to one aspect of practice. Smith is critical of a limitation in using teacher autonomy as a loose synonym for the capacity to promote learner autonomy. This kind of capacity, he says, is not exactly the same thing as any, or all of the dimensions identified (2008: 85). He later states, however, that it does seem possible to propose certain general precepts for this promotion (ibid: 86). Direct lecturing over the benefits of learner autonomy might be insufficient, but actual practical experiences can be particularly powerful. teachers for the development of their own autonomy can be difficult. Preparing It might be
appropriate for educators, including institutions, to focus directly on developing a willingness and capacity for self-directed teacher-learning. How to do this is, according to Smith (ibid: 87) not something frequently discussed in the literature. Nor, would I argue, is an account of self-employed, freelance ELT professionals necessity to be autonomous learners, which I will account for in my own research. These different dimensions of teacher autonomy were useful for this new investigation, in respect of separating the potential for action and actuality of something happening in practice. It can also be the separation of the capacity of teachers, based on their perceived relationship with technology, to learn about new tools, and their willingness to do so, given that relationship and other contextual factors. In this paper, the autonomous behaviour shown by teachers to learn about using ICT tools can be seen as that which is carried out for the purpose of actual teaching practice (professional action) and for future employment, training and other opportunities (professional development). Definitions of teacher autonomy and teacher learnerautonomy have not previously been used to frame discussions of teachers learning about technology or web tools. There are a number of studies which evaluate more specific tools, such as screen casting (e.g Gromik, 2007; Wales and Roberton, 2008; Grandon Gill, 2007) but this rarely focuses on English language teaching. Often the research is conducted in other areas, most notably by or for librarians (Jill Markgraf, 2006; Price, 2010). Teacher autonomy covers a wide range of potential characteristics, as we have seen; more than just a set of skills, technical or otherwise. Although it has been closely linked to the idea of fostering learner autonomy, no explicit connection has been made between the
12
I/D: 1163612
teachers own capacity, on the one hand, and behaviour, on the other, in respect of learning about ICT tools. I am investigating how autonomous teachers are as learners of these tools and to what extent these are self-directed professional actions. By using the tools, this covers both the ability to effectively use the tool in lesson preparation, the deliverance of the lesson or to facilitate its operation by the student learners. It can also extend to using a tool reflectively or, for example, managing feedback. It is worth pointing out that the general distinction of freedom from control in practice can be evidenced in more than two ways. That is, in terms of the opportunity to use technology and ICT tools in professional practice and the necessary use of technology as imposed by an institution which has spent resources installing such technology. I will now proceed to explore the dimension of teacher-learner autonomy that focuses on firstly, the capacity and secondly, the willingness to be autonomous when it comes to learning about technology and ICT tools. In doing so, I will look at three different paradigms, typologies, that have been proposed. It is worth bearing in mind that a teachers ability to be autonomous when it comes to learning new technologies or tools can be affected by the relative freedoms they have in choosing to use it. One assumption on my part is that where there is freedom from constraint, the teacher will show more autonomy but where there is an imposed requirement, the teacher may feel less inclined to research the tool themselves and, instead, wait for institutional training or support. 2.3 PARADIGM 1: TECHNOPHILIA-TECHNOPHOBIA One particular dimension on the attitudes of EFL and prospective EFL teachers is their perception of a relationship with technology. A person who is considered a technophobe dislikes, is wary of or has some fear of using technology. Conversely, a technophile is someone with a love, passion or enjoyment of discovering and/or using new technology. These contrasting perceptions are not limited to simply a fear or love and are usually far more complex than these extremes. Furthermore, a persons own attitudes might be different from their personal belief in the benefits of technology rather than a simple resistance to it. The research question of whether language teachers were perceived to be
13
I/D: 1163612
technophobic was explored by a Canadian study (Lam, 2000) and appears to be the only study which proposes this contention from the outset. This study aimed to test whether fear was an underlying factor behind decisions regarding the use of technology. Furthermore, it posed the related question of what other factors lead some L2 teachers to choose not to use technology in their teaching practice. This relatively small-scale study, featuring ten participants, indicated that the reasons for not using technology lay more in the lack of pedagogical benefits they saw rather than an outright fear. One implication was that it felt it necessary to convince them of the benefits of using it in the classroom (ibid, 411). It concluded that there was negativity attached to teachers considered to be technophobic, quite possibly by an overly technophilic institution. As long as teachers feel alienated from technology they will not see the benefits. Furthermore, understanding what factors influence teachers decisions on using technology is an important step in ensuring that institutions are not wasting already limited funds on equipment that no one uses. (ibid, 412) The idea of a creating a typology of peoples relationship with technology is not new, although as technology develops, the actual devices or tools used as part of research into that relationship changes too. It also appears common in literature on this topic to create a typology (e.g. Tondeur et al, 2007), where there are two polar extremes or dichotomy, such as above. Alternative terminology on this particular continuum could be describing users as tech-comfy or tech-savvy (Dudeney, 2011). The latter relationship is often inappropriately attributed to younger users of technology, which will now be discussed. 2.4 PARADIGM 2: DIGITAL NATIVES vs DIGITAL IMMIGRANTS Another widely held distinction is that there is a whole generation of digital natives (Prensky, 2001), often called the net generation (Tapscott, 1998; Oblinger and Oblinger in Bennett, Maton and Kervin, 2008), millenials or gen Y (Pegrum, 2009: 55). Learners of a certain age are portrayed as having spent their whole lives immersed in technology (Prensky, 2001: 1). By the sheer volume of their interaction in this ubiquitous environment (ibid), they possess sophisticated knowledge of and skills with information technologies which, in turn, informs their learning preferences. A clear distinction is made between this generation born, for example, between 1977 and 1997 (Tapscott, 1998) and those who are
14
I/D: 1163612
older, not born in the digital age, the so-called digital immigrants. Despite this, the latter generation, have become fascinated by and adopted many of the newer technologies. Their foreign accent, which translates as having one foot in the past (Prensky, 2001: 2), however, never disappears entirely. Whilst the existence of an accent might be argued to feature in a whole generation of immigrants, it is often characterised by anecdotal evidence and appeals to commonly held beliefs (Bennett et al, 2008: 777). It is argued that there is little empirical evidence to the claims that this arbitrary divide exists. By not empirically backing up this contention, Prenskys words only sought to create an academic version of a moral panic. The analogy to Cohens (1972) notion of moral panic is helpful, because of the similarity to a youth subculture, portrayed as embodying a threat to societal values and norms, (Bennett et al, 2008: 782). Prensky (2001) tried to expose this generational gap, warning of students who had changed radically, no longer the people [the US] education system was designed to teach and that digital immigrants instructors spoke an outdated language (ibid: 1-2). While newer technologies may still be frequently portrayed as playgrounds for younger generations, it does not necessarily follow that children are the authorities. It is true that many young people are driven to connect with their peers online as a result of increasingly heavily scheduled and protected lives (Dudeney, Hockly and Pegrum, 2012: 8). It does not follow, however, that the emergent technologies, including the newer generation of dynamic web tools, which focus on communication, sharing and collaboration, thus turning ordinary web users from passive consumers of information into active contributors to a shared culture, have only been taken up by a younger generation. Empirical studies show that the notion of a homogenous, digitally able generation is a myth (ibid), while simple terms like net generation can blind us to a more complex reality (Pegrum, 2009: 56). In educational settings, teachers might find themselves having to be pro-active when learning new technologies for the classroom, as a top-down requirement. Similarly, they might take the lead on investigating web tools because they are part of a wider network of professionals, which students are not. Finally, many language teachers currently practicing
15
I/D: 1163612
are very open to creative possibilities of technology. They do not have a pre-digital mindset, often knowing as much as, if not more than, their students. 2.5 PARADIGM 3: DIGITAL RESIDENTS vs DIGITAL VISITORS A more recent paradigm, or continuum, has been proposed (White, 2008; White and Le Cornu, 2011) which seems to more accurately define two contrasting but not polar opposite users of online technology, who differ in the approach they take. A visitor goes online, presented metaphorically as a garden shed, and selects a particular tool to carry out a task. It might not be ideal but it does the job. As long as progress is made, the visitor is content, with the tool being replaced in the shed. Visitors are goalorientated and unlikely to have a social persona online as they might be wary of their digital identity being known. They try to leave without creating a trace. A resident, on the other hand, pictures the Web as a meeting place for exchanges of all manner of ideas, opinions and activities. A significant proportion of their actual lives are conducted online. For residents, the Web is a place to express opinions, a place in which relationships can be formed and extended. They are nebulous, visible and communal, but not necessarily collaborative. The web is a social space, where a resident enjoys that sense of ambient social presence of other people in social media platforms but still retains a strong sense of autonomy (White, 2008iii). The construction of a web tool as something which is purposefully selected is very useful, in the same way that a piece of technology can be consciously chosen to do a job. Incidentally, none of the numerous Web 2.0 tools, which will feature in the taxonomy of tools described later in this paper, did not exist when Prensky offered his original, dichotomous typology. Many visitors will limit their online activity for good reason. It can be a fairly conscious decision not to engage for fear of wasting time, being exposed or being sucked into something which causes anxiety and frustration. Being a cautious and selective visitor means a person is no less technically adept at using a tool effectively than the resident. In fact, they may be better skilled at selection, based on pedagogic principles.
16
I/D: 1163612
Whilst the Visitors-Residents paradigm initially appears to represent a more fluid and engaging way to frame this new research, it focuses more on online behaviour and still may not accurately reflect the complexities of users engaging with technology today. It is also not yet established in the minds of potential respondents. The technophile-technophobe paradigm is, I would argue, more familiar and was, therefore, chosen as a starting point for this investigation. activity. Despite reservations over how accurately it can describe a persons relationship with technology, it benefits from not being age-based or dependent on online It also allows respondents to self-describe their relationship, based on their comparative perception, which can be explored during the interviews.
17
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN 3.1 RESEARCH QUESTIONS I have so far discussed Continuous Professional Development, Computer-assisted Language Learning, some previous research into ICT use in education and by language teachers in particular, dimensions of teacher autonomy and paradigms used to describe a persons relationship with technology. The research questions below were formulated ahead of this new exploratory investigation into this area, with an attempt to connect the different dimensions of teacher autonomy with the behaviour of currently practicing EFL teachers. The perception of an EFL teachers view of technology was an interesting starting point and I wanted to discover whether this affected autonomous behaviour and whether this changed over time. This led to some initial research questions shown here: How do teachers discover ICT/web tools, what are they using and why? How frequent is teachers use of ICT/web tools in practice? Are they getting enough support to integrate these tools? What are the expectations of institutions in training teachers in this area? How autonomous are teachers in learning these tools for themselves and is this based on their relationship with technology? What are the barriers to implementing ICT/web tools into teaching?
These are explored in the research, as taxonomy of what EFL teachers are doing was developed. One presupposition was that they are either not getting enough support or that there is a mismatch between institutional demand to increase ICT skills and a lack of training. I also ventured that there were many self-employed and freelance teachers and teacher trainers who, by their circumstances, are, by necessity, more likely to be autonomous when it comes to their development in this area. It was important, however, to see what came out of the data.
18
I/D: 1163612
3.2 METHODOLOGY Having set up my research questions, I will describe the process of research, including reasons for this area of investigation and methodological approach. I chose a mixed methods approach to collect the data. On the one hand, I wanted to collect taxonomy of what language teachers are currently doing, and where they are doing it - a snapshot of the extent to which ICT and web tools were being engaged with. On the other hand, I wanted to dig beneath the surface to find the reasons behind using these tools, and especially of their relationship with technology. field? How do teachers learn these tools for themselves and to what extent do they rely on others, more experienced in the When finding out attitudes towards the use of technology, I suspected that many This second part teachers perceived their relationship with technology in a certain way. connects with the paradigms which I covered earlier. The particular variant of mixed methods approach I used can be abbreviated to QUAN -> qual (Drnyei, 2007: 170). This typology is reserved for a questionnaire survey which is followed by an interview or retrospection, with dominance on the former method (ibid 169). Research begins with a reasonably large amount of data collection in a short space of time, using a questionnaire survey. The answers received are substantially dependent on the questions asked. This is followed up with a hand-picked selection of qualitative interviews with semi-structured questions, based on the responses to the open questions from the survey. Those interviewed have already taken part in the survey. Hence, the capitalisation of QUAN and the lower-case, qual, because the subsequent qualitative component is there to remedy the potential weakness of the respondents engagement with the questions as being shallow and unable to show the exact nature of the any observed relationship (ibid: 170-171). An alternative to this method would be QUAN+QUAL concurrent design method, in which equally weighted pieces of quantitative and qualitative data are carried out, albeit separately from each other. As my interviewees also participated in the questionnaire survey, they form a sequential secondary component of the overall data collection. questionnaires:
19
I felt it was important to do this because, in isolation,
I/D: 1163612
inherently involve a somewhat superficial and relatively brief engagement with the topic on the part of the respondent. Therefore, no matter how creatively we formulate the items, they are unlikely to yield the kind of rich and sensitive description of events and participant perspectives that qualitative interpretations are grounded in. (Drnyei, 2007: 105)
3.3 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN For the survey questionnaire design, a combination of closed, demographic, Likert scale, multi-item (matrix) scale and open-ended questions were used. In trying to establish current practice, it was important to provide some suggestions for each question, but to also allow respondents to state, in their own words, what they are doing, as supplementary or additional information. Examples of this were questions 8 and 9, which account for some options, but allowed for an open response to cover additional or alternative answers. The survey underwent a process of several stages of piloting. Firstly, the survey was advertised on an ICT in ELT blog, which already existediv, amongst current practicing professionals, with a request to take part, It was circulated amongst members of the IATEFL and #ELTchat Facebook groups and via followers on Twitter. A webinar was set up using the WiZIQ platformv, providing a link to the class on the blog post. The aim was to ask some of the preliminary research questions and to explore some definitions, including those of technophobia and technophilia, with an aim to construct a questionnaire. Seven teachers participated, including two who responded directly with comments on the blog. Five others came via the aforementioned social networking sites and already formed part of a growing Personal Learning Network (PLN), which had been building since the start of the year. These seven willing participants, each one a currently practicing language teacher, formed the focus group, of which two members complete their feedback by email. The question wording was designed following that first webinar. The design underwent a number of changes. Initially, ten questions were thought to be sufficient. I consulted a friend, an experienced researcher, who noted a complete absence of demographic questions, such as those on age and gender. It was also suggested that ten questions might not be enough, a crucial point which was affirmed by my supervisor later.
20
By this time,
I/D: 1163612
however, a second webinar had taken place, thirteen days after the first. This webinar was specifically to discuss the wording of the questionnaire, which at that point had only nine questions. There were four participants, which included one new teacher who had found the blog entry and wanted to take part. The four others, who were originally involved in the focus group but couldnt make the second session, submitted their feedback by email. A working link to the draft survey was provided, so that they could go through each question of the nine questions and suggest a possible 10th. All of this feed into a radically revised, twenty question survey, which now included demographics and an option to take part in follow-up interviews. This was subsequently road-tested by two of the group, one of whom suggested what subsequently became an optional question on measuring effectiveness of an ICT tool. The final version, with covering letter is included in Appendix A. 3.4 SAMPLING PROCEDURE At this point, I will discuss the sampling procedure. From the outset, this study did not aim to focus on one teaching context or location. The aim was to collect broad opinions from EFL teachers around the world, without necessarily making generalised claims. Nonprobability sampling was used, as this consists of a number of strategies that try to achieve a trade-off, that is, a reasonably representative sample using resources that are within the means of the ordinary researcher (Drnyei, 2007: 97). In addition, a form of convenience (with purposive) sampling was used. An important criterion here is the convenience of the researcher, who is able to easily access members of the target population, using social networks. In addition, it is somewhat purposive, because the request for participants included a requirement that the person be working in the field of ELT as a teacher, teachertrainer, recently engaged as a teacher or about to start as one. Although the qualification was narrowed at first, it was kept wide enough to catch potential candidates who had some valid opinions on this. Two collector points were set up in Survey Monkey. The first consisted of accessing my own Personal Learning Network (PLN), mentioned earlier, via the same sources used to establish the focus group. They were given one uniform resource locator (URL) to complete the survey. The second consisted of people signed up to the Teacher Training Videos (TTV)
21
I/D: 1163612
websitevi newsletter. This group were given a different locator to complete the survey.
It
is likely that some received both requests, but there can be confidence that nobody completed the survey more than once, as was requested, due to identifiable Internet Protocol addresses. A minimum of 50 and ideally 100 responses were sought, which was easily achieved. It is important to stipulate the manner of the sampling technique employed here. Any survey about peoples behaviour with technology and experience of ICT tools would ideally triangulate data collected by an online survey against that taken from a physical questionnaire followed by face-to-face interviews from a contrasting source. A more accurate current picture might be obtained by surveying people who otherwise do not readily engage with online activities. So despite taking a mixed approach, there is no triangulation in the strictest sense (ibid: 165). An acknowledgement of the somewhat inevitable problem of self-selection (ibid: 100-101) is also required. By giving participants freedom to choose, the resulting sample can be dissimilar to the ideal target population. A reasonably representative sample was, nonetheless, obtained, given that the majority of participants would have, at least, the basic skills of IT competence to complete the survey. In addition, there was no deliberate attempt to target technophobes or those less engaged in the topic. A question which bluntly asks how technophobic someone feels could be taken as a somewhat irrelevant question given an online survey. It remained a starting point, nonetheless, for investigating attitudes towards the issue, which could be tested later during interviews. As stated earlier, this is more familiar terminology. A relationship with technology can be more fluid than that, with the use of some technologies managed better than others. The relationship can also change over time.
22
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER FOUR - SURVEY FINDINGS 4.1 DEMOGRAPHICS 107 responses were received in a 14 day period, with 68 from the general collector and 39 from the TTV collector. One response from the latter was discounted due to incomplete information from a duplicated IP address. Effectively this resulted in 106 full responses, who all completed the main 18 questions to reach the final page, while 23 added further comments (question 19) and 46 left their contact address (question 20) to be informed of the results of the survey and/or for a follow-up interview. The full findings are shown in Appendix B, minus the contact details. Of the first two demographic questions, 72 (67.9%) were female, 34 (32.1%) were male, with a broad range of ages being represented. 40 (37.7%) of the respondents came from the 30-39 age bracket see figure 3. One respondent was 60 or over and no-one was under 21.
Figure 1
Of the second two demographic questions, a total of 54 different countries and 26 different first (or native) languages were represented. For this survey, country was defined as where the respondent currently teaches or has recently taught, while first (or native) language could include two answers if that person considered themselves bilingual. Both of these open questions required a self-defined answer, rather than ticking from several options.
23
I/D: 1163612
Country of teaching
1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10
8 7
1 1 7 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4
UK (10) Spain (7) Japan (4) Germany (3) Portugal (3) Indonesia (2) Oman (2) South Korea (2) Venezuela (2) Belgium Chile India Libya Nepal Republic of Macedonia Scotland Switzerland Uruguay
Turkey (8) Argentina (4) Australia (3) Mexico (3) Canada (2) Ireland (2) Qatar (2) Thailand (2) Vietnam (2) Cameroon Croatia Iran Middle East Netherlands Russia Slovakia Syria USA
Greece (7) China (4) England (3) none/yet to teach (3) France (2) Italy (2) Romania (2) Ukraine (2) Armenia Channel Islands Ethiopia Latvia Mynamar Poland Saudi Arabia Sweden Tanzania Virtual/Online with LEWWP
Figure 2
24
I/D: 1163612
First (or native) language

1 1 2 2 2 2 2 4 6 2 2 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 11
1 1 1
49
6 12 English (49) Greek (6) Russian (4) German (2) Italian (2) Portuguese (2) Amharic Croatian Lamnso Mandarin Chinese Persian Romanian Swiss German Ukranian Spanish (12) Turkish (6) Arabic (2) Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia) (2) Polish (2) Slovak (2) Burmese Greek/English (bilingual) Macedonian Nepali Pogoro Spanish/Catalan (bilingual) Telugu
Figure 3
25
I/D: 1163612
The most represented countries were the United Kingdom, Turkey and Greece see figure 2. Five respondents stated that they taught in more than country and these are counted as separate entries (total 116). Some appeared to associate themselves with teaching in one country (for example, eight years in Iran) but are currently teaching in another (Sweden). One respondent, based in the USA, stated that she has set up a virtual Ning-built website and, subsequently, teaches people from around the world. English was, perhaps not surprisingly, the most common native language stated, with 49 stating this, followed by Spanish (12) see figure 3.
Figure 4
4.2 EXPERIENCE, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING On the question of experience, 98 responded, with 35 stating they had 11-20 years in the area of ELT. 23 claimed more than 20 years experience see figure 4. Eight skipped the question, which, must be assumed, included three who had previously stated (in Q3) they were yet to teach. The vast majority of respondents (70) stated they were employed, with two part-time and two more employed as volunteers. This left 32 as not employed - 11 self-employed, 9 as freelance, 8 as student/not employed and 4 other.
26
The latter
I/D: 1163612
questions (Q16, Q17) on support and training are directly related to this. The survey found little support by employers or institutions. 50% of those who responded said their employer/institution has never or on just one occasion provided support and/or training, while 62.6% responded similarly on the issue of the employer or institution paying for training figure 5.
Figure 5
Figure 6
27
I/D: 1163612
The full data figure 6 suggests a reasonable amount of teachers not receiving much PD training in this area, whereas a higher proportion seem to say they are frequently (36%) or always (28.1%) self-taught in this area. On the face of it, those kinds of results would appear to correlate, but this required some cross-tabulation with employment status. An expected high proportion of the not employed group (32), outlined above, selected N/A for those questions relating to what their employer does. Some of those, however, answered never, possibly referring to a time when they have been employed. Although answers from the not employed group have generally fallen into these two responses, different interpretations of the question have arisen. So what initially appears to be a reasonable finding reveals possible misunderstanding about the question and, therefore, required further clarification during the interview stage. Q17 asked opinion on three statements relating to where training should come. It revealed both a strong desire for employer or institutions to provide and responsibility being taken by the teacher. Of those that answered the question (92) opinion seems that training should be a joint responsibility see figure 7. The remainder (14), possibly containing many from the not employed group, may have decided the question was not relevant, although some may still have selected the second option, given the lack of alternatives for them. By crosstabulating, we found half of those described as self-employed or freelance chose N/A here. Again this needs further unpacking during interviews, as it may not have been entirely clear how to answer the question.
Figure 7
28
I/D: 1163612
4.3 RELATIONSHIP WITH TECHNOLOGY Before I discuss the taxonomy section of the survey, I will briefly show the results of Q7 figure 8 - which asked respondents to place themselves on the dichotomous technophobictechnophilic paradigm. I have already mentioned that ticking a single box does not Furthermore, asking this accurately describe someones relationship with technology.
question during an online survey can misrepresent the reality. Nonetheless, eight teachers placed themselves at the technophobic end. Not surprisingly, a high proportion (73) placed themselves at the technophilic end, suggesting a positive experience towards the questions which followed. More interesting is how teachers describe themselves in relation to technology. Feedback during the pilot study had already suggested terms like tech-aware and tech-user at the lower end, with tech-aficionado and tech-savvy at the higher end. The term enthusiastic amateur was additionally suggested, along with a sense of using technology when needed, appropriate for activities. For others, it is less about fear, more about the benefits of using the technology, which we return to in Q12. The interviews would provide an opportunity to uncover a more fluid relationship and whether this had changed over time.
Figure 8
29
I/D: 1163612
4.4 TAXONOMY OF CURRENT PRACTICE Now I will discuss the critical section (Q8-Q12) of the survey, which is essentially the taxonomy of what English language teachers are currently doing in the area of ICT. Each of these questions offered some likely options, but also the opportunity to comment further with specific, individual responses. Q8 was concerned with the original broader area of (continuous) professional development. In the introduction, I wondered about the extent to which teachers have found themselves increasing their knowledge through autonomous self-directed learning. A starting point is to ask teachers what they currently do in the area of PD. Here, respondents were invited to tick all that applied. Following/reading blogs (76.8%) was the most popular response, followed by engaging with an online community (69.5%) figure 9. Actually writing a blog (41.1%) was lower down the list. More ambiguous general reading (68.4%) and voluntary self-study (63.2%) were more popular, as is the more specific activity of attending conferences (61.1%). A wide variety of additional methods were employed. These included taking an MA, delivering peer training in e-learning, using Edudemic on iPad, watching YouTube tutorials and taking part in webinars. A small number declared they currently did nothing or that they were just starting out, while 11 skipped the question entirely, which suggests they did none of those listed.
Figure 9
30
I/D: 1163612
Q9 focused on the frequency of technology, the hardware, used in teaching. It was deliberately worded in the passive so that use by students could be included. In addition, it included use outside of the classroom. Results indicated a stronger use of more conventional networked computers and laptops over tablets figure 10. An overhead projector, or beamer, was mentioned by some in the comments section, as was some kind of audio or voice recording equipment, such as a Dictaphone. Some stated that none of these applied, while 8 skipped the question entirely.
Figure 10
Q10 focused on the use of web tools, or software, broadly grouped by type. Respondents were asked to select the frequency they used 15 types of tool, for which some examples were given. The results figures 11/12 provide a snapshot of how frequent these tools were currently being used. Some of these, such as materials creation tools, are more obviously geared towards ELT, while others are not specifically designed for that purpose. Unfortunately, the question did not stipulate the use in teaching, as did Q9, but this was noted and later clarified during the interview stage.
31
I/D: 1163612
Figure 11
Figure 12
32
I/D: 1163612
Given the vast amount of web tools now in existence, it was unsurprising that many respondents wanted to share specific names of tools, offering links and recommendations. Glogster, Screen Chomp (for iPad), VoiceThread, Voki, Headmagnet, FlashcardsDb, Fotobabble, Mailvu, Dropbox, Evernote and Lyrics Trainer were just some of those mentioned. See Appendix B for the full list. Q11 asked how teachers discovered ICT or web tools. discovery figure 13. This straightforward, optional
question revealed the highest proportion of respondents (79) stating this was through selfThis suggests complete independence, but I would suggest an Certainly the crossover with Q8, overlap exists with other methods, such as searching for certain terms on the internet, following a blog, or discovering a tool at a conference. about professional development activities, exists. Indeed, a brief cross-tabulation between these two questions figure 14 - shows very high response rates between those engaged in numerous activities for PD and those who claim to self-discover.
Figure 13
33
I/D: 1163612
Figure 14
The factors behind choosing a tool were asked in Q12 and later explored during the interviews. Does the web visitor purposefully have a pedagogical aim and looks for a tool that does the job or do they discover the tool and then adapt the lesson accordingly? It is, perhaps, not surprising that most teachers consider the importance of a tool to be easy to access, easy to use and ideally free figure 15. In addition, it needs to be relevant, engaging, motivating and justified. Opinion is strong across all of these and it can be difficult to argue against that. It was far less important for the institution to have a subscription. Although many tools are basically free, there are often paid-for versions which do more, such as increased integration. One respondent commented that it was important for students to be able to embed content on other sites. Another, who was subsequently interviewed, proposed that it should be andragogically justified, an previously unfamiliar term to describe a theory of adult learning, coined by Knowles (cited in Hartree, 1984: 204) in contrast to a more child-based pedagogy, the art or science of teaching children (emphasis in ibid). Many of the above questions shown required further unpacking to remedy the potential weaknesses shown in the significant, but often misleading data obtained. That is where follow-up interviews can be more explicit in their meaning towards, for example, factors behind choosing and using a web tool. I will move onto the interview data shortly, but not before summarising the responses to two key questions set out earlier. How autonomous are teachers in learning about tools, as opposed to merely discovering them, and what are the barriers to implementation?
34
I/D: 1163612
Figure 15
4.5 AUTONOMY AND BARRIERS Earlier I discussed overlapping definitions of teacher autonomy, which highlighted the development of appropriate skills and attitudes, the capacity to make choices and the support offered by teacher-learner pools of diverse knowledge. theoretical dimensions which separated action from development. I also detailed the I would like to use
these constructs to frame my discussion of the responses to Q14 and Q15. These questions move the respondents on from their autonomous behaviour in respect of general professional development, such as going to conferences, to the more specific learning required to effectively use an ICT or Web tool. A persons capacity and/or willingness to engage in self-directed behaviour might be based on their relationship with technology, or how they perceive their ability to learn the tool. But this capacity can also be seen in terms of an ability to put theory (learning of the tools) into action (integration). This, in turn, can be compromised by barriers which limit this. Just as McGrath and Smith (ibid) separated those factors which an autonomous teacher has control of from those which are outside of
35
I/D: 1163612
their control, so too can we separate out factors which show good intention to learn and implement these tools, from those which prevent it happening in reality.
Figure 16
Figure 17
36
I/D: 1163612
Q14 asked how frequently teachers engage in autonomous behaviour, such as learning a tool on their own. What is their reliance on others? This effectively begins to explore their capacity and/or willingness to learn the tool. The results figure 16 suggest a high level of autonomous behaviour. Most striking is that 80 (86.9%) teachers of those who answered said that they learn by using and practicing, suggesting that confidence comes with being self-taught. Almost as likely, 72 (78.3%) said they would try a tool out and only resort to help if needed. 40 (43.5%) respondents claimed they frequently teach themselves everything they need to know. Occasionally they would rely on others to show them what to do but overall, according to the data, this appears to be a fairly resourceful and autonomous set of teachers. One teacher highlighted their attitude: Most often I have a go and if it's not intuitive and easy to work out, or I want ideas on how to use then I Google it and will usually find a YouTube video or blog with loads of great advice. (Appendix B) Q15 effectively asked what kinds of barriers exist in moving the teacher from learning about the tool (professional development) to using the tool in reality (professional action) figure 17. Financial costs - 60 (65.2%) was the biggest barrier, with 54 of those stating it was important or very important for tools to be free (cross-tabulation with Q12). Reliability also featured highly 55 (59.8%), and there is some expected correlation with the question on technophobia figure 18 although not completely conclusive.
Figure 18
37
I/D: 1163612
Lack of training 37 (40.2%) and time consumption 44 (47.8%) appeared lower down than expected initially, but we have already established this group as fairly resourceful. Institutional resistance - 40 (43.5%) could encompass all situations where stricter controls on how things are taught apply, or difficulties in getting permission to install software on institutional machines, as some commented. While 14 skipped the question and/or wrote none at all in the comments, others took the opportunity to highlight their personal barriers. One stated that while it is not time consuming, per se, to learn these tools, they dont have enough time to devote to fully discovering, assessing and incorporating the tech into the lessons. Another described physical discomfort associated with constant use of the computer, with ergonomic issues being an elephant in the living room. Health issues are often overlooked, and one respondent wanted to rectify this omission. In addition: Another elephant in the living room with ICT is the problem of deteriorating quality of concentration that many of us have been experiencing as we become more adept and frequent ICT users in every aspect of our lives. (Appendix B: 36) 4.6 ASSESSING EFFECTIVENESS OF TOOLS Before concluding this section, I will briefly deal with the main points from the open Q13 on how teachers would assess the success or effectiveness of a particular tool. This question immediately followed one about what factors are involved when selecting a tool to use. This was referred to as many teachers responded with examples of why they used certain tools. Simple, manual coding of the answers revealed a significant judgement lay in students engagement, interest, their opinions and feedback. If they responded well, then it is effective. However, many of these went on to state that learning outcomes, proficiency in performance and demonstrated use of the target language were equally markers for success. For some, ease of use and the ability to integrate the tool into lessons, rather than to become the focus of it, were additional important, as shown in the extracted comment: Whether it serves the purpose ... it needs to be relatively easy to integrate into my lesson, and at the moment I am not completely changing the way I teach to incorporate technology - for instance, I am not "flipping" classrooms. (Appendix B: 33)
38
I/D: 1163612
The amount of time and effort involved were lesser but notable remarks, while some merely commented that as long as the tool got used, inside and outside of the classroom, this was a positive measure. Provided some pedagogical value can be proven or an actual increase in student engagement or learning takes place, then teachers appear to make contextual decisions regarding their use and choice of tool. 4.7 MAIN POINTS I will now identify the main points from the survey which formed the basis for the remainder of the investigation. To what extent have teachers found themselves increasing their knowledge of ICT and web tools through autonomous self-directed learning? The findings suggest this is happening quite a lot. To what extent do they wait for externallydriven training to be given when needed? The suggestion is that this does not happen much. Not only did the findings point to there being little support by institutions but an overwhelming majority, (82.2%) of those who expressed an opinion, felt they should take responsibility for their own training in this area. Although a high proportion (75.2%) also felt that while the institution should provide training, this does not mean they expect it. The amount of responsibility that teachers take for actually learning these tools, therefore, became a focal point for the interviews. The most common constraining factors from the survey were reliability (59.8%) and the financial cost involved (65.2%). A high number of respondents ticked several factors as well as adding their own reasons. The barriers which impact upon the teacher learning and implementing these tools for themselves, therefore, also needed further investigation. Finally, respondents relationship with technology and autonomous behaviour needed further exploration. Finding out how both of these more personal factors have changed over time could provide some benefit to others and offer practical ways of developing in this area.
39
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER FIVE - INTERVIEWS 5.1 METHODOLOGY For the follow-up interview stage, I drew upon the pool of survey respondents that had left contact details. 45 out of 106 respondents were subsequently contacted, by group email (Appendix C), for further participation. Fourteen individuals, based in thirteen different countries, eventually signed up for a single online session, where they chose the date and time, via a simple Wikivii, effectively confirming consent and to maximise involvement. Conducting an online interview comes with potential technical barriers and need for the participants to help troubleshoot problems so it was fortunate, perhaps, to have reasonably technically-minded interviewees. A member of Warwick Language Centreviii provided assistance by offering the use of a privately maintained room in Blackboard Collaborate 12ix, a VLE previously mentioned on page 5, and forwarding the recordings. The questions were piloted beforehand with one member of my survey focus group. This one-off pilot did bring out some technical issues, such as dropouts, avoiding echo and maximising the number of speakers. These issues were highlighted in further emails to the interviewees. In addition, before recording, a few minutes were spent checking the connection. On five occasions, however, unsolvable issues prevented access to the room or a clear connection. Skype (version 5.10.0.116) together with a VOIP recorder plug-inx was, subsequently, used instead. In preparation for the interviews, individual survey responses were printed off and a semistructured Interview framework with content questions was devised see Appendix D. The interviewees were encouraged to elaborate on their survey responses. This approach is suitable for cases when there is already a good understanding of the phenomenon and there is a wish to develop deeper responses to those questions engaged with already (Drnyei, 2007: 136). Furthermore, interviewees were encouraged to tell their story, with the questions intended to frame but also to allow elaboration upon this. Fourteen interviewsxi were conducted during a one week period. The intention was initially to transcribe and to code all the data, which is good practice for any researcher, by taking a
40
I/D: 1163612
rigorous, objective approach. It soon became clear this was simply not realistic or even appropriate. Even transcriptions which disregard the meticulous, finer points of conversation analysis can take several times as long as the original interview length to complete. A key aspect of the QUAN->qual approach, as stated in the methodology section, is that interviews are used to remedy the potential weakness of the respondents engagements with the questionnaire. The purpose here was not to carry out completely separate interviews on the topic or to inductively generate data, as in grounded theory approach. The aim was to add flesh to the bones, a term used in the interviews, of what had already been claimed. In addition, prompts, probes (ibid: 138) and reflective remarks were used to clarify their responses, as well as the use of questions which challenged the respondents survey answers, as they were invited to justify their selections. Opportunities were also given to ask questions or answer related questions which were not actually asked. In order to code, a significant amount of pre-coding would have to be acknowledged, given the content questions. Pre-coding also takes place in the transcription selection of most but not all of the responses. The coding which has been applied here is, therefore, a simpler transcription of each interview, where the essence of all the responses have been grouped approximately by five content questions taken from the interview guide, but allowing for some additional, relevant information to be included: Relationship with Technology ICT/Web Tools Usage Barriers Institutional Support and Training Autonomous Behaviour
41
I/D: 1163612
5.2 INTERVIEW FINDINGS In presenting the interview findings, 14 interviewees are referred to by their anonymised initials. Two sections of the transcribed data, along with demographic information, transcription notes, collector points and medium used can be found in Appendix E. Demographics are interesting but less important here as this was not a direct comparison of age, sex and nationality etc. There is difficulty in analysing results across such wildly different teaching contexts and it would be nigh-on impossible to make generalisations from the data. The general is only interesting when it takes the form of concrete connections to other contexts, findings, experience and so on (Richards, 2003: 265). 5.3 RELATIONSHIP WITH TECHNOLOGY Having reminded each interviewee of where they placed themselves on the technophobetechnophile continuum, each one was invited to describe more fully their relationship with technology. Collectively, there was an over-representation at the technophile end, but this perception represented their current relationship and what emerged from the data were stories of changing perceptions and engagement with learning ICT, predominately outside of work. In three examples, claiming to be a technophile was unambiguous because of lifetime experience or a perception of being born into it: Basically, I am bit of a nerd. I used to spend hours writing up computer programs. [At university] we used a lot of computer technology to run simulating software the whole computer thing is pretty straightforward for me ... Im using really high-end software. (UV) I was a computer programmer then website developer when the Internet first came about. I did my first online course before that ... when we had something called ARNET I dont have any fear of anything with technology. (YZ) Ive grown up with the Internet and with digital life and digital identity. I spend a ridiculous amount of time on the computer. Im very comfortable with [it]. (KL) Others were more cautious, concerned about technology taking over, for example: I dont just naturally love computers, but Im not afraid, either in the future it wont be a fancy alternative, just the norm, so I decided it was necessary to learn, to get comfortable the term digital immigrant resonates with me my relationship [is] transitional, experimental. (AA)
42
I/D: 1163612
I love technology, but dont like going to extreme like spending the whole day in front of the computer I use it half for my professional needs, half for my professional development. (CD) I hope to lean towards the technophile end Im very eager to try out new things [but] Im not a real technical genius. (ST) The most interesting finding was a number of interviewees who described their journey from one part of the continuum to another or how they had integrated their increasing knowledge into their teaching. For example: I have always been fond of technology. In 2004 I did a Webheads In Action course. To that point I did use technology in my life, but not for teaching ... I discovered there were so many things you could do that could make teaching and learning more fun, interesting and effective. Thats where my journey started and I think Ive come a long way. (WX) My movement into ICT is something germinated from some seeds planted here and there. Given that progression and an inclination to try and get away from inefficient teaching approaches. I think that is the process, by which, a teacher can develop into ICT. (IJ) One respondent explicitly claimed to originally be a digital immigrant who claimed that first-hand experiences, in South Korea, and finding mentors had helped her: It was a big turning point. I havent always been a technophile, absolutely not for my own fear factor, Ive always been a curious person. I was terribly phobic for years and the continuum goes back and forth still, but confidence [has grown], especially since the last several months. (GH) Approximately half of the interviewees were introduced at some point to resident-visitor paradigm. Most of those, who expressed an opinion on this, placed themselves closer to visitor, at least in terms of strategically choosing tools (AA), although this seemed to be changing, as confidence grew in using online forums for professional development: I have both social and professional online identities, with my Diploma blog and I spend a lot of time reading ELT blogs and even commenting. Perhaps my digital residency isnt fully established simply because Im a fairly new arrival. (AA) I am becoming a bit more relaxed about my online presence. In the beginning, I wasnt so relaxed I was a little bit intimidated by some of the other participants [on] websites. Im way over that now. (BB)
43
I/D: 1163612
5.4 ICT/WEB TOOL USAGE During the interviews there was an opportunity to clarify answers given for survey Q10 as the question had not asked whether use of tools was specifically for teaching purpose or more general use. Teachers had interpreted the question in different ways. Some assumed it was in relation to teaching because the previous question had been. Others took it more generally, with one explaining: Its definitely an [extension] of my personal life. Ive realised a lot of the potential that connected learning, and connected professional development can offer, so Ive been integrating it more and more into my teaching. (KL) Three main areas emerged of where certain types of tools were used. Social networking tools, for example, were limited to personal use and accessed for professional development. Materials creation and screen casting tools were used in teaching, but mostly for preparation and feedback. Finally, there are those, such as creative, integrative and presentation tools, used in the classroom with or exclusively by the students. This was outlined by one interviewee as follows: For myself, I use almost everything [on the list] but I do not necessarily use everything in class. Thats the difference. I use Jing a lot, but I dont use Jing in the classroom. So there are effectiveness of tools for my daily life as a teacher and what I then actually transfer to students. (WX) Many interviewees were also asked for frequently used tools. MOODLE was mentioned the most. This was clearly due to Learning Management Systems (LMS) being introduced at the institutional level. For some, this was the starting point in terms of integrating online tools and sharing information securely with students. It remains a favourite for some (MN, YZ) while others have used alternative LMS, such as Ganttproject (UV), Engrade and Edmodo (OP). Collaborative wikis and blogs also proved popular. Reasons for selecting tools were influenced strongly by options given on survey Q12. For
students the tool had to be simple, easy to use, intuitive (CD), plug and play (OP) and free to access. Many teachers, having discovered a tool, allowed themselves a certain time to learn the tool before either using or rejecting stage three of the innovation, decision, process model, referred to earlier. Often this depended on whether it can be
44
pedagogically justified. Some tools may be perceived as time-fillers, but, when asked,
I/D: 1163612
teachers frequently claimed justification is essential. Tools which enable brainstorming ideas, e.g. Wordle, Freemind, and ones which encourage creativity, for example, Pixton, were also mentioned. One teacher queried whether she would know if a tool was motivating, but agreed that engagement could be judged (YZ). When it came to the order of discovery and implementation, there was no clear preferred method. However, the majority seemed to wait for recommendations rather than purposefully searching, as one interviewee stated: First I learn about this tool, somewhere on the internet then I see how and which point I can use this tool in the classroom, for which purposes or activity. I usually read about it, maybe watch some tutorial and I see whether I personally like this tool or not and is it easy for me to use it? If yes, then I try to think how can incorporate this tool into my lesson. (CD, sic) For teacher-trainers the process was slightly different: I do tend to wait until somebody points the tool out to me and think I could see a really good use for that one and then squeeze it into the classroom when I need it. From a teacher-training point of view, I do tend to do it the other way round, though. I wonder if there is a tool out there that will help my students or my trainees benefit from it ... but for my own teaching, its the other way round. (BB) A lot of it comes from my need and demand if I need to do a certain thing and I dont have the immediate tool at my fingertips, I go onto sourceforge or some software website. (UV) If the tool proved to be effective then it could be used again. In response to how
effectiveness can be measured, some stated it was a trial and error process. The strongest responses, in passion, if not in number, were in terms of students being able to demonstrate the target language, with one declaring it to be pointless otherwise (ST). Whilst the majority of interviewees saw the potential for tools, not everyone was enthusiastic and tools were dismissed by one respondent as frivolous, before elaborating: I think a person has to be really sold on the benefits web tools inherently are easily dismissible [compared to a course book]. by their nature, [they] in their virtuality are ephemeral. Jing? Well, you can make a video and send them to students, but its kind of narrow. I want a multipurpose or general set which brings them all together. (IJ)
45
I/D: 1163612
This freelance teacher later expressed how preparation and delivery had changed with Smart notebook software: Im no longer sitting in front of a blank sheet of paper, wondering what to do. Now I have a series of slides to fill in and things are slicker, more efficient Ive got a record of what was done. Given those characteristics or features I find some endless benefits. (IJ) Having that ability to have everything in one place is attractive for any teacher wishing to appear organised. As an example of someone who moves from context to context, on a yearly basis, portability is essential. With so many tablet devices now, this is becoming the future in ELT, as is the trend to bring your own device (GH). 5.5 BARRIERS The financial cost involved was the highest polling barrier in the survey. This was affirmed by a number of interviewees. A significant proportion of web tools are free to use, at least in their basic version. While the perception by institutions that purchasing technology to enable use of these tools was prohibitive, many interviewees revealed they either used free tools where the opportunity and hardware existed or bought their own technology for their classrooms: You would have to go and buy more tools [for MOODLE] and if nobody else asks for these tools my university will not get [these] additional tools. I got my own iPad because my university wont pay for it. (MN) I buy a lot of licences and tools myself, because that is the only way I can justify [to the institution] the amazing things Im doing with it. (YZ) One interviewee, however, went to great lengths to explain how he had overcome cost barriers by directly emailing several software owners: Some of the companies have granted me professional licences because I am teacher from Ukraine and I need them and my salary is peanuts [so] they let me use professional versions for half a year. You can see an email from the creator of ThingLink, Finland, granting me educational account free of charge. (OP) Reliability, which also scored high on the survey, was also reaffirmed, although tellingly the fear of technology breaking down was projected onto non confident work colleagues by some, describing it as the last nail in the coffin (BB). Guaranteed access was also raised,
46
I/D: 1163612
especially in Nepal, where there are frequent power cuts (QR) or in China, where a lot of useful sites are blocked and proxy servers are not encouraged at the institution (UV). In addition, state government networks can also restrict access, even to sites like Blogger, if someone gets offended (YZ). Time constraints were singled out, as well as specific issues concerning online instruction: Every tool takes a lot of learning and adapting and experimenting and that takes a lot of time. Its much easier to go with what you already know. (AA) Definitely my list of priorities is too long. I can prioritise and I do, but time. Connection speeds is another large challenge. Infrastructures of connection access. With so many devices used now I get feedback that things dont work with this device or browser. (GH) More specific contextual problems arose. Non homogenous classes were mentioned (EF, ST, YZ) as a factor associated with low-level learners. One interviewee spoke of the disadvantage caused by easily distracted students and a liberal school policy in Sweden, while another mentioned the problems of a self-described developing country: Because all the students have laptops, all of them are connected to the internet and sometimes they use games, and they check Facebook or they went to YouTube [the school is] not allowed to force [the students] not [to use] music ... the students said that they were allowed to do that, while I am teaching. (EF) In the context of Nepal, there is more than one hundred students inside the classroom. Another barrier is multilingual classroom, multilingual background. They dont have much English knowledge, and we have problem of different mother tongues. (QR) Many barriers, most notably that of institutional resistance and the lack of teachers seeking to be autonomous learners, are arguably underlain by a lack of political will (IJ). Thus: when an organisation wants ICT or web tools used, they will make them available, they will train staff and create an ethos in which these things operate therefore, the barriers which are left will be the teachers own proclivities or disinclination to engage. (IJ)
47
I/D: 1163612
5.6 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT OR TRAINING So what experiences do teachers have of institutional support? There were many detailed examples of an organisation making technology available, as above, and there being some expectation for training. One particular case involved the introduction of MOODLE, preloaded with a bunch of stuff, with teachers told to figure it out, but no specific training given (ST). In that unionised environment resistance from the teachers not prepared to invest their own time in learning the tool, scuppered this innovation before it got going. Another institution, part of state government, had very good conditions. Managers had fought hard for allocation of PD. Support was widely given, but some teachers chose not to spend time learning technology, training was turned down. Teachers can stubbornly resist development unless they see a direct benefit for themselves. As one interviewee explained: There was someone who said [they had] been teaching for 20 years and there is nothing else [she] could learn I said to my manager, well I hope you took her PD money and time off her. (YZ) Some regional training was found (UV), or funding for online courses (OP) and more so with established providers, such as The British Council (IJ), but generally any PD in this area came from colleagues, encouraged by institutions as part of a contractual obligation (AA, BB, IJ). General support and encouragement for innovative teaching using existing technology was found. Commonly, however, there was no training given and many had grown to not expect it either. There were many examples of self-directed teacher-learners bringing new ideas and trying them out for themselves or sharing with colleagues. The institutions generally hired them on this basis and used them to give training sessions when needed. For one young teacher, about to start work at an institution in the Netherlands: Im not expecting to be given anything. Im expecting that I will have to either figure it out myself or ask people who have been there longer I would hope it would be otherwise. Especially as there is now a trend to try and incorporate more ICT in education and director of studies are quite interested by that ... they really want to push for that, but they dont know what to do with it. So Im seeing [my employment] as being very self-directed. (KL) The interviewees consistently explained they had received no training and quite often found their institution offering only basic training (BB, EF, MN, OP, UV) or not buying into the
48
I/D: 1163612
idea (GH), often because non-government institutions are run as profit-driven businesses (ST) or are reluctant to offer full-time contracts (AA, WX). Locations where teachers have two or three part-time jobs make it difficult to coordinate professional development (WX). As many of the teachers interviewed are also teacher-trainers (BB, GH, WX, YZ), they demonstrated many of the skills required by their trainees, but expressed that both managers and teachers often showed that lack of political will. explained: I think the institution should be providing training. I think if you bury your head in the sand and get to the point that you think its not important then you are going to lose customers in the end, because people are so confident around technology that I think teachers need to have that as well. (BB) Those that possessed significant skill sets either become hired as trainers or end up doing training: This normally happens if someone has a useful skill set that person then becomes the person as the expert in those skills. So if I was a technophobe and my senior teacher was a technophile he would have a more dominant role when it comes to training on the IT side. (UV) Being shown by an expert on how to do something, however, is not always helpful. There was a barrier for one teacher-learner, wary of synchronous tuition, if the gap between the teachers and learners knowledge is so great that it is off-putting (MN). This can be avoided, however, with asynchronous learning sites offering numerous screenshots of how to do something. In addition, teacher training sites, which use screen casting technology, can fill a gap because of the step-by-step process where no assumption of knowledge is made beyond basic ability to operate the device being used to access the tool. The amount of responsibility that teachers actually take for their own training appeared very high amongst most of the interviewees, which reflected survey Q17 opinion on whether they should. The willingness to take responsibility was self-evident in at least two young professionals (KL, MN) but for many became some kind of realisation, for example: I used to expect to have that training or the institution set some standards or expectations. Over time, I have realised that that is never happening, so if I want to use this it is up to me I used to be dependent on them to make those initiative moves, but now Ive decided to take it upon myself. (ST)
49
As one teacher-trainer
I/D: 1163612
A number of interviewees (BB, CD, OP, MN, WX, YZ) expressed how they had proven themselves over time. Not only can they be trusted, left alone to teach or, as one put it, not to break anything in the lab (WX), their very actions have effectively earned their relative freedoms. Their professional development may have indirectly, therefore, impacted upon their professional action. But to what extent do teachers have a capacity from the outset, how did they learn to be autonomous and have they had to become more so? 5.7 AUTONOMOUS BEHAVIOUR For some respondents, that part of autonomous behaviour concerned with self-reliance is rooted in personality. Independence, impatience, curiosity and restlessness were some characteristics mentioned by those (AA, CD, WX) who thought they have always been that way. Impatience is also connected to a drive to avoid stagnating teaching the same materials the same way every year would be terribly boring (AA). For others, it was something they had acquired, as one director of studies explained: I think that is something that I have been taught, through my education. I dont think its something I just acquired when I came to China. I think Ive had it for a long time, maybe as part of my university education where a lot of [work is done] on your own and if you dont have an immediate solution you go and find it. (UV) The idea that is could actually be taught is questionable, although many felt it could certainly be learned, given leading by example and showing good practice (e.g. AA, MN, GH). For many, being self-reliant and not waiting for others to show the way was something learned from experience, something which developed over time. When it came to learning web tools, many seemed to take the initiative and try them first. Most learned by practicing or experimenting with it, before looking for a tutorial or further help, as a few teacherlearners commented: I just try them out, learning by doing. I dont like people showing me how to do things. (MN) I try it myself first. Trial and error, see what are the possibilities. If I get stuck, then I resort to trying to find somebody who has already used it a tutorial, a blog post or anything. (WX)
50
I/D: 1163612
If there is something which is really frustrating me, Ill go search for a tutorial or the FAQs. For example, with Edmodo, I had no idea and I just kind of lets see what happens, and I just figured it out, but I realise that takes more time. Trial and error takes more time. Its a bit more passive but I would still regard it as autonomous because its in my free time. (KL) Being resourceful is often taken to be an example of autonomous behaviour in action. Teaching situations with limited resources have forever made resourcefulness a necessity. This is a big draw when it comes to technology (AA). A lot of teachers work in places where they dont have good access (AA), such as the Nepalese teacher, who claimed to manage all technological problems by himself as he didnt care much for the chalk and talk method used by others (QR). Whilst being resourceful was something that many of the interviews demonstrated about themselves, some expressed dismay (BB, OP, QR) at colleagues for a lack of resourcefulness. One teacher explained how she modelled her methods to others when it came to problem solving, by showing that, initially, she didnt know either and learned how to do it (YZ). Except her colleagues assumed she knew everything anyway and an impression remained that it was easy for her. So she switched to modelling others autonomous efforts instead. That part of teacher autonomy concerned with self-directed learning came across from the majority of the interviewees, who gave examples backed up with their belief that this had significantly helped them in their career. Unsurprisingly, this was truer for the selfemployed, freelance teachers, such as those engaged primarily in one-to-one and online tuition. This was suspected at the beginning of this investigation. For the most part, their relative freedom from control dictates that they should take full responsibility for their learning and training. This does not mean that they are actively seeking training, but they are making autonomous choices in that regard. As one freelance teacher explained: I dont find the tools myself as primary sources. I wait for others to tell me, but not my colleagues [but] people on online forums or people on social networks. In my community of people, Id be the first, but I dont actively search. Its not a high priority for me to read and curate the information. (KL) Another freelance teacher, who solely teaches online, expressed the benefits of having a sense of community, a shared experience through social platforms. She also expressed how this social environment affected learning tools for conducting her online classes:
51
I/D: 1163612
What I love with the world getting more and more social online is that we dont have to do all the work. If its a social platform and open then other people help other people. For me, it makes strong learning experiences because its relevant. When you have relevance in your learning, thats what creates autonomy and independent learning. (GH) These social benefits of having a PLN or tapping into other kinds of support network were widely mentioned and this was a concrete connection of opinion. In terms of behaviour, if [use of PLNs] parallels mine and it actually moves away from me, thats very good because people develop at their own time and speed (BB), offered one teacher-trainer. There can, indeed, be a very positive attitude to be found on blogs and amongst certain online groups who like to share good experiences. Establishing and maintaining a PLN did appear to be most beneficial way of developing teachers interest, understanding and incorporation of ICT and web tools into their teaching. Despite some evidence from those teacher-trainers in relatively larger organisations, the majority view was that sufficient training could not be relied upon. In addition, taking responsibility for ones own learning was not just an ideal but more of a necessity if the teacher had any interest in professional development at all. An employer, by and large, cannot be relied upon to provide the same level of enthusiasm which can be generated by peers, even if they are teaching in different contexts. As one teacher said, Ive got friends to help me, its not the official way of doing it, but it is my own interest that motivates me (MN). Even for teacher-trainers most of their role was tailored to increase a teachers autonomous behaviour. As one teacher-trainer concluded, teachers who are no longer learners are doing their students a disservice (BB). 5.8 DISCUSSION In discussing the interview findings, I refer back to the theoretical construct of teacherlearner autonomy and the main points from the survey. Those aspects of learning ICT and web tools which take place as part of professional development are those related to selfdirected teacher learning and teacher-learner autonomy. As Smith (2003) notes, it might be possible for institutions to focus on developing the willingness and capacity for self-directed teacher learning, but the evidence was that this is only partially happening, at least from the teachers perspective.
52
I/D: 1163612
Those employed as teacher-trainers did demonstrate that web tools were being promoted to their teachers and quite often informal training was given. examples of trying to foster more autonomous behaviour. They also gave some The teachers who were The different
interviewed, however, painted a less positive picture in this regard and if they were fortunate to have dedicated training, it was not being acknowledged. predominately employed as trainers was an interesting, emerging feature. The extent that teachers were self-directing their learning was high and many took substantial responsibility for learning tools. The survey had suggested that whilst the belief was that training should be given, teachers did not wait for this to happen. The interviewees partially backed this perception, as many teachers felt a frustration with having to do their own self-directed learning in their own time. While those that did invest substantial time being autonomous learners were rewarded by the amount of autonomy they created for themselves at work, for many that lack of political will was very much in evidence. Although some described a lack of access to reliable technology, most reported an above sufficient capacity and a strong freedom from control to learn about and integrate web tools in their practice. This was certainly truer of freelance teachers, although they were not the only ones to have shifted their autonomous behaviour. For the most part, teachers reported support, if not training, by institutions, and were mostly free to teach how they wanted to. Clearly some barriers impacted upon professional action. Time, cost and reliability were common factors which impinged upon both learning and implementing tools. The extent to which they impinged varied, of course, from person to person, with each context bringing its own particular constraints. Barriers discussed had to be taken into account when considering the pay-off for the investment made. Quite often there was a conscious decision on the part of the teacher not to integrate a particular tool for practical reasons, or that the pedagogic value was not great enough to warrant the investment. perspective on actual training between those who were solely teaching and those
53
I/D: 1163612
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION 6.1 CONCLUSION In coming to a conclusion we need to remember that the purpose of the interviews was not to collect separate data, removed from the survey. The two were inextricably linked. Drawing a conclusion from the whole data set, as already indicated, would be very difficult because of the varied contexts, employment statuses and experiences of the interviewees who took part. Any connections claimed, therefore, are less concrete than would be hoped for because of these wildly different variables. Part of the original purpose of the study was the potential help that could be offered to those who feel the pressure of needing to integrate ICT into their teaching. By maximising potential responses, too broad a picture may have been obtained. In addition, although some focus was attempted during the interview stage it may not have been sufficiently specific enough to extrapolate meaningful results. Finally, the issue of an individuals relationship with technology was, perhaps, not a conclusive way to measure whether the learning of tools was an autonomous process, even if it was a reasonable assumption to make at the outset. Nonetheless, taxonomy of current practice was obtained of a body of teachers and teachertrainers, albeit at the more technophilic end of the paradigm and more autonomous end of that spectrum. As teacher-learners, plenty of data was obtained to suggest that there is a keen interest of developing and of taking responsibility for own learning in this area. Conversely, some stories from teacher-trainers implied that this keenness is not so common and that a lack of political will pervades a minority of teachers attitudes and practices. The teachers interviewed may have under represented the amount of training they receive at the institutional level, although many wanted to express their extra-curricular activities. For those in freelance roles or transitory employment, a high level of self-directed learning probably is not only necessary but was probably accurately portrayed. There is some value for teacher-trainers here in the way that more autonomous professional development in this area can take place. Institutions should encourage selfdirected teacher learning where possible; it is in their own interest to do this. In respect of learning about higher end ICT tools such as LMS, the responsibility appears to lie with the
54
I/D: 1163612
institution. In respect of more general web tools, the responsibility, however, does appear to lie mostly with individual teachers and their own pedagogic aims. Although teachertrainers are in a position to guide teachers and demonstrate benefits, learning how to use and integrate certain tools by themselves appears to be the most effective. 6.2 FURTHER RESEARCH There is already enough data collected here to make further inroads into this area of investigation. If this was to be streamlined further more concrete suggestions for teacherlearners may emerge. That focus would ideally be solely on the specific, developmental, autonomous practices of teachers rather than providing the contextual reasons for this or the barriers to action. It might further explore the transition towards a capacity to selfdirect ones learning as a teacher. teachers learn ICT tools. Or it could be solely about the specific way those
This is from a #ELTchat summary dated 2 May 2012 - http://eltchat.com/2012/05/06/introducing-cpd-todinosaurs-eltchat-summary-02052012/ and also posted on a blog by Andrea Wade - http://worldteacherandrea.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/introducing-cpd-to-dinosaurs-eltchat.html ii http://www.berlitz.ch/en/learning_a_language/berlitz_online/eberlitz_self_study/ iii A video by David White presenting this idea is available at: http://tallblog.conted.ox.ac.uk/index.php/2009/10/14/visitors-residents-the-video/ iv http://teacherphilisictinelt.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/ict-in-elt-ma-dissertation-1.html v http://www.wiziq.com/online-class/870707-what-ict-tools-do-efl-teachers-use-and-how-did-you-learn-them vi http://www.teachertrainingvideos.com/. The newsletter is sent out monthly to a list of over 9,000 email addresses. My request was included in the June 2012 edition. vii http://teacherphilisurvey.wikispaces.com/ viii http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/languagecentre/ ix http://www.blackboard.com/platforms/collaborate/overview.aspx x http://voipcallrecording.com/ xi Each of the interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes, which began after the audio wizard had been set up and a good connection established. A couple ran onto around 45 minutes but this allowed for extended discussions and questions to me about my research. Main body word count: 16,533 118 (notes) = 16,415
55
I/D: 1163612
BIBLIOGRAPHY Albrini, A. 2004. Teachers attitudes toward information and communication technologies: the case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers and Education. 47: 373-398. Aoki, N. 2000. Aspects of teacher autonomy: Capacity, freedom and responsibility. Paper presented at 2000 Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Language Centre Conference. In Smith, R. 2003. Bailey, K., Curtis, A. and Nunan, D. 2001. Pursuing professional development: the self as source. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Barfield, A., Ashwell, T., Carroll, M., Collins, K., Cowie, N., Critchley, E., Head, M., Obermeier, A and Robertson, M.C. 2001. Exploring and Defining Teacher Autonomy: A Collaborative Discussion. In Developing Autonomy, Proceedings of the College and University Educators 2001 Conference, Shizuoka. The Japan Association for Language Teaching. Available at: http://www.encounters.jp/mike/professional/publications/tchauto.html. Accessed 2 May 2012. Bax, S. 2003. CALL Past, present and future. System 31/1: 13-28. Beatty, K. 2011. Teaching and Researching Computer-assisted Language Learning (2nd edition). Harlow: Pearson Education. Becker, H.J and Riel, M. 2000. Teacher Professional Engagement and Constuctivistcompatible Computer Use. Centre for Research on Information Technology and Organisations, University of California, Irvine. Bennett, S., Maton, K and Kervin, L. 2008. The digital natives debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Education Technology. 39/5: 775-786. Benson, P. 2000. Autonomy as a learners and teachers right. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath and T. Lamb (eds.) Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. London: Longman. 111-117. Benson, P. 2007. Autonomy in language teaching and learning State-of-the-art article. Language Teaching 40:21-40. Chambers , A and Bax, S. 2006. Making CALL work: Towards normalisation. System, 34/4: 465-479. Cox, M., Preston, C and Cox, K. 1999. What Factors Support or Prevent Teachers from Using ICT in their Classrooms? Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Sussex, Brighton, November. Drnyei, Z. 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56
I/D: 1163612
Dudeney, G., 2011. No place in class for digital illiteracies. The Guardian. 6 December. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/dec/06/teaching-digital-literacy. Accessed 15 July 2012. Dudeney, G., Hockly, N and Pegrum, M. 2012. Digital Literacies. Unpublished manuscript. Friedman, A and Phillips, M. 2004. Continuing professional development: Developing a vision. Journal of Education and Work. 17/3: 361-376. Grandon Gill, T. Quick and Dirty Multimedia. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education. Available at: http://grandon.com/publications/Gill-2007-QuickAndDirty.pdf. Accessed 17 March 2012. Granger, C.A., Morbey, M.L., Lotherington, R.D., Owston and Wideman, H.H. 2002. Factors contributing to teachers successful implementation of IT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. Vol 18: 480-488. Gromik, N. 2007. Video tutorials: Camtasia in the ELT classroom. The JALT CALL Journal, 2007, 3/1-2: 132-140. Hampel, R. and Stickler, U. 2005. New Skills for New Classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online. Computer Assisted Language Learning 18/4: 311-326. Hartree, A. 1984. Malcolm Knowles Theory of Andragogy: A Critique. International Journal of Lifelong Learning Education. 3/3: 203-120. Hismanoglu, M. 2012. The impact of a curricular innovation of prospective EFL teachers attitudes towards ICT integration into language instruction. International Journal of Instruction. 5/1: 183-202. Hismanoglu, M. 2012. Prospective EFL Teachers' Perceptions of ICT Integration: A Study of Distance Higher Education in Turkey. Educational Technology & Society. 15/1: 185196. Hu, Z. 2009. EFL Teacher Development in the Context of ICT Use in Chinese Higher Education. Available at: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/shared/shared_edu/pdfs/pgr_pdfs/Hu.pdf. Accessed 18 June 2012. Hu, Z and McGrath, I. 2011. Innovation in higher education in China: are teachers ready to integrate ICT in English Language Teaching? Technology, Pedagogy and Education. Vol 20/1: 41-59. Jimoyiannis, Athanassios and Vassilis Komis. 2007. Examining teachers beliefs about ICT in education: implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development. Vol 11/2: 149-173.
57
I/D: 1163612
Kelm, O. 1996. The application of computer networking in foreign language education: Focusing on principles of second language acquisition in Warschauer, M. (ed.) Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawaii Symposium: 1929: Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawaii. Kern, R. 1995. Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal. 79/4: 457-476. Lam, Y. 2000. Technophilia vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why Second-Language Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology In Their Classrooms. The Canadian modern language review / La revue canadienne des langues vivantes. Vol 56/3: 389-420. Lamb, T. 2000. Finding a voice: Learner autonomy and teacher education in an urban context. In Sinclar, B., McGrath, I and Lamb T (eds.) Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. London: Longman. 118-127. Lamb, T., and Reinders, H. (eds) 2007. Learner and Teacher Autonomy: Concepts, Realities and Responses. Amsterdam. John Benjamins. Levy M. 1997. CALL: context and conceptualisation, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Levy M. 2009. Technologies in Use for Second Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal. 93: 769-782. Li, L and Walsh, S. 2011. Technology uptake in Chinese EFL classes. Language Teaching Research. 15/1: 99-125. Little, D. 1991. Learner Autonomy 1: definitions, issues, and problems. Dublin: Authentik. Little, D. 1995. Learning as Dialogue: the dependence of learner autonomy on teacher autonomy. System 23: 175181. Mann, S. 2005. The language teachers development: State-of-the-Art Article. Language Teaching. 38: 103-118. Markgraf, J. 2006. From Learning Communities to Learning Objects. Journal of Library Administration. 45/3-4: 559-559. McGrath, I. 2000. Teacher Autonomy. In Sinclair B,. McGrath, I and Lamb, T (eds). Learner Autonomy, Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions. Harlow: Longman. Mumtaz, S. 2000. Factors affecting teachers use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education. 9/3: 319-342. Mullen, T., Appel, C and Shanklin, T. 2009. Skype-based tandem language learning and web 2.0 in Thomas M. (Ed). Handbook of research on Web 2.0 and second language learning. 101-118. Hershey, PA: Igi Global.
58
I/D: 1163612
Oblinger, D and Oblinger, J. 2005. Is it age or IT? First steps towards understanding the net generation in Oblinger, D and Oblinger, J. (Eds). Educating the Net generation: 2.1-2.20. Available at: http://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/educating-netgeneration. Accessed 5 July 2012. Pegrum, M. 2009. From Blogs to Bombs: The Future of Digital Technologies in Education. Crawley, WA: UWA Publishing. Perkins, R. and McKnight, M. 2005. Teachers Attitudes Toward WebQuests as a Method of Teaching. Computers in the Schools. 22/1-2: 123-133. Prensky, M. 2001. Digital natives, digital immigrants. On The Horizon 9/5. MCB University Press. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/ypgvf. Accessed 5 July 2012. Price, J.B. 2010. Screencasting on a Shoestring: Using Jing. The Reference Librarian. 51/3: 237-244. Richards, K. 2003. Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Robertson, S. I., Calder, J., Fung, P., Jones, A., OShea, T. & Lambrechts, G. 1996. Pupils, Teachers and Palmtop Computers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 12: 194-204. Rogers, E.M. 1995. Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Romeo, G. and Walker, I. 2002. Activity theory to investigate the implementation of ICTE. Education and Information Technologies. 7: 323-332. Salam, A.L.G. and Sert, S. 2012. Perceptions of In-Service Teachers Regarding Technology Integrated English Language Teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry. 3/3: 113. Available at: http://www.tojqi.net/articles/TOJQI_3_3/TOJQI_3_3_Article_1.pdf. Accessed 28 July 2012. Schwienhorst, K. 1999. Teacher autonomy in multiple-user domains: supporting language teaching in collaborative virtual environments. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education. 8/2: 199-214. Sheingold, K. & Hadley, M. 1990. Accomplished Teachers: integrating computers into classroom practice. New York: Centre for Technology in Education. Smith, R.C. 2003. Teacher education for teacher-learner autonomy in Symposium for Language Teacher Educators: Papers from three IALS symposia (CD-Rom), J Gollin, G Ferguson and H Trappes-Loman (Eds.) Edinburgh. IALS. University of Edinburgh. Also available at: www.warwick.ac.uk/~elsdr/Teacher-autonomy.pdf Accessed 7 May 2012. Smith, R.C. and Erdoan, S. 2008. Teacher-Learner Autonomy in Lamb, T., and Reinders, H. (eds). Learner and Teacher Autonomy: Concepts, Realities and Responses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 83-102. Sparks, D. 2002. Sparks, D. (2002). Designing powerful staff development for teachers and principals. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council. Available at:
59
I/D: 1163612
http://www.learningforward.org/news/sparksbook/sparksbook.pdf. Accessed: 17 June 2012. Sykes, J. 2005. Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal. 22: 399-431. Tapscott, D. 1998. Growing up digital: the rise of the Net generation. New York: McGrawHill. Teo, T., Chai, C.S., Hung, D and Lee, C.B. 2008. Beliefs about teaching and uses of technology amongst pre-service teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. 36/2: 163-174. Tonduer, J., van Braak, J and Valcke, M. 2007. Curricula and the use of ICT in education: Two worlds apart? British Journal of Educational Technology. 38/6: 962-976 Tort-Moloney, D. 1997 Teacher Autonomy: a Vygotskian theoretical framework. CLCS Occasional Paper No. 48. Dublin: Trinity College, CLCS. Veen, W. 1993. How Teachers Use Computers in Instructional Practice: four case studies in a Dutch secondary school. Computers and Education, 21(1/2): 1-8. Wade, A. 2012. Summary of #ELTchat Introducing CPD to Dinosaurs. Available at: http://eltchat.com/2012/05/06/introducing-cpd-to-dinosaurs-eltchat-summary-02052012/. Accessed 6 May 2012. Wales, T and Robertson, P. 2008. Captivating Open University students with online literature search tutorials created using screen capture software. Program. 42/4: 365381. Warschauer, M, 1997. Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice. The Modern Language Journal. 81/4: 470-481. Warschauer, M. 2002. A Developmental Perspective on Technology in Language Education. TESOL Quarterly. 36/3: 453-474. Warschauer, M and Meskill, C. 2000. Technology and second language learning in Rosenthal, J. (Ed.) Handbook of undergraduate second language education. 303-318. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Available at: http://www.gse.uci.edu/person/warschauer_m/tslt.html. Accessed 12 June 2012. White, D. 2008. Not natives and immigrants but visitors and residents. TALL blog. Available at: http://tallblog.conted.ox.ac.uk/index.php/2008/07/23/not-native-i mmigrantsbut-visitors-residents/. Accessed 13 June 2012. White, D and Le Cornu, A. 2011. Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday. 16/9. Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049. Accessed 13 June 2012.
60
I/D: 1163612
Ying Xue Zhong and Hui Zhong Shen. 2002. Where is the technology-induced pedagogy? Snapshots from two multimedia EFL classrooms. British Journal of Educational Technology. 33/1: 39-52.
Tools used for advertising and carrying out data collection: Blackboard Collaborate 12 http://www.blackboard.com/platforms/collaborate/overview.aspx Blogger http://teacherphilisictinelt.blogspot.co.uk/ Skype - http://www.skype.com/ Survey Monkey - http://www.surveymonkey.com/ Teacher Training Videos - http://www.teachertrainingvideos.com/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/teacherphili WiZIQ - www.wiziq.com
61
APPENDIX A
Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

'Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT'
Welcome.MynameisPhilLongwell.IamastudentattheUniversityofWarwick,UK.Youarebeinginvitedtotake partinaresearchstudyformydissertationinMAELT(ICT&Multimedia).Thetitleoftheresearchpaperis: 'TechnophiliaorTechnophobia:ExploringteacherautonomyinlearningICTtoolsfortheELTclassroom.' Thetitleofthissurveyis:'TaxonomyofEnglishLanguageTeachers'useofICT' Youshouldonlycompletethesurveyifyouhavebeenrecentlyteaching,arecurrentlyteachingorwillbeteaching EnglishasaForeignLanguageinthenearfuture.ByEFL,thisincludesotherdefinitionsandvariationsonthis,such asEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages(ESOL).PleasedonotcompleteifyouhaveNOexperienceatallof teachingEFL.Iamresearchinggeneralteachers. Thesurveyconsistsof20mixedtypequestions,withoptionalcommentboxes.Mostquestionsrequireananswer. Someoftheseareoptional.Itshouldtakeapprox.2025minutestocomplete. ThedatawillbecollectedonlyaspartofmyresearchforanMAdissertationasindicatedabove.Quotesfromopen endedquestionsmaybeusedanonomously.Thedatawillbecollectedandstoredonlinebutwillonlybeavailableto theresearcher. Itisadvisedtocompletethesurveyinonesitting.Thereisanoptiontoreturntopreviousquestionsonprevious pagesinthesurvey,butoncethesurveyhasbeencompletedorexitedtherespondentwillnotbeabletoreenterthe survey.However,anewonecanbecompletedandmorethanoneresponsecanbemadefromthesamedevice(e.g. laptop). Unfortunatelynopaymentcanbemadeforparticipationinthesurvey. Ifyoufindthisinterestingandwouldliketoparticipatefurtherwithmystudy,suchastakingpartinafollowup interview,pleaseleaveyourcontactdetailsonthefinalpage. Attheendofthesurveyyouwillbeabletolookatalltheresultssofar.Pleasedonotcompleteforasecondtimeas thiswillaffecttheresults. Ifyouarehappytocontinuepleaseclicknext:
Page 1
APPENDIX A

General Information
*1. What is your gender?

j k l m n Female j k l m n Male

*2. Which category below includes your age?

j k l m n 20oryounger j k l m n 2129 j k l m n 3039 j k l m n 4049 j k l m n 5059

j k l m n 60orolder
yet to teach English as a second or foreign language please state 'none'.

5 6
*3. In which country do you currently teach or have you recently taught? If you have
*4. What is your first (or native) language?

5 6
Page 2
APPENDIX A

More specific questions
worked in the area of English language teaching ?

j k l m n noneatall

*5. How many years have you been teaching English as a second/foreign language or
j k l m n lessthan1year j k l m n 13years j k l m n 45years

j k l m n 610years
j k l m n 1120years
j k l m n morethan20years
you.
*6. What is your current employment status? Choose the answer which best suits
j k l m n Employed

j k l m n Selfemployed j k l m n Freelance
j k l m n FulltimeStudent/NotEmployed
Otherpleaseselfdescribe
technology) or a 'Technophobe' (having a fear or dislike of technology), or are you somewhere in between these? Choose one answer only or selfdescribe yourself in the box.
1(Technophobe) Whatisyourrelationship withtechnology? Ordescribeyourselfinrelationtousingtechnology: 2 3 4 5(Technophile)
*7. Would you describe yourself as either a 'Technophile' (having a strong love for
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
Page 3
APPENDIX A

8. What are you currently doing in respect of professional development in ICT and technology? If other, please specify below. Tick all those that apply. If nothing, please state 'nothing'. (optional)
c d e f g Attendingafacetofacecourse c d e f g Takingaonlinecourse

c d e f g Followingbloggers/readingblogs c d e f g Writingownblog
c d e f g Engagingwithanonlinecommunity c d e f g Attendingconferences c d e f g Voluntaryselfstudy

c d e f g Readinggeneralsources
Othermethodpleasespecify
during the class, for preparation or for feedback?

Never NetworkedComputer Laptopornonnetworked Computer iPad(orothertablet) SmartPhone SmartBoard InteractiveWhiteboard Video/Cameraequipment EPodium(multifunctional networkedcomputer) Ononeoccasion
*9. How often does the following technology get used in your teaching (this includes
Sometimes Frequently Always(Everyday)
j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n
OtherTechnologyoradditionalcommentspleasespecifytypeandstatefrequency
5 6
Page 4
APPENDIX A

Please specify names/websites if possible in the box below. If you use none at all, please state 'none' in the box below.
Never MaterialscreationTools (egWordle,Quizlet,Hot Potatoes) VoiceRecordingTools(eg Vocaroo,Voxopop) AudioEditingTools(eg Audacity) PodcastingTools(egPod omatic) PresentationTools(eg Slideshare,PresentMe) SocialNetworkingTools (egTwitter) WebinarTools(egAdobe Connect,WiZIQ) Photo/Image/Slideshow Sites(egFlickr,Bubblr) VideosharingSites(eg YouTube,Vimeo,TED) Screencapturesoftware (egJing) Screencastingsoftware(eg ScreenR) Online bookmarking/notetaking (egEvernote) Creativetoolsforstudents (egGoAnimate) Integrationtools(eg Edmodo,Wikis) Toolsforautonomous learners(egEnglish Central) OtherICT/WebToolspleasespecifytypeornameandstatefrequency Ononeoccasion Sometimes Frequently
*10. How often do you use or have you used the following kinds of ICT/Web Tools?
Always(everyday)
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n
5 6
Page 5
APPENDIX A

11. How do you learn about (discover) new ICT/Web Tools? Tick all those that apply to you. (optional)
c d e f g Selfdiscovery

c d e f g Colleaguerecommendation
c d e f g Institutionalrecommendation c d e f g Fromaprintedpublication
c d e f g Fromablogwhichyoufollow c d e f g Onlinecommunity/group c d e f g Onlinecourse c d e f g Newsletter

c d e f g FacetofaceConferences c d e f g VirtualConferences
c d e f g Website(viaanRSSFeed)
c d e f g ViaTwitter(orothersocialnetworktool)
Otherpleasespecify
5 6
you have no opinion on this, please state 'no opinion' in the box below.
Notimportantatall Engaging Motivating Easytouse(foryou) Easytouse(bystudents) Free Institutionhassubscription toit Easytoaccess Relevanttolanguage skills Pedagogicallyjustified Notimportant Noopinion/Notsure Important
*12. How important are or would be the following when selecting a ICT/Web Tool? If
Veryimportant
j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n
Otherreasonpleasespecifyandstateimportance
5 6
Page 6
APPENDIX A

13. How do you or would you assess the success or effectiveness of a particular ICT/Web Tool? (optional)
5 6
Page 7
APPENDIX A

Further and final questions
learning about ICT/Web Tools?

Never Irelyonotherstoshowme whattodo Itrytolearnaboutfirst thenaskforhelpifneeded Iuseateachertraining videosite Iliketoinvestigatewhat theydobymyself IteachmyselfeverythingI needtoknow Ilearnbyusingand practisingwithit Ifullylearnaboutatool andthenteachittoothers Othermethodorcomment?
*14. How autonomous are you? How frequently do you do the following in respect of
Occasionally Sometimes Frequently Everytime
j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n j k l m n
5 6
respect of your teaching practice. Tick all that apply for you. If 'none at all' please state so in the box.
c d e f g Personaldislike

*15. What are the barriers to learning about and then implementing ICT/Web Tools in
c d e f g Institutionalresistance
c d e f g Reliability(techbreakingdown) c d e f g Norelevancetolanguageskills c d e f g Timeconsumingtolearnthem
c d e f g Notworthinvestment(intime/effort) c d e f g Lackoftraining/support
c d e f g Financialcostinvolved(purchasing/maintaining) c d e f g Notenoughpedagogicalvalue c d e f g Lackoftechnologyavailable

Otherreasonpleasespecify
5 6
Page 8
APPENDIX A

technology and ICT? If N/A (eg you are selfemployed, freelance) please tick N/A.
N/A Myemployer/instutition providessupportand/or training Myemployer/instutition paysfortraining Myemployer/instutition encouragesPDbutdoesn't offertraining Myemployer/institution offersPDbutnotinthis area Myemployer/instutition offersnoPDatallinthis area Ihavereceivedsupport and/ortraininginpastand nowtrainothers Iamselftaughton everythinginthisarea IamnotemployedbutI stillreceivetrainingor support Never Ononeoccasion Sometimes Frequently
*16. How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of
Always(Everyday)
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
j k l m n j k l m n
you are selfemployed, freelance) please tick N/A.

N/A Myemployer/institution shouldprovidetraining Ishouldtakeresponsibility myselffortraining Thereshouldbeanequal amountofexternal trainingandselftraining Stronglydisagree
*17. What is your opinion on the following in relation to technology and ICT? If N/A (eg
Disagree Notsure Agree Stronglyagree
18. Do you receive any other kinds of support, training or professional development in the area of technology/ICT. If 'yes' please specify from where? (optional)
j k l m n Yes j k l m n No

If'yes'pleasespecify:
Page 9
APPENDIX A

Thank you!
YouhavecompletedthemainsurveyandIamverygratefulforyourparticipation.
19. Do you have any other comments about this survey that you would like to include? (optional)
5 6
20. If you would like to participate further in this study, such as taking part in an online interview (webinar) about the topic, or would be interested in the findings, please leave your contact details below, such as an email address. (optional) You can contact me on philiplongwell@gmail.com.
5 6
Page 10
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B - NOTE: BLANK PAGES HAVE BEEN REMOVED
1. What is your gender?

Response Percent Female Male 67.9% 32.1% answered question skipped question Response Count 72 34 106 0
2. Which category below includes your age?

Response Percent 20 or younger 21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older 0.0% 14.2% 37.7% 28.3% 18.9% 0.9% answered question skipped question Response Count 0 15 40 30 20 1 106 0
APPENDIX B
1 of 43
3. In which country do you currently teach or have you recently taught? If you have yet to teach English as a second or foreign language please state 'none'.
Response Count 106 answered question skipped question 106 0
4. What is your first (or native) language?

5. How many years have you been teaching English as a second/foreign language or worked in the area of English language teaching ?
Response Percent none at all less than 1 year 1-3 years 4-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years more than 20 years 0.0% 2.0% 10.2% 10.2% 18.4% 35.7% 23.5% answered question skipped question Response Count 0 2 10 10 18 35 23 98 8
APPENDIX B
2 of 43
6. What is your current employment status? Choose the answer which best suits you.
Response Percent Employed Self-employed Freelance Full-time Student/Not Employed 71.4% 11.2% 9.2% 8.2% Other - please self-describe Response Count 70 11 9 8
answered question skipped question
98 8
7. Would you describe yourself as either a 'Technophile' (having a strong love for technology) or a 'Technophobe' (having a fear or dislike of technology), or are you somewhere in between these? Choose one answer only or self-describe yourself in the box.
1 (Technophobe) What is your relationship with technology? 5 (Technophile) Response Count
3.1% (3)
5.1% (5)
17.3% (17)
34.7% (34)
39.8% (39)
98
Or describe yourself in relation to using technology:
98 8
APPENDIX B
3 of 43
8. What are you currently doing in respect of professional development in ICT and technology? If other, please specify below. Tick all those that apply. If nothing, please state 'nothing'. (optional)
Response Percent Attending a face-to-face course Taking a online course Following bloggers/reading blogs Writing own blog Engaging with an online community Attending conferences Voluntary self-study Reading general sources 14.7% 32.6% Response Count 14 31
76.8%
73
41.1% 69.5% 61.1% 63.2% 68.4% Other method - please specify
39 66 58 60 65
20
95 11
APPENDIX B
4 of 43
9. How often does the following technology get used in your teaching (this includes during the class, for preparation or for feedback?
Always Sometimes Frequently (Every day) 17.9% (17) 23.2% (22) 11.5% (11) 23.4% (22) 10.3% (10) 24.2% (23) 43.8% (42) 29.5% (28) 25.3% (24) 7.3% (7) 12.8% (12) 11.3% (11) 17.9% (17) 21.9% (21) 42.1% (40) 43.2% (41) 10.4% (10) 9.6% (9) 8.2% (8) 10.5% (10) 3.1% (3)
Never
On one occasion
Response Count
Networked Computer Laptop or non-networked Computer iPad (or other tablet) Smart Phone Smart Board Interactive Whiteboard Video/Camera equipment E-Podium (multifunctional networked computer)
10.5% (10) 8.4% (8) 61.5% (59) 48.9% (46) 68.0% (66) 42.1% (40) 21.9% (21)
0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 9.4% (9) 5.3% (5) 2.1% (2) 5.3% (5) 9.4% (9)
95 95 96 94 97 95 96
81.5% (75)
6.5% (6)
7.6% (7)
3.3% (3)
1.1% (1)
92
Other Technology or additional comments - please specify type and state frequency
15
98 8
APPENDIX B
5 of 43
10. How often do you use or have you used the following kinds of ICT/Web Tools? Please specify names/websites if possible in the box below. If you use none at all, please state 'none' in the box below.
Always Sometimes Frequently (every day)
Never
On one occasion
Response Count
Materials creation Tools (eg Wordle, Quizlet, Hot Potatoes) Voice Recording Tools (eg Vocaroo, Voxopop) Audio Editing Tools (eg Audacity) Podcasting Tools (eg Pod-o-matic) Presentation Tools (eg Slideshare, Present Me) Social Networking Tools (eg Twitter) Webinar Tools (eg Adobe Connect, WiZIQ) Photo/Image/Slideshow Sites (eg Flickr, Bubblr) Video sharing Sites (eg YouTube, Vimeo, TED) Screencapture software (eg Jing) Screencasting software (eg ScreenR) Online bookmarking/notetaking (eg Evernote) Creative tools for students (eg GoAnimate) Integration tools (eg Edmodo, Wikis) Tools for autonomous learners (eg English Central)
16.5% (15)
12.1% (11)
31.9% (29)
36.3% (33)
3.3% (3)
91
33.3% (30)
13.3% (12)
22.2% (20)
26.7% (24)
4.4% (4)
90
30.0% (27) 55.6% (50)
15.6% (14) 11.1% (10)
27.8% (25) 21.1% (19)
25.6% (23) 10.0% (9)
1.1% (1) 2.2% (2)
90 90
19.1% (18)
4.3% (4)
34.0% (32)
35.1% (33)
7.4% (7)
94
19.4% (18)
6.5% (6)
16.1% (15)
23.7% (22)
34.4% (32)
93
32.2% (29)
10.0% (9)
31.1% (28)
23.3% (21)
3.3% (3)
90
19.6% (18)
14.1% (13)
25.0% (23)
31.5% (29)
9.8% (9)
92
6.5% (6)
3.2% (3)
16.1% (15)
57.0% (53)
17.2% (16)
93
32.2% (29)
11.1% (10)
24.4% (22)
27.8% (25)
4.4% (4)
90
66.7% (60)
6.7% (6)
13.3% (12)
11.1% (10)
2.2% (2)
90
33.3% (29)
8.0% (7)
21.8% (19)
23.0% (20)
13.8% (12)
87
47.8% (43)
11.1% (10)
20.0% (18)
21.1% (19)
0.0% (0)
90
29.0% (27)
10.8% (10)
20.4% (19)
21.5% (20)
18.3% (17)
93
47.8% (43)
6.7% (6)
27.8% (25)
13.3% (12)
4.4% (4)
90
Other ICT/Web Tools - please specify type or name and state frequency
25
APPENDIX B
6 of 43
answered question
98
skipped question
11. How do you learn about (discover) new ICT/Web Tools? Tick all those that apply to you. (optional)
Response Percent Self-discovery Colleague recommendation Institutional recommendation From a printed publication From a blog which you follow Online community/group Online course Newsletter Face-to-face Conferences Virtual Conferences Website (via an RSS Feed) Via Twitter (or other social-network tool) 82.3% 67.7% 20.8% 18.8% 67.7% 70.8% 30.2% 45.8% 31.3% 42.7% 37.5% Response Count 79 65 20 18 65 68 29 44 30 41 36
59.4%
57
Other - please specify
96 10
APPENDIX B
7 of 43
12. How important are or would be the following when selecting a ICT/Web Tool? If you have no opinion on this, please state 'no opinion' in the box below.
Not important at all Engaging Motivating Easy to use (for you) Easy to use (by students) Free Institution has subscription to it Easy to access Relevant to language skills Pedagogically justified 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 15.1% (14) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) No opinion/Not sure 3.2% (3) 2.1% (2) 4.2% (4) 1.0% (1) 9.4% (9) 25.8% (24) 1.0% (1) 4.2% (4) 8.5% (8) 53.7% (51) 48.4% (46) 37.5% (36) 33.3% (32) 28.1% (27) 28.0% (26) 40.2% (39) 32.3% (31) 35.1% (33) Important
Not important
Very important
Response Count
0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 8.3% (8) 1.0% (1) 3.1% (3) 12.9% (12) 1.0% (1) 1.0% (1) 0.0% (0)
43.2% (41) 49.5% (47) 50.0% (48) 64.6% (62) 59.4% (57) 18.3% (17) 57.7% (56) 62.5% (60) 56.4% (53)
95 95 96 96 96 93 97 96 94
Other reason - please specify and state importance
98 8
13. How do you or would you assess the success or effectiveness of a particular ICT/Web Tool? (optional)
APPENDIX B
8 of 43
14. How autonomous are you? How frequently do you do the following in respect of learning about ICT/Web Tools?
Every time Response Count
Never
Occasionally
Sometimes
Frequently
I rely on others to show me what to do I try to learn about first then ask for help if needed I use a teacher training video site I like to investigate what they do by myself I teach myself everything I need to know I learn by using and practising with it I fully learn about a tool and then teach it to others
21.1% (19)
40.0% (36)
24.4% (22)
13.3% (12)
1.1% (1)
90
3.3% (3)
5.4% (5)
13.0% (12)
42.4% (39)
35.9% (33) 6.6% (6) 34.8% (32) 14.1% (13) 38.0% (35) 25.0% (23)
92
20.9% (19)
14.3% (13)
35.2% (32)
23.1% (21)
91
1.1% (1)
5.4% (5)
18.5% (17)
40.2% (37)
92
3.3% (3)
16.3% (15)
22.8% (21)
43.5% (40)
92
0.0% (0)
2.2% (2)
10.9% (10)
48.9% (45)
92
9.8% (9)
9.8% (9)
23.9% (22)
31.5% (29)
92
Other method or comment?
92 14
APPENDIX B
9 of 43
15. What are the barriers to learning about and then implementing ICT/Web Tools in respect of your teaching practice. Tick all that apply for you. If 'none at all' please state so in the box.
Response Percent Personal dislike Institutional resistance Reliability (tech breaking down) No relevance to language skills Time consuming to learn them Not worth investment (in time/effort) Lack of training/support Financial cost involved (purchasing/maintaining) Not enough pedagogical value Lack of technology available 26.1% 43.5% 59.8% 39.1% 47.8% Response Count 24 40 55 36 44
27.2%
25
40.2%
37
65.2%
60
31.5% 45.7% Other reason - please specify
29 42
11
92 14
APPENDIX B
10 of 43
16. How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? If N/A (eg you are self-employed, freelance) please tick N/A.
Always Sometimes Frequently (Every day) 2.2% (2) 2.2% (2) 4.5% (4) 2.3% (2) 7.1% (6) 4.5% (4) 28.1% (25) 3.6% (3)
N/A
Never
On one occasion
Response Count
My employer/instutition provides support and/or training My employer/instutition pays for training My employer/instutition encourages PD but doesn't offer training My employer/institution offers PD but not in this area My employer/instutition offers no PD at all in this area I have received support and/or training in past and now train others I am self-taught on everything in this area I am not employed but I still receive training or support
15.6% (14) 18.7% (17) 27.3% (24) 29.1% (25) 42.4% (36) 20.2% (18) 9.0% (8) 78.6% (66)
28.9% (26) 51.6% (47) 28.4% (25) 31.4% (27) 32.9% (28) 32.6% (29) 5.6% (5) 10.7% (9)
21.1% (19) 11.0% (10)
20.0% (18)
12.2% (11)
90
12.1% (11)
4.4% (4)
91
8.0% (7)
19.3% (17)
12.5% (11)
88
11.6% (10)
15.1% (13)
10.5% (9)
86
7.1% (6)
5.9% (5)
4.7% (4)
85
12.4% (11)
16.9% (15)
13.5% (12)
89
6.7% (6)
14.6% (13)
36.0% (32)
89
1.2% (1)
3.6% (3)
2.4% (2)
84
92 14
APPENDIX B
11 of 43
17. What is your opinion on the following in relation to technology and ICT? If N/A (eg you are self-employed, freelance) please tick N/A.
Strongly disagree Not sure Strongly agree 34.8% (31) 31.1% (28) 29.7% (27) Response Count
N/A
Disagree
Agree
My employer/institution should provide training I should take responsibility myself for training There should be an equal amount of external training and self-training
16.9% (15) 11.1% (10) 13.2% (12)
0.0% (0)
1.1% (1)
6.7% (6)
40.4% (36) 51.1% (46) 37.4% (34)
89
0.0% (0)
3.3% (3)
3.3% (3)
90
1.1% (1)
6.6% (6)
12.1% (11)
91
92 14
18. Do you receive any other kinds of support, training or professional development in the area of technology/ICT. If 'yes' please specify from where? (optional)
Response Percent Yes No 20.9% 79.1% If 'yes' please specify: Response Count 18 68
17
86 20
19. Do you have any other comments about this survey that you would like to include? (optional)
APPENDIX B
12 of 43
20. If you would like to participate further in this study, such as taking part in an online interview (webinar) about the topic, or would be interested in the findings, please leave your contact details below, such as an email address. (optional) You can contact me on philiplongwell@gmail.com.
APPENDIX B
13 of 43
Page 2, Q3. In which country do you currently teach or have you recently taught? If you have yet to teach English as a second or foreign language please state 'none'.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey China Ethiopia Middle East Cameroon Oman Australia Scotland UK Japan Argentina Portugal Tanzania Greece England Chile in Southamerica Greece Australia argentina UK Republic of Macedonia none Argentina Ukraine Mexico
Jul 7, 2012 6:54 AM Jul 6, 2012 10:17 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:30 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:22 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:02 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:16 AM Jul 5, 2012 3:32 PM Jul 4, 2012 7:58 PM Jul 3, 2012 3:50 PM Jul 3, 2012 10:17 AM Jul 3, 2012 6:50 AM Jul 2, 2012 7:11 PM Jul 2, 2012 6:24 PM Jul 1, 2012 6:56 AM Jun 29, 2012 10:36 PM Jun 28, 2012 10:46 AM Jun 28, 2012 8:03 AM Jun 28, 2012 7:16 AM Jun 28, 2012 7:12 AM Jun 28, 2012 6:14 AM Jun 28, 2012 5:45 AM Jun 28, 2012 3:42 AM Jun 28, 2012 1:42 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:16 PM Jun 27, 2012 8:11 PM Jun 27, 2012 6:02 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:26 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:08 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:57 PM
APPENDIX B
15 of 43
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58
India, Libya Ireland Italy England At present, I am teaching English here in Yangon, Myanmar. Mxico Poland Indonesia and Thailand. Ireland Croatia China Argentinia Japan Germany Vietnam UK Spain Belgium Qatar UK Italy Oman Switzerland Japan I have taught English as a foreign language for 8 years in Iran. and now in sweden I am teaching English (as a second language) and Swedish. Turkey Netherlands UK France
Jun 27, 2012 3:55 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:29 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:27 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:20 PM Jun 27, 2012 2:14 PM Jun 27, 2012 1:16 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:43 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:08 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:23 AM Jun 27, 2012 11:08 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:58 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:43 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:41 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:29 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:59 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:39 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:24 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:21 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:17 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:05 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:00 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:57 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:42 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:42 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:41 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:30 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:04 PM Jun 26, 2012 3:37 PM
APPENDIX B
16 of 43
59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87
Indonesia Spain Portugal Spain UK Russia Slovakia Thailand, China Spain USA, South Korea, virtual (online: LEWWP: Learn English With a Worldwide Perspective) mx Portugal and Spain Greece/Uk Greece- none. Greece Venezuela none Greece Uruguay Greece Latvia South Korea United Kingdom Venezuela Turkey Romania Germany German England Japan Saudi Arabia
Jun 26, 2012 2:10 PM Jun 26, 2012 12:32 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 26, 2012 8:38 AM Jun 25, 2012 8:18 PM Jun 25, 2012 2:42 PM Jun 25, 2012 1:55 PM Jun 25, 2012 11:49 AM Jun 25, 2012 9:13 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:35 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:46 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:22 PM Jun 24, 2012 8:32 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:55 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:49 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:43 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:42 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:37 PM Jun 24, 2012 4:29 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:20 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:17 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:15 PM Jun 24, 2012 2:16 PM Jun 24, 2012 12:53 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:52 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:07 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:02 AM
APPENDIX B
17 of 43
88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106
Syria Greece Australia Uk Canada Qatar China Canada Channel islands France Nepal UK Romania Currently I teach in Armenia, before this I taught in Kazakhstan Spain Spain Vietnam Ukraine Turkey
Jun 24, 2012 10:41 AM Jun 24, 2012 9:28 AM Jun 24, 2012 8:23 AM Jun 23, 2012 5:17 PM Jun 23, 2012 4:29 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:57 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:47 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:37 PM Jun 23, 2012 2:30 PM Jun 23, 2012 1:23 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:58 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:13 PM Jun 23, 2012 11:12 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:46 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:43 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:20 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:13 AM Jun 22, 2012 9:58 PM Jun 22, 2012 6:36 PM
APPENDIX B
18 of 43
Page 2, Q4. What is your first (or native) language?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
English English Turkish Turkish Turkish English Amharic English Lamnso Arabic English English English English Spanish Portuguese Pogoro Bilingual: Greek, English English Spanish Greek English spanish English Macedonian Turkish Spanish Russian Spanish Telugu
Jul 7, 2012 6:54 AM Jul 6, 2012 10:17 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:30 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:22 AM Jul 6, 2012 6:02 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:16 AM Jul 5, 2012 3:32 PM Jul 4, 2012 7:58 PM Jul 3, 2012 3:50 PM Jul 3, 2012 10:17 AM Jul 3, 2012 6:50 AM Jul 2, 2012 7:11 PM Jul 2, 2012 6:24 PM Jul 1, 2012 6:56 AM Jun 29, 2012 10:36 PM Jun 28, 2012 10:46 AM Jun 28, 2012 8:03 AM Jun 28, 2012 7:16 AM Jun 28, 2012 7:12 AM Jun 28, 2012 6:14 AM Jun 28, 2012 5:45 AM Jun 28, 2012 3:42 AM Jun 28, 2012 1:42 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:16 PM Jun 27, 2012 8:11 PM Jun 27, 2012 6:02 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:26 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:08 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:57 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:55 PM
APPENDIX B
20 of 43
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
English Italian English Burmese Spanish Polish Indonesian Enlgish Croatian English Spanish English German English English Spanish / Catalan English English English Italian English Swiss German English Persian Turkish English English English The Bahasa Indonesia English
Jun 27, 2012 3:29 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:27 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:20 PM Jun 27, 2012 2:14 PM Jun 27, 2012 1:16 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:43 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:08 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:23 AM Jun 27, 2012 11:08 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:58 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:43 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:41 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:29 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:59 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:39 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:24 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:21 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:17 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:05 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:00 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:57 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:42 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:42 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:41 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:30 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:04 PM Jun 26, 2012 3:37 PM Jun 26, 2012 2:10 PM Jun 26, 2012 12:32 PM
APPENDIX B
21 of 43
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
English English English Russian Slovak English English English sp Portuguese English Greek Greek Spanish Slovak Greek Spanish Greek Russian English English Spanish Turkish English German English English Arabic Greek English
Jun 26, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 26, 2012 8:38 AM Jun 25, 2012 8:18 PM Jun 25, 2012 2:42 PM Jun 25, 2012 1:55 PM Jun 25, 2012 11:49 AM Jun 25, 2012 9:13 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:35 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:46 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:22 PM Jun 24, 2012 8:32 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:55 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:49 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:43 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:42 PM Jun 24, 2012 6:37 PM Jun 24, 2012 4:29 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:20 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:17 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:15 PM Jun 24, 2012 2:16 PM Jun 24, 2012 12:53 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:52 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:07 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:02 AM Jun 24, 2012 10:41 AM Jun 24, 2012 9:28 AM Jun 24, 2012 8:23 AM
APPENDIX B
22 of 43
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106
English English English Mandarin Chinese English English English Nepali Polish Romanian Russian Spanish English English Ukrainian English
Jun 23, 2012 5:17 PM Jun 23, 2012 4:29 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:57 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:47 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:37 PM Jun 23, 2012 2:30 PM Jun 23, 2012 1:23 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:58 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:13 PM Jun 23, 2012 11:12 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:46 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:43 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:20 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:13 AM Jun 22, 2012 9:58 PM Jun 22, 2012 6:36 PM
Page 3, Q6. What is your current employment status? Choose the answer which best suits you.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Creating a Common Initiative Group for language training and communication Volunteer Teacher + self-employed also I am on a special leave to do my PhD, I am state employed volunteer teacher own a school Part-time employed + freelance
Jul 3, 2012 3:59 PM Jul 2, 2012 7:19 PM Jun 28, 2012 7:18 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 27, 2012 8:54 AM Jun 24, 2012 9:55 PM Jun 23, 2012 8:28 AM
APPENDIX B
23 of 43
Page 3, Q7. Would you describe yourself as either a 'Technophile' (having a strong love for technology) or a 'Technophobe' (having a fear or dislike of technology), or are you somewhere in between these? Choose one answer only or self-describe yourself in the box.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
trying to catch up with it :)- balance is my key word. This all comes due to my study now. Like variety- don't like it when things go wrong! Most education technology is over-complicated Enthusiastic Amateur like using it for appropriate activities No real fear of tech but I I tend not to use it much because I don't typically see the benefit on a daily basis I benefit a lot from using it as a learner and enthusiastically use it selectively as a teacher. However, I hate sitting at the computer for long stretches due to stiff necks and shoulders.
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jul 5, 2012 3:38 PM Jul 2, 2012 6:28 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:40 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:17 AM Jun 25, 2012 2:02 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:28 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:20 AM
APPENDIX B
24 of 43
Page 3, Q8. What are you currently doing in respect of professional development in ICT and technology? If other, please specify below. Tick all those that apply. If nothing, please state 'nothing'. (optional)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
giving online courses- e-moderating Edudemic on iPad - Get it! Delivering peer training in ILT/e-learning Try to stay current by subscribing and following a lot of interesting blogs I have also participated in the design of modules of an online teacher development course Writing my own ICT Wiki for Italian Modern Language Teachers Watching tutorials on Youtube. Taking part in virtual seminars attending webinars curation developing use of SmartNotebook tools - integrating them with my collection of digital materials I am not doing anything related to ICT at the moment I recently started to checking out and attend webinars Have recently completed an online course. I'm completing assignments for the M.A. Technology-Assisted Langauge Learning course at Norwich Institute for Language Education. Teaching others (yes, I count this as my PD too as I learn lots doing that!) in the phase of being interested in knowing more about using ICT in ELT classroom Studying MA Ed Tech and TESOL at U of Manchester Taking part in webinars Studying for an MA
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jul 1, 2012 7:03 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:23 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:19 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:05 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:33 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:40 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:49 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:36 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:22 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:07 AM Jun 24, 2012 9:33 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:00 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:20 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:20 AM Jun 24, 2012 8:28 AM Jun 23, 2012 4:00 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:43 PM Jun 23, 2012 8:57 AM Jun 22, 2012 6:48 PM
APPENDIX B
26 of 43
Page 3, Q9. How often does the following technology get used in your teaching (this includes during the class, for preparation or for feedback?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
OHP, yes it is technology:) Projector or Beamer Frequently We use Overhead projector Currently no WiFi installed in the institution which limits the use of laptos and ipads Voice recording equipment (eg dictophone) Use depends on availability - I would use Smartboard or IWB every day if I had access to it (as I did in my last job in FE) but HE makes less use of this. N/A voice recorder is v useful & I sometimes use one what is E- Podium ! Not sure what the difference is between a Smart Board and an IWB... beamer + laptop for presentations (both given by me and my students), language lab - 5times in a 12-week semester Students sometimes use ipads in class but this is not a requirement I have used video a lot in the classroom. We used the smartboard and epodium a lot last year at KSU. I used google docs and moodle in every f2f class at a local university last semester. It's difficult to state frequency, as I have had a different job in a different country for the past 5 years, so what I have done frequently in the past in one job, I havn't necessarily done in other jobs. Audio equipment I have also used an MP3 player as a voice recorder
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jun 29, 2012 10:41 PM Jun 28, 2012 8:09 AM Jun 28, 2012 3:56 AM Jun 27, 2012 11:40 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:43 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:17 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:07 AM Jun 26, 2012 8:43 AM Jun 25, 2012 8:24 PM Jun 25, 2012 2:02 PM Jun 24, 2012 3:28 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:20 AM
14 15
Jun 23, 2012 12:19 PM Jun 22, 2012 6:48 PM
APPENDIX B
27 of 43
Page 3, Q10. How often do you use or have you used the following kinds of ICT/Web Tools? Please specify names/websites if possible in the box below. If you use none at all, please state 'none' in the box below.
1 2 3
Glogster, sometimes Movie makers, sometimes Games maker - www.zondle.com Screen Chomp app on iPad allows it operate as a whiteboard. You failed to ask about overhead projection- couple that with an iPad and there are a lot of apps that I use to run a class. For example, using iPad screen captures makes Flickr redundant. LMS Moodle. Content delivery Moodle - everyday Teamspeak - frequently VoiceThread, HelloSlide, Glogster, Showdocument, Smore, Popplet, dotSub, Voki, Voxopop, Tripline, Headmagnet, Grokit Answers. I regularly manage and update my students' wikispaces to give them kind of e-learning activities: http://amaldi-english-corner.wikispaces.com http://galliefl.wikispaces.com http://nattaefl.wikispaces.com Voicethread - sometimes Weebly for Education - frequently none Audacity, Jing, Snaggit, YouTube, FlashcardsDb, Edublogs, Audioboo, Wordle, Make Beliefs Comix, Fotobabble Moodle frequently Blackboard WebCT - frequently. Nicenet for link sharing - every day Since using a smartboard software in a job I have "converted" to teaching using the software, given its advantages; I now use the software for most lessons. LyricsTrainer - frequently, as homework assignments. pbworks Jing (still screencasting awa screen capture) twitter posterous diigo scoop.it BC BBC google docs (students make forms for reading comp) voxopop Primary Pad - sometimes didn't know all these tools existed ! My own Ning site: http://englishworldwide.ning.com Facebook - always Moodle - always I used moodle for a face-to-face course, mainly to store materials, collect student writing and give feedback. I also used google docs a lot in class for collaborative writing in the same course. I think most I use fit into one of the categories above.
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:24 AM Jul 1, 2012 7:03 AM
4 5 6 7
Jun 28, 2012 6:20 AM Jun 28, 2012 3:56 AM Jun 27, 2012 4:19 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:33 PM
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Jun 27, 2012 3:26 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:40 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:49 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:36 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:01 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:43 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:07 AM
15 16
Jun 26, 2012 9:36 PM Jun 26, 2012 3:45 PM
17 18 19 20 21
Jun 26, 2012 9:17 AM Jun 26, 2012 8:43 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:44 PM Jun 24, 2012 4:39 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:20 AM
22
Jun 24, 2012 8:28 AM
APPENDIX B
29 of 43
Page 3, Q10. How often do you use or have you used the following kinds of ICT/Web Tools? Please specify names/websites if possible in the box below. If you use none at all, please state 'none' in the box below.
23 24 25
Mailvu Sometimes Tools used most often - Vocaroo, Twitter, Edmodo, Evernote, YouTube, Flickr Dropbox for file-hosting (frequently); Voicethread for storytelling (sometimes); Kidblog for student blogging (frequently)
Jun 23, 2012 1:32 PM Jun 23, 2012 8:20 AM Jun 22, 2012 6:48 PM
Page 3, Q11. How do you learn about (discover) new ICT/Web Tools? Tick all those that apply to you. (optional)
1 2 3 4 5 6
Scoop It curation site ie Russell Stannard's newsletter from learners' recommendations! I do not make efforts to learn about new technology. Facebook
Jun 27, 2012 3:26 PM Jun 27, 2012 9:22 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:07 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:44 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:33 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:51 PM
Page 3, Q12. How important are or would be the following when selecting a ICT/Web Tool? If you have no opinion on this, please state 'no opinion' in the box below.
1 2 3
suitable to the lesson aims No or little personal information required for sign up andragogically justified (smile) = very important, but this is subjective to a degree. [motivating = very subjective as well] "you can't please everyone all of the time, but you can try to please some of the people some of the time" I wish the ICT/Web tool is used for language learning, not just for the sake of using techonology itself. So whenever a certain tool is used, it should be justified: is it really necessary to use it? Option to embed on another website - important; Privacy (for my students) very important
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:49 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:44 PM
Jun 23, 2012 4:00 PM
Jun 22, 2012 6:48 PM
APPENDIX B
30 of 43
Page 3, Q13. How do you or would you assess the success or effectiveness of a particular ICT/Web Tool? (optional)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
I use my teacher/trainer judgement. Is it worth it pedogocially? the time I and they will spend on it, is it useful? Speed to results time is short. students' feedback How much it helps with learning outcomes; how the students respond to it; if other teachers want to use it too That the amount of time and effort involved is worth it in terms of pedagogical usefulness and benefit. Students' engagement and effective results If it's easy to use for me and if students like it. It makes teaching interesting and active If the students are engaged and motivated enough to use it as a tool for improvement on a frequent basis. Regularly, this would be carried out when reflecting on success of the lesson. If students have learnt how to use it, and keep using a web tool, so it is a success. Considering basically how easy it is to use, and pedagogic criteria. If it was successful in allowing the learners to achieve a learning outcome and a bnus if it also helped develop their IT skills simultaneously. Student interest and course value When teachers and students like using it and have fun Student feedback and self-reflection Student feeedback and ease of use It depends on the activity and objetctive that I have in that moment. By how successfully I can integrate it into an activity without it becoming about the tech and switching the focus or time away from the learning objective. As per 'very important' above. Student's response Student's frequency of use Student's proficiency in performance a tool is useful / successful to the extent that it allows me to do better what I used to do eg with SmartNotebook I find I can go faster & have more impact than without it. tool can not be the focus of the lesson - students use the tool in their 'free'
Jul 6, 2012 6:09 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:24 AM Jul 5, 2012 3:38 PM Jul 3, 2012 6:56 AM Jul 2, 2012 6:28 PM Jun 29, 2012 10:41 PM Jun 28, 2012 10:51 AM Jun 28, 2012 8:09 AM Jun 28, 2012 3:56 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:23 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:19 PM Jun 27, 2012 4:05 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:26 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:02 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:36 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:01 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:43 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:29 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:29 AM
20 21 22
Jun 27, 2012 9:22 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:11 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:07 AM
23
Jun 27, 2012 9:03 AM
APPENDIX B
32 of 43
time as well. 24 25 Student feedback, my experience. Whether it serves the purpose, to guide students in their learning. A lot of the assessment is from students' opinions. I also find that it needs to be relatively easy to integrate into my lesson, and at the moment I am not completely changing the way I teach to incorporate technology - for instance, I am not "flipping" classrooms. If the students use it (do the activity proposed) If it provides a more effective way of achieving the lesson aims than not using the tool. So, does it help the learners do something quicker and better? Twitter, blog, LinkedIn, and/or other professional networked PLN connections' comments... *I usually explore and if my first impressions are strong, will google to see if Nik Peachey or Webheads or other names I know/respect have written about it, provided tutorials, examples. Often I experiment, save to diigo, save to Portaportal guest.portaportal.com/englishworldwide excellent I have never used ICT technology apart from showing some Youtube videos to my students as well as some videos on DVDs. Therefore, I cannot really speak from my experience of using a particular ICT/Web Tool. However, I would say if the students are engaged in the activity using ICT I would consider it as being successful. by the motivation and response of ss Pedagogical and useful related to language skills. By Ss or peer feedback it brings an educational benefit to the lesson. It doesn't exist merely because it exists but integrates into a lesson/course. view learning results of students, observation of the learning process Do the students find it engaging and useful? Does it do something we can't do without it? Does it promote language learning? Is it flexible--i.e. can students change/adapt it, and does it offer students more roles than just passive consumer? By how well it met my expecations as shown in question 12 easy to get access to /navigate/use, free/cheap, useful If students enjoy it, and have demonstrated use of target language The amount of use it gets outside the classroom I try to use it in my teaching and depending on student-response I would decide if it's an effective tool for me. Jun 27, 2012 8:49 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:36 PM
26 27
Jun 26, 2012 3:45 PM Jun 26, 2012 9:17 AM
28
Jun 24, 2012 11:44 PM
29 30
Jun 24, 2012 9:55 PM Jun 24, 2012 9:33 PM
31 32 33 34 35 36
Jun 24, 2012 8:37 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:51 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:00 PM Jun 24, 2012 1:00 PM Jun 24, 2012 12:02 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:20 AM
37 38 39 40 41
Jun 24, 2012 8:28 AM Jun 23, 2012 4:00 PM Jun 23, 2012 3:43 PM Jun 23, 2012 2:34 PM Jun 23, 2012 1:32 PM
APPENDIX B
33 of 43
42 43 44 45 46
It depends on my professional practice.I feel pleasure as well as motivated to kiss the ICT world. If I cannot imagine my life without that means it has to be good :-) If students learn from using it and/or enjoy using it, then I could say that the tool is useful for me and my learners. Ease of use, student feedback and results. I would say that such tools as Pixton, Wordle, YouTube, Jing, Wallwisher proved really effective in my one-to-one and group classes. They motivate students and make learning fun. And while having fun, students are still learning "serious" stuff. Besides, they see that their teacher keeps up with the modern world. Student reaction is the main thing for me. If they have a positive reaction to it, then engagement and motivation are easier to achieve and the learning goals are more easily reached. I also look for all students to be involved some lessons with video and voice-recording have really encouraged my shy students to open up, something that would have been more difficult without tech tools.
Jun 23, 2012 1:32 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:19 PM Jun 23, 2012 8:57 AM Jun 23, 2012 8:20 AM Jun 22, 2012 10:04 PM
47
Jun 22, 2012 6:48 PM
APPENDIX B
34 of 43
Page 4, Q14. How autonomous are you? How frequently do you do the following in respect of learning about ICT/Web Tools?
1 2 3
learn watching tutorials in youtube Budgets are often not available for ICT so self-development is most frequently done on an individual and independent basis This year I set up a free blended course for Italian Modern Foreign Language Teachers (http://lendbg.wikispaces.com) who belong to LEND, a national association for Language Teachers (www.lend.it) Most often I have a go and if it's not intuitive and easy to work out, or I want ideas on how to use then I Google it and will usually find a YouTube video or blog with loads of great advice., Watch, do, share is my motto! *fully learn ??? Is that possible :) I teach it to others once I get to grips with it. I don't consider myself a very autonomous learner when it comes to ICT, although I'm gradually getting better because I think learner autonomy is important and interesting and ideally would like to foster it in my own classrooms. Blog posts written by other teachers about how they have used the tool in class (practical examples) are also useful
Jun 28, 2012 6:26 AM Jun 28, 2012 4:01 AM Jun 27, 2012 3:39 PM
Jun 27, 2012 3:30 PM
5 6 7 8
Jun 27, 2012 9:45 AM Jun 24, 2012 11:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:54 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:33 AM
Jun 22, 2012 6:51 PM
APPENDIX B
35 of 43
Page 4, Q15. What are the barriers to learning about and then implementing ICT/Web Tools in respect of your teaching practice. Tick all that apply for you. If 'none at all' please state so in the box.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
If software has to be downloaded - permissions are required from IT which takes time. 'none at all' none at all None at all none *perception* of not enough pedagogical value by uninformed teachers and administrators Time - not that it's time consuming to learn them, just that I don't have enough time in the day to devote to fully discovering, assessing and incorporating the tech into the lessons. At least, not all the time! *not enough andragogical value :) My organisation's corporate network doesn't allow me to use unapproved software on its system. Physical discomfort associated with using the computer: too many hours hunched over my tiny netbook. Seriously! I think the ergonomic issues are the elephant in the living room. Yes there are remedies for these but I can't afford (or don't prioritize the expense) of getting the equipment necessary to make it ergonomically more sustainable to spend more time on the computer. Not to mention eyestrain. But actually I think it is important to turn off the computer every day and go outside, get exercise, focus on other things. I think another elephant in the living room with ICT is the problem of deteriorating quality of concentration that many of us have been experiencing as we become more adept and frequent ICT users in every aspect of our lives. Maybe this is just a stage that we pass through and learn to remedy--I hope! Those I've ticked above are reasons why I might not learn or implement a particular tool.
Jul 3, 2012 7:00 AM Jun 28, 2012 6:26 AM Jun 27, 2012 4:08 PM Jun 27, 2012 3:39 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:52 PM Jun 27, 2012 10:07 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:21 AM
8 9 10
Jun 24, 2012 11:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 1:03 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:33 AM
11
Jun 24, 2012 8:35 AM
APPENDIX B
36 of 43
Page 4, Q18. Do you receive any other kinds of support, training or professional development in the area of technology/ICT. If 'yes' please specify from where? (optional)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Inst,itutional, personal effort, PLN Blogs/Online communities/Social Networks DELTA Cambridge Full support by my immediate boss. eTwinning portal online teacher ddvelopment webinars Italian Ministry of Education webinars organized by American Embassy and British Council http://evosessions.pbworks.com, other free MOOCs and opportunities, supportive husband who encourages TESOL attendance, Twitter! aplanet and wikikis Self- sponsoring I belong to a professional association of english language teachers in my region. I pay a yearly fee. The association was organized indepentently by teachers themselves and offers training workshops throughout the year. I'll follow some classmates' blog to learn more about it. thanks to them! Eltchat PLN Council of Education from Internet, and I am also going to CELTA course in September. I paid the course fee and accommodation expenses all by myself.
Jul 6, 2012 6:12 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:27 AM Jun 28, 2012 7:23 AM Jun 27, 2012 4:22 PM Jun 27, 2012 11:17 AM Jun 27, 2012 10:40 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:15 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:48 PM Jun 24, 2012 8:40 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:54 PM Jun 24, 2012 11:33 AM
13 14 15 16 17
Jun 23, 2012 4:09 PM Jun 23, 2012 2:37 PM Jun 23, 2012 12:24 PM Jun 23, 2012 8:49 AM Jun 22, 2012 10:07 PM
APPENDIX B
37 of 43
Page 5, Q19. Do you have any other comments about this survey that you would like to include? (optional)
1 2 3 4
good to topic to investigate:) It's a great survey. Thanks for it. I look forward to seeing the results of it. Good luck in your Masters. the context in the developeing world is signficantly different. It would have been interesting to see a question about OS platforms and how Universities like mine set up CALL systems without consulting teachers who actually use the equipment. In most of the third world countries, there are still some problems on the development of ICT in language teaching and learning. There is the question of power which is partly available and technology accessibility to people and schools in up country areas. No n/a Questions not always clear when to use 'N/A', Some ofthe questions were difficult to understand and some were repetitive, however, I encourage you to do the dissertation that I consider interesting. Question 16 is difficult to answer accurately because of the way the statements are phrased in relation to the options available. Interesting survey, when I read the tools available I was surprised how little I actually know.. I had considered myself quite knowledgeable about use of technology for teaching ! For 10 years I worked with an Adult Learning Center where prof. dev. was supported = if you presented, your way was paid (most years). I have helped coordinate regional and state conferences (Virginia), attended and presented at TESOL annual conferences, several other state conferences, and many other opportunities. It was much easier when there was institutional support. It is not impossible now, but more limited. nope No, none. Sometimes it's not wether you're a technophobe or the opposite, but the fact that there's more to it. For instance, badly equipped classrooms, or time constrictions. The students play a mayor role too. In my country there's also the need for more teacher development programs that help us to integrate our subject matter with tecnology and not merely use it to do the same old things in new ways just because it's there. Yes, the disregard of self-employed teachers' engagement in ITC on their own is rather disheartening, very exclusive, although it's clear that the last questions were about support. Still some variants for selfemployed/freelance teachers could be added to listen to all opinions, not only to the opinions of those who work in institutions... I was a bit confused on the final page where I was asked to talk about "always" or "never" for what seemed to be questions of opinion (rather than
Jul 6, 2012 6:12 AM Jul 6, 2012 4:29 AM Jul 5, 2012 3:43 PM Jul 1, 2012 7:11 AM
Jun 28, 2012 8:17 AM
6 7 8 9 10 11
Jun 27, 2012 4:23 PM Jun 27, 2012 12:14 PM Jun 27, 2012 9:46 AM Jun 27, 2012 9:33 AM Jun 26, 2012 9:22 AM Jun 26, 2012 8:49 AM
12
Jun 24, 2012 11:51 PM
13 14 15
Jun 24, 2012 10:00 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:54 PM Jun 24, 2012 7:24 PM
16
Jun 24, 2012 4:46 PM
17
Jun 24, 2012 3:34 PM
APPENDIX B
39 of 43
Page 5, Q19. Do you have any other comments about this survey that you would like to include? (optional)
frequency). In any case, it was an enjoyable and interesting survey. 18 19 20 Please see a post I wrote recently responding to Scott Thornbury's post entitled T is for Technology. My blog is passthediploma.edublogs.org Would love to see waht my colleagues think - some are complete tehnophobes - will forward to them. There are a lot of things I would like to try with students, but with one computer per classroom, and an offsite computer lab, it just seems such a hassle to coordinate everything. It seems we are in a bind because the institutions want teachers to integrate ICT, but cannot provide the machinery or training to make it happen. Frustrating! Basically the survey that you are carrying out is really challenging. One thing that you have to analyze the data collected very carefully otherwise you have to face some problems I am sure your dissertation will be very effective.Best of Luck I think that at least in our country everything depends on a teacher, on their enthusiasm to use ICT. I have always been the one who initiated using new technologies in class, and held trainings for other teachers. But I mostly have one-to-one classes, so I am free to choose whichever technology I like. And my students are happy with that. Technology, like many other 'issues' in ELT, seems to divide opinion and be misused. In my current situation, many teachers either see it as pointless or use it without considering learning aims and/or suitability. Training is simply not frequent enough and the school seems unwilling to invest in both the necessary training and in upgrading/maintaining equipment. I'm trying to change things but it's a slow process! Jun 24, 2012 11:35 AM Jun 24, 2012 8:36 AM Jun 23, 2012 3:50 PM
21
Jun 23, 2012 1:49 PM
22
Jun 22, 2012 10:11 PM
23
Jun 22, 2012 6:54 PM
APPENDIX B
40 of 43
APPENDIX C
Email Template sent out on Friday 20 July: Hello xxxxxxxx. You have kindly offered to take part in a follow-up interview on xxxxxx.xx.July. The interview should take no more than 30 minutes, which should be enough time to explore deeper questions in relation to the survey which you have already completed. You are one of 14 teachers to take part in interviews this week. I will send you the link to the interview room around 30 minutes before the start time, so you need be ready to access your emails beforehand. The reason for not sending this now is that the room is used by other people so I need to keep to the time slot chosen and allocated, which is: xxxx GMT (xxxx BST). Please make sure you know the correct time where you are. I will have a print-out of your survey answers before and during the interviews, as I may wish to follow-up on some of the comments made on those. Rest assured these comments and those given in the interview will remain anonymous if quoted in the dissertation, as per the draft findings write-up*, which you are welcome to look at, if you have time, before the interview, although this is not obligatory. I will record the sessions in order to transcribe later. You do not have to enable your web camera during the interview, but it would be nice if I could see you. The main thing is to record the audio and anything else that might get shared on the collaborative screen. I look forward to conducting the interview on xxxxxxx. - Phil *Survey Findings here: http://teacherphilisictinelt.blogspot.co.uk/
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
INTERVIEW GUIDE
Ice-breaker questions to give the interviewee confidence in answering the remainder. Establish identity, location and some other background or demographic questions. This might vary and you could invite person to say a little about themselves or their work. Story allow interviewee opportunity to tell their story and how they have come to be where they are now in relation to the topic.
Content Questions: 1) In Q7 I used the terms technophobe and technophile. I noticed that you selected _X_ on the scale, but I wonder if this accurately describes your relationship to technology use. How fluid is your relationship?
2) In Q10 the survey asked how often you use various ICT/Web Tools. You stated the following (read back responses from list) can I ask whether you answered this question in relation to using them in your teaching or, more generally? What are your favourite tools to use?
3) If employed - How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? What do you receive from your institution? What other things do you do outside of work? If self-employed/freelance How often do you receive support or training in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? How much responsibility do you take for your own learning?
APPENDIX D
4) Could you tell me more about the barriers to using these tools which you selected and which of these are the most common?
5) Where does your autonomous behaviour in relation to this topic come from? Have you had to become more autonomous in learning about certain technologies and ICT tools? What do you think you teach others about autonomous behaviour?
Probes: Includes clarification questions and reflective paraphrasing. Take certain words from answers given, such as freedom, and ask them to explain what they mean by that? Pick up on tips, advice and experiences that each interviewee gives that add value to the data and for the research project as a whole. Be prepared to follow-up interesting responses. Follow their story if possible.
Closing Questions: Give interviewee a chance to add anything or what they had wished they had been asked? Send a follow-up email thanking them again and inviting them to make any comments, if they wish.
Thank you!
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
TRANSCRIBED INTERVIEW DATA Note: The transcriptions below are substantial chunks of the recorded interviews. In each section, almost all of what was said by the interviewee was included. Each initial question was based on the interview content questions, with answers being subsequently grouped, no matter where it came during the interview. Specific prompts, variations or further questions from the interviewer are shown in (italics). Some paraphrasing is employed or words [added], in order to retain the essence of what was said. However, it largely shows word-for-word transcription, exactly as it was spoken, complete with grammatical mistakes or alternative spellings (eg, program, programme). In some parts, too much repetition or an excessive number of examples have been removed. The interviews are numbered, with anonymised initials for each person as shown below. Gen (General) / TTV (Teacher Training Videos) indicates the collector point, while BC (Blackboard) /Sk (Skype) indicates the medium through which the interview was conducted.
1. AA. 40 year old American woman, living in Berlin. Been in EFL since 2005. Recently taught in Saudi Arabia. Career change for her and now autonomous in developing in this area. Now freelance. Gen. BC. 2. BB Employed woman in her 50s, working and living in the Channel Islands, teaching at a British Council language school, predominately adults and occasionally teenagers. Experienced teacher and teacher-trainer. Regular contributor to #ELTchat. Gen. BC. 3. CD. Ukranian female in her 20s, working as a project manager for a Canadian company, with three years experience. Doing a Celta course in Poland before starting a new role as coordinator of a language school. Is a freelance translator. Also teaches Business English. Gen. BC. 4. EF. Iranian female in her 30s, who spent 8 years teaching in her home country, before starting a Language and Culture in Europe masters degree in Sweden and has volunteered in a private language school for one year, teaching both English and Swedish, where students had laptops in class. TTV. BC. 5. GH. Experienced American female, in her 50s, with experience in South Korea. She is self-employed, running her own Ning site, delivering various online classes. Begun with Moodle several years ago. 10 years at an Adult Learning centre where CPD was supported. She has also helped coordinate regional and Virginia state conferences and presented at numerous TESOL conferences. Gen. Sk. 6. IJ. 47 year-old freelance male teacher with more than 20 years experience in the middle of short term contracts, most recently in the Middle East. Just finished in Oman, and previously been in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (with British Council). Currently doing pre-sessional work in UK, before taking up a post in Slovakia. TTV. Sk.
APPENDIX E
7. KL. A 21 year-old female Belgian/American living in The Netherlands, having experienced the Middle East and Northern Africa. Currently a freelance 1-1 EFL teacher before doing a Masters in International Development. Self-described digital native. TTV. BC. 8. MN. An experienced, bilingual Swiss/German female in her 50s. Teacher/educator in Berne, Switzerland, preparing pre-service primary school English teachers. Over 20 years in EFL. Full-time employed. TTV. BC. 9. OP. Ukranian male in 50s, senior lecturer at Donetsk National Technical University, teaching mostly Business English/Economic IBA students. A former interpreter/translator and an international officer. A big user of Learning Management Systems. Participant shared his screen to demonstrate his ICT use. TTV. BC. 10. QR. 24 year-old male, Nepalese Masters student, with limited English ability, who claimed to have never spoken to a native speaker before. 4-5 years experience in TEFL in secondary schools and another (unclear) institution, in Kathmandu. Faces a number of barriers, not least of all large class sizes and a lack of electricity. Gen. Sk. 11. ST. Canadian female in her 30s, who has just been laid off, after 2 years, from a university program in Toronto, teaching low level adults. Working on own educational technology masters. Limited access to technology previously, but now on a short contract at University of Toronto, where she is using smart boards for the first time. Gen. Sk. 12. UV. An Irish male in his 30s. A male Director of Studies with English First in Hangzhou, China. Full-time employed. Previously a software engineer, with a degree in maths and masters in computational science. TTV. BC. 13. WX. An Argentine female from Buenos Aires, with a prominent online presence, such as through blogging. More than 20 years experience. Still teaches and coordinates at secondary school, but has shifted to teacher training/professional development. Travels around South America for Pearson as series course book consultant. Gen. Sk. 14. YZ. A 51 year-old Australian female. EFL teacher since 2004. Previously a computer programmer, website developer, information architect. Volunteered to teach migrants, which lead to working with new arrival migrants and refugees at a vocational institute in Canberra. Involved in professional development and training teachers with technology. Gen. BC.
APPENDIX E
RELATIONSHIP WITH TECHNOLOGY 1) In Q7 I used the terms technophobe and technophile. I noticed that you selected _X_ on the scale, but I wonder if this accurately describes your relationship to technology use. How fluid is your relationship?
1.
Maybe it was discomfort with the words technophobe, technophile. So, I dont love it, just because its technology. I dont just naturally love computers, but Im not afraid of it, either. So Im not a technophobe. If anything, Ive been afraid not to try it, not to use it. If anything Ive been afraid not to try it and not to use it, thinking that in the future it wont be a new thing, it wont be a fancy alternative, itll just be the norm, so I decided it was necessary to learn, to get comfortable with it. But I still feel a bit old-fashioned. The term digital immigrant resonates with me, although Im critical of that dichotomy, between digital native, digital immigrant, so its not always easy. Im not really so great at experimenting with it. I would like to have a sensible relationship with using technology for teaching. Not to use it for its own sake, but just to decide that there are these useful tools and resources, and decide the best way to use them. So I describe my relation with it as always transitional, experimental right now. I use technology a lot in my own professional development. I like to use things like webinars. I belong to quite a number of online sites, things like #ELTchat, like to take a great interest in things like that. But at the same time, its very difficult to embrace the same ideas, so getting it into the school is a bit harder. The only time I use technology [that is not for face-to-face with students) is if I am doing Skype interviews for the teacher training programme. Most of time I use technology in the classroom as an additional tool. (during question on autonomy, asking if she was aware of the residents-visitor paradigm) Yeah, I dont know. I never really thought about it. I suppose I am becoming a bit more relaxed about my online presence, and I do belong to a substantial number of sites. Even things like writing the summary for #ELT gives you more of a presence, because if you then google your name you come up in 6 million different places, so I suppose youve got to be relaxed about that, or you would just go in and lurk, I suppose. (suggesting that she has adapted to what some people see as a barrier) For sure, definitely. In the beginning, I wasnt so relaxed about it, but also I was a little bit intimidated by some of the other participants in some of the websites. Im way over that now, Im quite happy to treat everybody as equals because we all learn from each other. (asking if an online presence can be too much) I think it depends on how much naval-gazing there is in the blog, I think if they are interesting and creating thought-provoking scenarious then I cant see a problem with it, really. I think I knew the terms. The etymology is quite clear, you know, philia and phobia. I love technology to a great extent but, on the other hand, I dont like going to extreme into technology, like being held up in social media or spending the whole day in front of the computer. In terms of English teaching, I am always trying to strike the right balance, between the traditional teaching and using cutting edge technologies. (asking if she was aware of the residents-visitor paradigm) No, well I think I am somewhere I am still a visitor not a resident. (asking if her relationship is more fluid in general) I think that I spend, due to the settings I can spend most of my time in front of the computer, but talking about my personal needs, I use it quite.. I rely on the Internet to obtain most part of the information, for communication, to communicate with my friends, acquaintances, in social media, as well. I follow lots of different blogs online, Google reader. So I think I use it like half for my professional needs, for my professional development, as well, not only in English teaching, but also for my role as translator and for my current job. And the other part I use it for my personal needs. For example, for communication, for learning some interesting information and so on. (asking if she has her own blog) I dont have a blog myself, cause Im afraid that I wont have something interesting to put on it, but I will start having a blog in October when I start my job at the language school. And the other thing is Im currently also designing my own website, which is devoted to an intensive English course for software developers, and I think I will have some sort of blog there and I will update information on that website.
APPENDIX E
2.
3.
4.
I really like technology in the class and I think it helps teachers to have lots of facilities in the class, especially when they want to teach second language, and especially in the teachers have the students from different cultures with different language so we can help a lot. But alternatively, when I was in Iran, because we didnt have Internet in the class, I couldnt use technology a lot, but we had some video and shared some kind of video clips and something like that. We prepared some Power Point with our laptop, but we didnt have Internet. (asking if it was more for presentation) yeah, yeah. (respondent didnt really engage with the question on a personal level). (Have you always been a technophile?) Absolutely not! Experience certainly helps, finding mentors, definitely help. When I taught in Korea I was the only Moodle user working in the lab in Korea where all the instructions were in a language I did not know well. Yet it was magic, for those were some of my favourite memories of bringing students, learners not only learning a language but who had never used a mouse or computer before. We were laughing at some of them [being] more comfortable than I was. It was one of my big turning points. It doesnt matter how much I know of the technology, its the attitude. And I know that, but seeing it from learners helped me and still helps me, both in guiding people and in not losing it. (on being a digital immigrant?) I am not a digital immigrant. No, wait I am forgetting my terminology. Haha. (explains more about the definition) Well [the Korean kids] were born into it. In Korea, technology is way ahead of what I see in the US. Its so persuasive and ahead. There wasnt the fear factor that I run into a lot. But for my own fear factor, Ive always been a curious person and Ive always been aware. I read bulletin boards and Im aware of new things. I was curious from the get-go, but I was terribly phobic for years and the continuum goes back and forth still, but confidence, especially since the last several months, trying to handle it all. I cant lose my cool, so I am much higher now on the comfort end. (reflects accurately on what she says). (Later, during question on autonomy, mentions andragogy as stated in survey response) Definitely oriented to that [that different approach between teaching adults learners and children]. There is a difference between teaching a child, and I have done both online and offline, and teaching an adult. The dignity issues are so strong and if you teach them pedagogically you often take their dignity aware and make them feel like a tiny child. Adults should be both [taught differently because they learn differently). It is becoming a challenge in pedagogy recently, because to me the basic premise is you value what they know and an adult learning English knows a lot more on some relevant levels of life than what a child usually knows. But today it is a challenge because children know so much technologically. Maybe we will have a new word soon that applies to all. But my strong view is that I teach adults and dont like to think like a child. Ive got an iPad, for example. That feeds into ticking a 4. As regards my attitudes towards IT, you mean. I read a book by Bill Gates once, called, I think, The Road Ahead. This was about 5 or maybe 10 years ago and set out his predictions and he was anticipating the kind of technology we have now and what we can see coming now. He said his advice was to use it, learn about it, use it and he saw that society was changing and that the nature of work was changing. This has borne out by my experience. Now, for example, all my teaching work really, there is nothing of any significance thats not in my computer. So the computer is collecting my experience. Given the ever-increasing importance in IT that respect and the convergence of work and important information in the computer, in the Cloud, with backups. The point is that I have a survival interest in making sure that my systems work, which sounds a bit rich after last night. But I was able to recover from it, I didnt just panic and say Oh, my God, ruined. I did a system restore and Im back to normal now. So thats my interest in as much as I need it. Its part of communication as well. I can travel and not feel out of touch. (prompting from inference that he wasnt always like this) Yes but its two things: one is 1520, certainly 30 years ago the technology just wasnt there. When I was a teenager it was a big thing to see a cassette player and a radio in the one unit. There was a time when computers were coming in and I would hear the words word-processing or database and had no idea what that meant. Then I took a course, a PGCE, and was forced to submit work word-processed. I became curious and explored. I think Im one of those who had a natural inclination but I saw the applications and what you could do, which fitted with my personality. Just recently things have gone into the cloud, things have become very mobile. There has been a splitting off of laptop and tablets. Laptops are places, Im finding, where you elaborate data into information and you work more intensively. Tablets are for absorbing media, really, and lightweight communication. I now use the laptop a bit less and have the
APPENDIX E
5.
6.
tablet for reading books, papers, some skyping, email. The laptop is for essays and collecting heavy data. 7. I think the starting point is that relative to your sample and most teachers. Im quite young, Im 21, going on 22, so Ive grown up with the internet so Ive grown up with the Internet, and with digital life and digital identity. So thats a big part of it. I was educated with computers and in my personal life and work I spend a ridiculous amount of time on the computer as well. Im very comfortable with technology and I use it for a little of different things, but the reason that I didnt take 5 is because I am very acutely aware that I do not know. I dont know any programming. My knowledge and use is a bit more than your average Joe and I really try to keep up with new developments, new ideas, web 2.0 and the social aspect of technology. Im using it a lot to learn. For me, I live in a small city in the Netherlands which is the media city. For me, the Internet is also a way to stay in contact with other people and similar to me, and to learn from others that I wouldnt have the opportunity to if I was looking for just physical people. (reflecting and picking up idea of being native and checking awareness of residents-visitors) No, I wasnt aware but it sounds interesting. I guess I would describe my partner, who works in ICT, is a 5. (asking if she has developed into being a technophile) I happily ticked no.5. I still lap it up. I am fortunate that I can use an Interactive White Board for teaching, I am the only one who has one at our institute. Ive spent quite a lot of money buying the latest gadgets. So, Im still happy about that and very interested in how technology can facilitate teaching. I dont want to replace teaching. I dont want to replace teaching but would come become easier for my students basically. (asking what drives this need to use tech) I just lots of advantages. Ive been using a computer for I dont know how many years. I couldnt teach anymore with Internet. I spend quite a lot of time sitting at my computer. Before embarking on the career of university teacher, I worked as an interpreter/translator in the capital of the country. I was also an international officer in many international bodies. When I came to Donetsk University, at first I didnt use any web applications, so it was 5 or 6 years ago. Out of the blue, I started to fall in love with all these web applications which can help you to get your point across. (goes on to talk about and demonstrate specific applications)
8.
9.
10. I am strongly in favour of the term, technophile. Why? Because I feel pleasure and benefitted in use in the ICT in my real class. These students, when I use these kind of ICT tools, these students feel comfort, pleasure inside the classroom, and I also be motivated to teach them. I can see my ideas freely and from the beginning I was really most interested using the ICT Tools. What I got from this idea, the knowledge, what I did, this is my self-knowledge. No people provided me [with] the ideas to use ICT, so I strongly in favour of these tools. I am a technophile. (asking how widely available is technology in Nepal) Oh, just 25% [of teachers] use technology inside the classroom. Just 25, not more. (what kind of technology?) These days, laptop is a bit deeper, and teachers are using laptop right these days. (asking if they have IWB) Sometimes I use. (checking if uses more than other teachers) No teachers use such ICT tools. I am the first one in that institution and I feel pleasure. 11. I said 4 because I hope to lean towards the technophile end of things. I dont consider myself technophobic. Im very eager to try out new things and try and get my students experienced with a lot of different things. I really want to do that but also dont know a lot and Im just learning stuff myself. Im not a real technical genius. I cant write genius. I cant write code or anything like that. But I try to use as much as I can figure out myself and Im not afraid to try, but I need the time to do more. Im not fully developed into technophile yet but I hope to get there. (asking if this has changed in last 10 years) Oh, yeah, massively. When I started working at York [institution in Toronto] 2 years ago I didnt use any technology, ever. The reason is because Ive never had the opportunity. The last schools I worked in, and Ive been teaching for 13 years and the last schools I worked in didnt have any technology. No computers, No TVs, maybe a CD player. I worked in one school that didnt even have electricity in the classrooms. Ive never worked in schools that have had any kind of provision for technology at all. At York, there was a computer lab, which we could sign out. But I never really bothered to do that. Finally, they put one computer in each classroom. But I was on 2
APPENDIX E
months contracts so each time I get a new classroom, so computer access not always there. Working in low-level low priority programs, I tend to get those classrooms without. Not always easy to have access, therefore. (clarifies practical issues) Its not really practical. Sometimes its a projector on a white screen or on TV display. A student at a time could come and use it, I suppose, but while I might use it as a teaching aid, its not really for the students. Its too difficult with class of 16 students and one computer. Its hard to get them to do anything with it (reflects on technology to present information only, not collaborative etc). I find that really frustrating, because my whole classroom style is very interactive and collaborative. It almost seems that the computer intrudes on that. Id rather not use it than break up having the students working together. (later introduces and explains concept of residents-visitors paradigm) I think that my life and my teaching life are somewhat different and they are not really in sync yet. So, in my life I would say Im a resident and I am certainly online most free hours of every day. I think I have somewhat of an online presence. However, it hasnt always translated into classroom, because I have not always had the opportunities. That is something very new to me. I think Im maybe caught in the middle there. I suppose in my teaching, I snatch and grab things, the visitor kind of thing. I am still figuring out what works and what doesnt work. 12. Basically I am bit of a nerd. I had a ZX Spectrum 48K when I was a young teenager. I used to spend hours writing up computer programs and running them to see how they would work. My degree at university was maths and we used a lot of computer technology to run stimulating software. I did a masters in computational science. So that was a huge lot of using technology in using old systems like UNIX, VMS and even supercomputers. From a technological point of view, the whole computer thing is pretty straightforward for me. Throughout my university education Ive been digging myself into a niche. Im using really high-end software, high-end technology. So I took a step back before I became a software engineer and learned about basic computer hardware, and studying operating systems, which I didnt know about before. So that is really good knowledge for me now. 13. (Does a love of technology describe your relationship? Has it always been that way?) Well, it has always been that way. I have always been very fond of technology. Wow, I dont know how far back, I think it was about 2004 that I did a Webheads In Action course. To that point I did use technology in my life, but not for teaching. Thats when I discovered there were so many things you could do with technology that could make teaching and learning more fun, interesting and effective. Thats where my journey with educational technology started and I think Ive come a long way. I also do a lot of information research and blog about it. I just love exploring new possibilities. (acknowledges blogging activity, conference attendance, engagement with online communities and voluntary selfdirected learning then asks if technology used is sufficient for her purposes?) Exactly. 14. My background is that I was a computer programmer and did that for about five years and then website developer when the Internet first came about, when it was first called the Internet. I did my first online course before that, when we had something in Australia called ARNET (Academic Research Network). Im very comfortable with it. I probably wouldnt say I have a strong love for technology, but as a tool and a way of doing things.. I have a strong love for my iPad and my iPhone, so I guess thats where I sort of. If the tool allows me to do things that I want to do and connects me with people round the world, I can say yes, I do love it. I dont have any fear of anything with technology. I often dislike it though when it doesnt work (picking up on that reliability) Yes, I often say that in my next job I want to work somewhere without electricity, but its not a fear or dislike of technology itself, its just the problems it can cause. One of the reasons I am most interested in what you are doing is because Im very conflicted when it comes to trying work out how to help the people who really dislike it. I can help the people who have a fear of it, but Im really struggling with [those that hate it].
APPENDIX E
ICT/WEB TOOLS USAGE 2) In Q10 the survey asked how often you use various ICT/Web Tools. You stated the following (read back responses from list) can I ask whether you answered this question in relation to using them in your teaching or, more generally? Could you tell me more about the tools you use and why you use them? How do you measure effectiveness?
1.
(Asked to clarify if Q was answered in relation to teaching or more general use) Part of my difficulty answering the question was that Ive had very vastly different jobs in the past four years, and now I work freelance and thats even more transitional. I cant say that I use anything really consistently, but most recently Ive used PowerPoint a lot at my job at a technical university in Berlin. Thats a job Ive only this past semester, March to May. I used a Moodle at that job for the time as a teacher. But I used it more as a way to access, a way to make material available to the students for them to access and to give them a very consistent home base for the course. But since it was an in-person course it wasnt used to its fullest potential with the interactive forum. So a lot of PowerPoint, what else? Materials creation? Well, over the years Ive used a lot of crossword puzzle makers. I liked using them because you can use your customised list of words, for revision. I only used JING once. Ive used some screen capture to give only once or twice, really. I think a lot of the things Ive used, Ive used a few times to experiment with them in some specific situations. But I havent always come back to them, like JING. What else? Google Docs is something I used a lot at the technical university in the spring. I really like it for collaborative writing and to be able to see the students revisions and for them to share easily with each other and with me. Yet, I used videos, just to show videos to get students to talk about them. Get them to write, based on a video. (asking if she agreed with perception that she is a visitor and purposefully selected a tool). Yes, I think so. I like that approach. I do think it is better to let good pedagogy drive your selection of and use of tools rather than just using tools because they are there. I answered the question in relation to my teaching. Yes, generally I might use some of them more than I would in the classroom. But I think Im always developing and learning about new tools. I know that you are working with Russell and quite often he sends out newsletters with things that I want to try out. I find a way to squeeze them into the classroom somehow or other. (responding to prompt about process or the order of trying out new tools) I do tend to wait until somebody points the tool out to me and think oh I could see a really good use for that one and then squeeze it into the classroom when I need it. From a teacher-training point of view, I do tend to do it the other way round, though. I think while Ive got a need to do a particular thing, I wonder if there is a tool out there that will help my students or my trainees benefit from it that way, but for my own teaching its the other way round really. (on prompt relating to using online bookmarking and note-taking tools) I tend to use Google Bookmarks for things for like online bookmarking and very often and those are the things that I can see a use for in the classroom. Yes, its not just favouriting things I want to read later. (asking for a favourite tool) I like English Central, with my students, but I find that its changing a little bit, but its quite a good tool. Then with my business students I use a website called Quintessential, which is a culture website. We do a lot of work with that one. (prompt about whether those tools encourage autonomous learning) Yes, absolutely, most of the ICT use is something that can be done outside of the classroom. Sometimes they need the knowledge or need to know about the sites and they also need a little bit of help getting round them in class, so they can they be autonomous outside of class. Two of my all-time favourite [tools] are Wordle and Pixton.com. I use them in different settings, for different levels and classes, and these two tools are always work right. Pixton is a very handy tool if I want, for example, to correct some grammar points. I can display the comments, like dialogue and the students have to fill in the gaps in the dialogue, like making the correct form of
APPENDIX E
2.
3.
a comparative, or placing the articles in the correct place. Or for correcting vocabulary, they have to choose the correct word from the gaps in the dialogue, and also it is when to use some exercises for different communication functions. (shared link). Why I like this tool is that it is very intuitive to use, very easy to use, maybe 5-10 minutes to create a comic. Students really love it. I teach only adults, whatever age they equally like this tool. (on choosing a tool for what purpose) Mostly, it is the first way round. First I learn about this tool, somewhere on the internet or blog. Then I see how and which point I can use this tool in the classroom. For which purpose, for which activity. (on how to decide to use or not) Well, usually I learn about the new tool in some blog. Then I read about it and maybe watch some tutorial and I see whether I personally like this tool or not and is it easy for me to use it? If yes, then I try to think how can incorporate this tool into my lesson, and then I try it out, get the feedback and see if its good to continue using this tool in the future. (asking how is tool assessed for effectiveness) First of all, I see whether the use of this tool was justified in class, whether it served the purpose. For example, the Wordle. Its very unobtrusive, its a good way to stimulate the discussion, doesnt take much time and it serves the purpose. Because some other tools they do not serve the purpose. They are too long or they involve many technical issues. For me, the main criteria is that this tool serves the teaching purpose and doesnt take much time. Then I see the feedback - whether they feel interested, whether they feel motivated. They also often ask. When I first used JING, I used it to record feedback about a students essay. Then I asked the student whether they liked this idea or to use it in the future and he told me that yes he was satisfied, because it was something very new for him, and he found this kind of feedback very useful. That is the basis, this the argument for me using this tool in the future. (prompt asking how she uses Wordle) I use it brainstorm a topic or to stimulate a discussion about what we will discuss during the course of the next two lessons. I select the key words from an article or topic, created a Wordle and then projected it [as a prediction task]. The second use was to revise the vocabulary. (prompt asking how she used JING) I used it for two purposes. The first one is the student submitted an essay in a .doc format. I opened the file on my computer, then I was capturing the screen. I was making some corrections in the essay and marking them in a different colour, then explaining with my words all the time. Then I just recorded this and sent it to the student. The second option was a difficult text in the Financial Times. I decided to explain the most difficult vocabulary items from the text. So I just opened it, highlighted these items, explained them and then sent it to the students emails, which they told me this was really useful. (asking how long she has used JING) I just used on these two occasions. I learned this tool by myself, and when I mastered it by myself I used it on these two occasions, having watched some tutorials. (asking where she found out about JING) I found out about it from your [the interviewers] blog (typed link of Teacher Training Videos site to which asked you found the tutorials via my blog) Yes. 4. (description of technology use, given without prompt during introduction) The school that I was working there, in the previous year, is [name] high school in Sweden, from level 6, 7, 8 and 9. It was one of the schools in Sweden that is connected to the Internet and students have laptop in the class and interactive board. They have some facilities in the class. The school was divided in two parts, one for Swedish students that have laptops and another department which is for the immigrants and they are the beginning level of Swedish, they also have laptops but they are not allowed to take them home. (clarifying the institution pays for the laptops) Yes. The give teacher the laptop, too, but because I am volunteer teacher I cant take it home, just while I work in school. (clarifying that institution encouraged this and other technology use) They have overhead, video projector. Its completely kind of modern school. (continuing with further prompt) For the student that they were beginners because they didnt know Swedish, Internet was very useful for them. We used Google Translate, because sometimes they cannot understand, we typed text and they understand in their languages. We used Google Translate a lot in the class. (asked later about favourite tool, she again mentioned) Google Translate. It made my teaching easier because of handling students from different countries and I didnt know their languages. Some of them from the Asian countries, there English was not at a good level. They couldnt speak English or Swedish, so GT helped a lot. Some of them from Hungary, Congo, and some speak Arabic, because they are from Libya. (asking if she speaks Arabic). No, I speak Persian. (other tools?) The Power Point that I made by myself which I connect to my laptop and I use the video projector to show them. (asking how she decides what to use and what comes first,
APPENDIX E
continue to mention the important of GT). I was advised I could use this one, and then I applied it in class and it worked, and I thought its good. And sometimes I use Google images and I talked afterwards and some images I show them, I tried to [unclear]. (asking if she had restrictions in how Internet used) No, we didnt have any kind of restriction, it depends on the teacher. (in Iran?) We didnt have so restrictions, but the Internet is not so available, we didnt have the facilities to have the wireless Internet in our school. We [just] used video and CDs and some Power Points.. [pre-prepared material]. (asking about how she discovers web tools) For three years I have been looking for different kinds of teaching methods and I read in some British Council teaching and Cambridge through some webinars because some of them was about Russells webinar. Through the Internet I got this information. (Teacher Training Video site?) Yeah, yeah and also one of his techniques, I think it was last January, about using how to correct students homework by using JING. From that time I have used it, I have it on my laptop and I used it. From this year only, I think before spring. I think Russell had a kind of webinar, I think, in spring. 5. (Recognising a high frequency of many tools from survey, but asks for favourites) Photopeach is one of my favourites, its fun and easy to use and it engages learners. Audioboo offer mp3 recording and playlists. Skype, I suppose, as a tool. The world would be lost without Skype, my income realise on it. (on there being no geographical limit to her business) Not at all and if you click on the clustrmaps you can see where all of the visitors and members are. Clustrmaps, though, is a wonderful tool. (further question about choice of tools and judging effectiveness) Great question and Im typing that it is probably my strongest challenge. A tool for its purpose but my audience is too broad and this is a real challenge for me. Assessing how it works is by the usage and effective usage that it gets by the members or learners Im working with. Whether it is being used to help learning. Not just how Im using it but how are members and learners responding and interacting with it as well. They wont do it if its not easy enough. (Referring to Q10 where most tools he had never used) I followed through Stannards newsletter of various web tools that he thought were useful or important for language teaching. Some of them, I didnt have the opportunity because I didnt have the classes. Others I had the classes but I didnt have the ICT. So, others I had not heard of. Others again, I probably looked at briefly after reading the newsletter and thought, no, it doesnt do it for me. Some of them seem frivolous. Of course, theyve got value in some applications, but I think a person has to be really sold on the benefits. They have to have an interest in that particular application. They have to have the appropriate opportunity or context to use them, and the time. Quite a few things have to come together. Others are very simple web tools cueprompter, for example. Very easy. Again, you need an Internet connection and a bunch of students who need to do that. Ive no doubt my eyes would be opened if I had some training course on that sort of thing. Additionally, there is a lot of noise in the environment these days. Web Tools inherently are easily dismissible, whereas a course book is there, the programme director has prescribed it. So, unfortunately by their nature, web tools in their virtuality are ephemeral. (summarising and linking to Q12 responses on importance in selecting a tool and checking this) I think so, and also if you could come up with a palette that would sit on a laptop where its got a set of web tools, the links that you could click through so you could always have them present instead of having to think is there a web tool for In Smart notebook software, which Ive got, I know the functions of it, I know what it can and cant do, those functions are always there. Web Tools, however, are distributed and scattered, and I have to remember them. Thats another factor. (summarises that respondent needs to have an app always accessible on the front page of a device and not to have to go searching) I think that is a good characterisation. It occurs to me I could have a series of shortcuts to these different things, but I think the benefits need to be sold to me more of specific apps, tools. They have this specificity about them. Smart notebook is a general workhorse, the teleprompter has one function, and JING, well, you can make a video and send them to students, but its kind of narrow. I want a multipurpose or general set or something which brings them all together. Can you work with a developer and make yourself a fortune by bringing out a program which is called web tools and is sold to language teachers?
6.
APPENDIX E
7.
Im doing private tutoring and I will be teaching on a teacher-training programme soon. (asking if use of tools was in relation to teaching) Its definitely an extent to my personal life, especially in the past 2 months, Ive realised a lot of the potential that connected learning, and connected professional development can offer, so Ive been integrating it more and more into my teaching. Ive been making very conscious effort to use the opportunities that are offered to me by these tools, for teaching. (asking for favourite tools either in preparation or with students) I find the two are quite separate in terms of for students or for myself. With my students it is still basic, lets try a few things out and see what happens. Ive been using Vocaroo. Ive also been using lots of online emails which I would kind of like to move to a collaborative blog with my students. Lyrics trainer, too, Ive used if you want to do something in your free time. And a lot of podcasts, actually. (clarifying this is for students to use in their own time) Right! I find that its quite useful to provide them with a lot of options should they want to practice to see what they can do. By giving them a wider variety of options I increase the likelihood that something works for them. (asking how to measure effectiveness) First of all, by the reception. If they dont like, theyre not going to use it and they are not going to learn through using it. So it needs to be easy and accepted by them. Second, is the reliability? It needs to dependable; I need to access it when I want to. And the easiest for me, especially for marking, and assessing. The MOODLE learning platform is my favourite one, if that counts. I already mentioned that I recently started with Blackboard. Im not too keen on Blackboard yet, but maybe its because I dont know it too well. Are you aware of MOODLE? The tools that [MOODLE] offers, I can include Hot Potatoes and do quizzes and crosswords. (asking if maintains own Moodle site) Well, at the University has it, which they have had for three years, I think. Not that long. I was in an online course before I started my job at University and there we had used the platform. Then I approached somebody at our institute and asked them about it, and I was the first one to start using the platform. I kept asking, asking for the finances. (goes to Q4 on institutions) (later returning to asking for favourite tools) I use Audacity, Articulate, which I use to record Power Point presentations. (asking if students use them) Not yet. The PPPs have started. Six years ago there were no students coming with PP but now they have a module called ICT, which they have to attend. So has made a big change in how they come or what they come with for PPP. With recording, I have had problems in the past because I have asked them to record and upload onto the MOODLE platform that were using and some students are not able to do that. So [instead] they have to send by email. If they dont already know how to do it, Im not paid to train them in the technology. Im teach English, thats my job. Its not only a matter of being paid, its my time for my content, for the competencies that I want to work with. (sharing his screen throughout) I started with Engrade, it is a Learning Management System. Then I changed to Edmodo - you can see EMS 11A which is abbreviation for International Economic Relations, so this group was admitted to the university last year. (interviewee demonstrates this by sharing his screen, navigating the system and showing the group users). Slowly but surely I started to use a lot of web applications, some of them, you see, VoiceThread, here they are. Then if you take a look at my wikis, I have a few wikis (again, demonstrates this) which I use as e-portfolios (shows actual students folders). This is my first glog (shows Glogster example) which I created about the Royal Wedding, on 29 April. Then we use Wallwisher. Here we have Poplet its my favourite group, Nickleback, and I created Poplet about it. Then we have games, Zondle, and finally it is ThingLink LLC, if you click, you see advice on passing your interviews successfully and so on. That is my last creation. Then we have Symbaloo, and a lot of other applications. So its very interesting, an animated road map [for the royal wedding]. (asked if he learned these tool by himself). Usually I try to operate on two principles re web applications. They must be, not should be, free and plug and play, so easy to use. (shows students creation) Look, first she created an animated cartoon, on GoAnimate for schools. The topic was going to a restaurant. Here we dub English videos into Russian. If I click you can see it is for my translation practice. Here is a glog about holidays, which I dont like at all, but students created. Here is a cartoon about financial plan. Now we have very interesting application, it is called Themeefy. If I click you see it is a kind of book, you can start reading it (demonstrates this) created by student. So, coming back to your question. Nobody told me anything. I just do it on my own. I receive a lot of emails from different bloggers, from different
APPENDIX E
8.
9.
educational sites and I tried to just, if something is interesting, for example, HelloSlide is very interesting because we can upload Power Point presentations. And Robot will speak decent British English, telling what you type. Well, nobody teaches me anything. As for help, I am thankful to some companies. For example, XtraNormal, because when I write a letter and ask them to give me some free points, because I am from Ukraine and my salary is not that big. They ask for verification of my educational email, and they let me do some things for free. I am very grateful to a lot of companies for letting me try my hand with their applications for free. (asking how to assess a tools effectiveness) Sometimes, I do it by trial and error. I read a lot of feedback on various blogs and sites, and if it is a buzz(?), for instance, VoiceThread is a cool application. I love it. I try to just play with this application. At the moment I am playing with Wiki, with their web create. If it is easy to use, because I must be the first to use. Then I explain to students, and I encourage them to use it. Thats all. Usually, I rely on word-of-mouth advertising after reading lots of information. (asking if other teachers use tools as extensively) No, no. I remember when I was at start of my career at this university, one of my colleagues she is in the Sultanate of Oman, she teaches there. She returned from a business trip and made a wonderful presentations about Hot Potatoes and other web applications. It was my first introduction to [these]. Since that time, practically nobody of my colleagues has started doing similar things. I explained to a couple of them about Engrade. If I just show you Edmodo, one of the members of this group is my colleague. I included her especially to show her how to use this application. My colleagues do not do that. My boss uses Yahoo! Groups and webs.com. She is a little bit more advanced than my colleagues but on the whole, no, they do not do that. (later, during discussion on autonomous behaviour, interviewee was challenged over the pedagogic value of using so many tools and whether they were learning English more effectively) Let me tell you that I am not all that democratic. I stick with one simple truth. If you come here, to university, you have to work. English is an invaluable practical skill, I mean speaking English well. So there will be no kindergarten stuff. You come here and I press you, press you all the time, because people usually work better under pressure. By being 24 hours available and making you understand I can control every step of yours. If you didnt do my exercise, I will punish you, there is no but about it. Because you are a student this is not secondary school. Most of them do not want me to share all these things with their parents, they hide information deliberately. I am very strict. Those who want to learn, they do learn. If they dont want they just face the music. 10. (acknowledges a high degree of frequency for ICT tools and asks for favourite kinds in teaching) Basically, I use blog, wiki, Facebook group and YouTube video, following those of Jeremy Harmer, David Nunan, Rob Ellis. (clarifies if latter is used for personal learning) Those are the prominent personalities that we to study in second language use, which is one of the course (which suggests he didnt quite understand the question). Up til now I am unable to talk with those people. Asking if he keeps his own blog) Yes, I have my own personal blog, which I use to share my knowledge with these students. The literal term of blog, that is a personal website, but not working as a personal for me. I use that blog to share my knowledge with students, and I share some articles if they enquire. (for material sharing?) yeah, I provide them the materials and the activities conducted by my colleagues also. I would like to share and they feel pleasure to visit those materials. When they come inside the classroom, they talk to me and say we are very happy. Those materials are really very effective. So we are in favour of you. (getting impression that he is presenting a glossy, rose-tinted view of what is going on). (asking what technology they use) Laptops, basically. Mostly the people who is study here in capital city they have the strong economic background and they can afford any kind of facility they require. (asking if they do work outside of class) Inside they can involve in wiki, their own wiki which they can edit if they like. (..so not answering question). (questioning what decides selection of tool and which way round) Basically I am influenced by one of my professor in Hawaii. He taught me these ideas. He also taught me to use those materials. Those ICT tools in real classroom teaching. (probing reasons as answers not at all clear) It is not easy to use. It is really challenging. In Nepal, there are lots of barriers in this context. (leads onto discussing barriers). 11. (started by asking what she looks for in a tool) It has to be really easy to figure out. I teach very low-levels who have very limited understanding. If I cant demonstrate it clearly.. we have an offsite computer lab which we have to sign out, so what happens is when I teach, and I need
APPENDIX E
them to do something in the lab, I have to teach it first in the classroom and give it to them on handouts which can be taken to the lab. Anything I use has to be so simple. Our lab also does not have a teaching computer in it. What I am looking for is things that are very simple and that allows for pair-work because I do need them to interact. So, is it simple enough and can they do something together in pairs? For example, a grammar quiz where they click boxes is not very interactive, but maybe there are things which they can build things online, for example, I would get them to build a room together and move furniture around in the room and then describe where it is, together. (asking if she answered Q10 in terms of teaching or more general use) I think I was really thinking of in my teaching, as I recall. At the same time, I was kind of looking at it from two sides. I was looking at it from what do I use myself as a teacher and a lot of that comes into presentation, and I was thinking about what I get my students to use, which are not always the same things. (clarifies that constraints dictates she uses more for preparation and less with students, before asking about the flip side where the students can work with a tool away from the classroom -> barriers)(later asks about Q13 on survey which asks about effectiveness and whether she agreed with students enjoying it and demonstrating use of target language) Yes, absolutely. I dont think there is any point in using tools unless there is some sort of language practice coming out of it. They have to actually use something in a realistic way that they would in everyday life. (interviewee describes building a room exercise using prepositions of place and adjectives). If [students using the target language] is not happening, with whatever tool, then I dont see the point. I wont use technology if I cant see how its helping their language. I think that tool was actually a game for kids, and it is called something like gamesforgirls.com which is a stupid name. (later, under autonomy asked about how tools are learned before mentioning..) Glogster, is something I figured out totally for myself. I asked my students to make posters using Glogster. But I spend a couple of hours myself before I brought it in to show my students. So, that is basically how I do everything. 12. (refers to own survey responses to answer this question) A use a lot of the tools regularly to showcase certain things to teachers. Voice-recording tools not so much in the classroom but I would use them a lot for myself. Audio-editing tools, I actually use Audacity, and lots of other ones on my laptop. Lots of video editing tools, as well. I use VLT media player. I use Audicity quite a lot. I use GCompris http://gcompris.net/-en- which is a suite of educational games. I use Freemind for brainstorming things, for training with teachers. I use Jolicloud http://www.jolicloud.com/ - which is a different operating system. I use Ganttproject http://www.ganttproject.biz/ - project management systems. A suite of games called Childs Play. I also base a lot of my classroom things around the Chrome browser, as theres lots of add-ins. I use Camstudio - http://camstudio.org/ quite a bit to capture videos. Another video editor is Avidemux - http://fixounet.free.fr/avidemux/. I use Picasa quite a lot and another one called Minisebran - http://www.wartoft.nu/software/minisebran/ . (asks about process involved) Usually, either I stumble upon something via lots of emails I receive or lots of groups or RSS feeds that I have subscribed to and I just get the bombardment of information. A lot of it comes from need, my need and demand - if I need to do a certain thing and I dont have the immediate tool to do it at my fingertips. I go onto sourceforge - http://sourceforge.net/ - or some software website. I usually try to find freeware or open source software. I download it and 2 or 3 other suitable options, figure out which one I think is the best and easiest for me to use really quick and I start using that one. (reflects numerous inputs and slightly different process from others in finding a tool after need has been established) I noticed online bookmarking tools well I call it that but its actually called Scoop http://www.scoop.it/ - I use this quite a lot at the moment, (points out this is a curating tool) so if I ever need high-quality, reliable directions for any field, I usually go there first. 13. (mentions that one blog has been looked at which shows knowledge of a huge number of tools, and asks for favourites and why) Ok, one of my favourites is VoiceThread, because its very easy to use. Its very versatile. You can do your own presentations for students. You can have a slideshow prepared and then have students add audio or comments, or they can do their own. Ive found many different ways of using that. Another tool is tools like Pixton and Zimmertwins. I do digital storytelling and I love the possibilities that those tools offer students in terms of expressing their creativity and Ive had great results. (how do you decide or select which tools to
APPENDIX E
use) Well, I think it goes both ways. On one side, I usually find out about a new tool or I discover a new tool myself. I explore it, I see what it looks like, if it is easy to use and what are the pedagogical values I can have with using that tool. I think that is the most important thing because, in the end, it is not the tool itself but whether the activity you are presenting has a pedagogical value. The tool has to enhance that. Usually it has to be easy to use for the students. If the tool is too complicated or takes me very long to teach students how to use, then its maybe not worth it. (clarifies emphasis on the students use and effective learning) For myself, I use almost everything but I do not necessarily use everything in my class. Thats the difference. I use JING a lot, but I dont use JING in the classroom. So there are effectiveness of tools for my daily life as a teacher and what I then actually transfer to students. (summarises 3 ways to use private life, for teaching and for students). (probes for tools that students use outside of class, using the word connecting) The thing is I only have access to the computer lab once a week which means we cannot do all the work there. 95% of my students have Internet access in their houses. Usually, whatever we do in class, they continue to work with most of those tools at home. 14. (asking how the question was answered) I did look for that distinction when I answered all of the questions, to see if whether you meant in my teaching or generally. It didnt mention, how often do you use, and it didnt mention teaching. So I answered that generally. I certainly wouldnt use that much [frequency ticked] every day for work. (reflects on frequencies ticked, before asking for favourites used for/in teaching) Mmmm, [thinks hard] Evernote http://evernote.com/ would probably be one I use daily, for teaching, but more for preparing lessons, more for my lesson planning. I take photos of what Ive written on the board before I scrub it off. So I save things there, save a record of what Im doing. It suits me to [use] that. There are no other group of tools there I would use every day. But things like voice-recording, not necessarily recording my voice, but weve got our own commercial product called WIMBA http://www.wimba.com/solutions/higher-education/wimba_classroom_for_higher_education/ that sits within MOODLE at my college and weve got all the WIMBA voice tools. Blackboard own them now. So I use them a lot with my students to record. You havent got the Learning Management System there, but I do use that daily MOODLE. Its what we use and it enables me to have forums for my students, put resources up, links or actual documents, audio, widgets like dictionaries, text-to-speech type things. I use it all the time, mostly to provide activities and resources for students. (interviewee refers to list) Webinar tools, I used to use all the time when I was doing distance teaching at the same college, but we dont have that program anymore. But I did use it. Screencapture is something I use occasionally but not for teaching. Probably creative students and material creation tools occasionally. (asks about reasons behind choosing tool and whether she agrees with her responses). On motivating, did I say no opinion or not important? (confirms no opinion) Ok, that would probably be because I wouldnt know if something is motivating for students. Things that are engaging and motivation really varies in the classes Ive got. I recently had a 71 year-old student who had never used a computer before, but was very engaged once I got her using one. Ive got another student close to that age who Ive taught before. I cant remember her aversion to technology but Im told shell wander off and my aim is to make sure she doesnt. Whereas Ive got other students who have got iPads in the classrooms and looking up anything Im talking about. (reflects that she has very mixed students) Yeah, we do have a program for international students and they are generally more homogenous, in their 20s, and more comfortable with technology. For the migrant students its a real mix. (asks how she manages this mix in relation to tool use) I guess my preference is to give them an awful lot of stuff using technology that I think would be of benefit to them, things that are pedagogically justified. Because of the different levels of comfort and skill, I dont do that. A lot of them are also working or studying on another course so everything I give students, unless we do it in class or computer lab, is an extension activities. If you want to do more, if you have Internet access [then take advantage if you want to]. I do have to temper my enthusiasm for using some of these things that I think would be really useful and helpful.
APPENDIX E
BARRIERS 3) Could you tell me more about the barriers to using these tools which you selected and which of these are the most common?
1. (asking for clarification on health issues) I havent read the book, but there is a book out called The Teachers Voice and it talks about the physical dangers of overusing and not caring for our voices. And part of the problem with technology is ergonomic problems with posture, so if you consistently have bad posture you may end up damaging your voice and, gosh, can you imagine being a teacher without a voice? So, there are problematic, dangers that you have to really take care of the ergonomic issues and using a mouse. Well, I try to do yoga but I always have a stiff neck and stiff shoulders and pains, so I dont know, part of that might be age, but I think its something that people should talk about more. (asking about other barriers?) Well, personally its just time constraints. Every tool takes a lot of learning and adapting and experimenting and that takes a lot of time. Its always much easier to go with what you already know. But teaching contexts at one of my schools that I teach at, its just a private language school for adults and I teach Business English classes. I can think of a lot of interesting things to do in the classroom with technology but we dont have any technology in the classroom. So I cant even hook up my computer to a projector, so thats a very technology free situation. So, its just the constraints of teaching context. 2. I think the first barrier is that many teachers have no training in using any of these tools and they are afraid of them One of the things is that they dont want to look stupid in front of their students. The minute that something goes wrong, thats the last nail in the coffin. They basically say, well look you cant even be guaranteed that they are going to work, so why should I bother. I tend to have a plan B, so it doesnt really worry me too much if I cant get YouTube to work. Ive probably downloaded it in preparation, but it takes a long time to get teachers who are not that way inclined or comfortable with technology. The other thing is the hardware itself. There are days when the internet is down and there is not a lot you can do about it. Or the TV in the room isnt working. Or someone has borrowed the cable. There is always something. You just have to live with it, I think. (referring to issue of technology breaking down) From my point of view, I mean, Ive got my own laptop which I sometimes use. Ive got an iPad. I know how to tether my iPad to my phone. I can find workarounds when I need to. My colleagues are just not confident enough to do things like that. (and in comparison to colleagues that she is more equipped to deal with technical issues) absolutely, but I am also starting to become the person that my colleagues come to when theyve got a problem. So, Im changing my role as well, because I want them to be more comfortable. (asking if this has changed) I am the teacher trainer after all. A lot of the young teachers have been trained by me to use the technology I know while doing the training course. From the very beginning, I am sending them information on JING or CAMTASIA or whatever right at the beginning, so we use technology right the way through a training course. And they dont really have any problems. Its my main school colleagues who are now looking to me for help. That is a new role. 3. (asked if barriers chosen on the survey personal dislike, no relevance to language skills, not worth time invested, lack of technology available she would still agree with or if she wanted to add anything?) Well, I think that is the complete list of barriers which I can think about. Thats it. 4. (trying to uncover whether she has a natural interest in technology, mentions a potential barrier) As I told you, I think [] technology in the class and I think if a teacher has technology in the class it helps him or her to have lots of facilities and to teach to the students in a very lovely manner, but meanwhile they should pay attention, [as] the Internet it has some disadvantages. In that school, because all of the students have laptops, all of them can connected to the internet and sometimes they use games, and they check Facebook or went to the YouTube, but although we have these disadvantages of the technology, but I think that [it] helps teachers to have more facilities to present their lessons and the class will be very amazing. (clarifying the distraction of low-level students having constant access to Internet) It is one disadvantage, but it depends on the teachers, of course. In that school they were not allowed to force them not using music while they were teaching. The students said that they were allowed to do that, while I am teaching. I think that is a disadvantage but it depends to the teachers. (summarised the onus on the teachers to control internet use during class).
APPENDIX E
5. Time. Hahaha. Definitely my list of priorities is too long. I can prioritise and I do, but time. Connection speeds is another large challenge. Access around the world is obviously not the same. Infrastructures of connection access. Also, more recently, a new challenge that is wanting to use Google Analytics better so I can see how other people are seeing the site. There are so many devices used now BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) is changing things. I get feedback that things dont work on this device or this browser. 6. (reading from survey responses) Institutional resistance, time consuming, lack of training/support, lack of technology available. You could argue that all of these are underlain by a lack of political will. Its about the people behind these things. -> see more comments under institutional training section. 7. (following on, asking if reliability is the biggest barrier) No. Honestly, I would say the biggest barrier is price. I used exclusively free tools. (reminds respondent of survey answers e.g. free easy to use tools by her and students) They tend to go hand in hand, to be honest. 8. There are barriers. If I can go back to MOODLE. My institutes got its own platform but we dont have all the the forum, the quizzes etc. You would have to go and buy more tools to use and if nobody else asks for these tools, if I am the only one then my university will not get this additional tools. (highlighting financial costs ticked on survey and if there is not enough demand they wont bother) Thats right. (paid yourself for tools for own teaching?) Oh yep! I got my own iPad because my university wont pay for it. They pay for your computer or laptop. But nothing else. So, if I want to use an iPad and I also a bought a [] whiteboard some years ago but I was paid back by my employer. I cant wait, you know. I couldnt wait for iPad, Ive got the first one. A birthday is coming up so I might get 3 or 2. Its just that you can connect it to the data projector etc. 9. (following on from institutional support and clarifying that financial cost is major barrier) Once my students [offered to pay] for a professional licence and I said, no, because it might have financial [problems] and I dont want any trouble. (clarifies main point of cost barrier reply shown under barriers). I have to save wonderful presentations from VoiceThread (demonstrates on screen), because it is free version. If I want to create first one, I have to delete one of them. So I [am able to] keep them, because I promised the company to write a report, an article and present it at an international conference. Some of the companies have granted me professional licences because I am teacher from Ukraine and I need them and my salary is peanuts. I am thankful to them, or they let me use professional versions for half a year. (so clarifies that he never pays but manages to persuade companies to give him professional versions) Yes, of course. If am successful [with my cartoon presentation] at the Republican level, I will try to mention all these companies for their help, to say Thank You. (asking for names of specific companies) Showdocuments.com is a very nice application and you can see that I have professional subscription plan. It is very useful and I use it every time. It is similar to what we are using now [Blackboard] (demonstrates that he has full version with all functions). You can also see (shows actual Gmail account on screen) an email from the creator of ThingLink, Finland, granting me an educational account free of charge. (goes on to demonstrate that he has full access). (later, during a supplementary question about his students responses) On the whole, well, there is an extra feature on Edmodo called Polls. Once I asked my students if I am right making [them] use a lot of web applications. 70% said yes. Once I asked them if it was OK to ask [them] to pay or to collect money to buy a professional licence, it was 50-50, but at that time I knew that Id better not. But on the whole, some of them are not so enthusiastic because once, let me tell you. A few years ago a group of students write to me when I created a Google site for their site, deliberately, accidentally on purpose they could, they were able, but they lied to me and I believed [them]. So they sabotaged my efforts. So I have had even bad experiences. But, I would say 80% do what I want them to do. Another problem, if I am good, lets say, at creating Glogsters, some of them try to concentrate on Glogsters only, and I have a mission not just to limit you to one site. 10. The first barrier is lack of experts is the thing. The second one is lack of training package. The next one is lack of basic knowledge to the learners. I mean, learners should have the basic knowledge of using those tools. (confirms same as survey answers) Next one is it is really expensive. I think you have heard that Nepal is a developing country and it is really difficult. (reflects on the context and suggests tools need to be free) and the next barrier is the problem of loadssedding have you ever
APPENDIX E
heard this term? (asks to repeat a few times as unfamiliar term) problem with power cuts, problem of electricity. (understands as unreliable power supply). We have power cut 18 hours in a day. It is not possible to have all the time, so one of the most [biggest] problems, which we called loadssedding (this term, actually spelt load-shedding is a local term which needed looking up see article here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12229752) (confirms that this is the only person to mention power issue). Next barrier is large class size. In the context of Nepal, there is more than one hundred students inside the classroom. (confirms this is also the first person to mention this problem, and probes whether this requires more collaborative or autonomous learning) Oh they have to be collaborative with the teacher, if teaching is possible. May I say another barrier is multilingual classroom, multilingual backgrounds. They dont have much English knowledge, so really very difficult to use [English language] technology inside the classroom. We have to face problem of different mother tongues. 11. (following on from use of tools and getting students to use tools outside the classroom) I still havent investigated that. Im a little nervous about that, because I cant guarantee that all students will have equal access outside the classroom. I dont have a way of knowing who has got access to what. Because I was working primarily with Saudi students, Ive had some cases where some of the women are not allowed or have never used a computer themselves: My husband does that. Our students, because they are coming from far away, sometimes they havent brought their machinery with them or they dont have a printer, or they are living in a homestay which only has dial-up instead of cable. (there are other barriers and the frustrations associated in other parts for 12 such as time consuming issue and lack of training see under institutions) 12. (listed survey answers institutional resistance, reliability, time, lack of training, cost and ask which was most important) One of the things here is that we work within a closed network, because EF is a private school. So out network is closed down, which means you have to log in with a secure username/password. Plus, if you want to install any additional hardware, like microphone software or video software, we have to send an IT request, so its a long process to get things to happen. That can restrict me from pushing it out onto teachers, so I experiment a lot first myself on my laptop. Any ones I find I allow teachers to use. So thats one of the resistance factors due to the parent company. Reliability one of the things about China is that a lot of very useful sites are blocked, because of the firewall. Instead of downloading and installing different software I try to find an online application that will do the same thing. (acknowledges workarounds but asks about proxy servers) Of course, yes. From a personal point of view, I use them for my personal use, but not from an institutional point of view (reflects that he probably cant be seen to be getting round the great firewall). In the school, we just leave it as it is and try to get round it. 13. (following on from ICT tools access) Internet access and the availability of having that is essential. For those without access at home, they can request further access at school, when we are not in class. (asks for actual barriers in the classroom) The first barrier is actually the schools policy on who can access the computers, because there is only one room, which is usually used by the IT teachers. There is only one free day. Ive been there a long time and earned the benefit of using the lab on Fridays, but the rest of the teachers cant. The only thing that other teachers can use is projector, installed in a different room, but there is only one bookable for the whole school. Another is teachers knowledge of ICT and what to do with it. Not many teachers are ICT literate. Thats a barrier. School is not offering training, so its mostly self-discovery. 14. (having previously mentioned non-homogenous classes and students who dislike technology, asks about contextual barriers) I hear about barriers from others 24/7. The ones I ticked (Q15) are institutional resistance. The reason is our network is within a state government network and they dont seem to understand education. Often things we cant do, like using Skype at work. I can use Blackboard, at work, fortunately. They change something or they suddenly deny us use of something. I had a blog with one of my classes on blogger, but suddenly I couldnt access it, because someone accessed something that had something offensive to the government network. They banned access to all of that, even teachers who were using it for teaching. I suppose that would happen in any educational institution but its a constant battle, for me, against the policies they make, because of the government part of it. If we were an autonomous institution, as far as our computer systems go,
APPENDIX E
it would be anything goes. They might put up barriers when something goes wrong, but not for experimental stuff. No relevance to language skills, I hope, speaks for itself. Although Im pretty good at playing around just to see if I can find relevance. In my other teaching, I actually [train] teachers of other areas, from hairdressing to forensic science, so its [experimental]. So something used for fashion design might be useful for language teaching. Not worth investment in time/effort also speaks for itself. Second Life, for example, I keep going back to, keep trying to use, thinking there must be something here. Ive done an online conference within SL, but to me, its not worth it. I certainly couldnt imagine ever getting a group of my students in there. Financial cost involved I buy a lot of licences and tools myself, because that is the only way I can justify [to institution] the amazing things Im doing with it. That is a barrier why I might not do some things. (reflects on top-down barriers -> leading to institution question)
APPENDIX E
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND TRAINING 4) If employed - How often do you receive support in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? What do you receive from your institution? What other things do you do outside of work? If self-employed/freelance How often do you receive support or training in your professional development in the area of technology and ICT? How much responsibility do you take for your own learning?
1.
(continuing to talk about barriers) A lack of training offered through institutions, although sometimes Im really grateful for that, because I tend to resent, well coming from King Saud University where you had to sit through awful trainings all the time, and they would observe you and tick the boxes did you use technology? Therefore, did you teach well? (asking about her freelance position) So far, Ive received none at all. In Berlin, its typical most teachers you meet do work freelance because employers dont want to give contracts because that would cost them more money, so most of us are freelance. Ive just a professional association called ELTAB (Brandenburg) and this association seeks to fill the gap and does offer a lot of professional development but, so far, not in the area of technology. But technical university, we had a conference for English for Academic Purposes in the spring. One professor, who is doing a masters in corpus linguistics, gave a short workshop but he wasnt showing us how to do it. But at that university, our head of languages has offered each of us the opportunity to give paid professional development workshops. So I could offer to lead one, or any others. But generally I dont get any support or training to use technology in the classroom. (continuing to talk about ICT tools) I think probably because the course, although they support me in my use of ICT in the classroom they are not terribly up on anything and it tends to be me who has to find the sites and the equipment myself, although once Ive done it theyre quite happy to share in it. (answering a reflection that she seemed autonomous in choosing what she wanted to use, there being no restrictions) none at all, no. (asking later about how much support in this area from the institution) Thats a hard one to answer. The school decided that would have some kind of training, but actually I ended up doing the training. So, the help I get is less than the help Im giving. But at least the will to give everybody some kind of help and development is there. It was me who was providing the help, if you like. (on prompt as to whether teachers shouldnt wait for the institution and, instead, offer training) No, I dont think so. I think the institution should be providing training. I think if you bury your head in the sand and get to the point that you think its not important then you are going to lose customers in the end, because people are so confident around technology that teachers I think need to have that as well. You can stand up and say Id quite like to have a bit more training but I really do think that there should be more from employer as well. Im delighted that my employer does do something, because it sounds like some other schools dont have that at all, but its still not enough. (asked to what extent she has received professional development by employer or if she had voluntarily done this. Where does it come from?) Basically, I graduated from my major at the university was English Language and Literature. I did some training in the methodology, but when I started teaching by myself, I found I realised this was not enough. Then I started my own development self-learning. I think the interest for the ICT comes from within myself, because I am really interested in technology. My husband is a software developer. Most of my friends are into IT. Thats when I wondered, how about if I use some technology in my teaching. I started with YouTube videos. I started by teaching a group of librarians. I started to bring my laptop, to do some interactive exercises on the laptop, and I watched some online lessons or videos in class. Then I started googling information for Internet information, specifically which web tools I could use. I found lots of different blogs and websites and read about trying to develop in my own classroom. I didnt receive any professional training in this respect. I created the presentation and held this in my language school and the title was Web 2.0 Tools in ELT and I can also share my presentation with you (shared link to Prezi). I just wanted to show the teachers what tools I am used. Soon I am going to Krakow in Poland to do a Celta course. In this respect, this is my self-education and my own enthusiasm of trying out something new in teaching.
2.
3.
APPENDIX E
4.
5.
(asking what kind of training in Iran/Sweden?) In Iran we had some training but it was not the latest to do with Internet or web tools, no I didnt have any kind of training. Here, in Sweden, just in the class before I wanted to start my job I have a kind of presentation with one of the teachers, she explained to me how should I use this tools. But I didnt have a kind of official training for web tools. (clarifying that she only received general guidance and what was expected) Yeah, yeah. (asking if she feels a pressure or expectation from the institution to use the technology effectively) I dont think so it is pressure for me, because when they introduce that this is the situation and you are supposed to use these things. Then because I was really eager to using these kinds of things I, myself, encouraged myself to use [them] and by using [them] my teaching will be very amazing for the students. So I dont think that its a kind of pressure for me. I think that when I come from teaching in my home country, [that I have] developed. I have a kind of revolution in my teaching, because I have more facilities, using web tools and technology. Its really amazing. I was definitely supported for several years at an Adult Learning Center where professional development was supported. When I was with that institution there was a full rated K12 school system but we were the outcasts and couldnt get them to use Moodle. They now do, but I could not then. I wanted, felt the need to get our learners of them using technology. Administration was not buying in. So I firmly believe there has to be support from the top or its bang your head against the wall time. Finally, my manager said youve outgrown us, were not ready for you. Shes still my best reference, but that was 6 years ago and they are just catching up. So I have since gone nuts on mine, though English Caf, loved what they were doing and then they closed [shut down] on us. (later in free discussion, respondent want to add the following) One comment I will add I am no longer affiliated with a Virginia based institution. I am no longer welcome to participate in Virginia learning experiences. I can pay and attend a conference but I cannot take state training. Theyve called me and asked me to teach but I cannot participate unless I pay full fees, because Im not a valued Virginia educator. Thats wrong. That needs to change. When an organisation wants ICT or web tools used, they will make them available, they will train staff, they will create an ethos in which these things operate and are used. At Newcastle, for example, the management are keen to go as paperless as possible, which is quite a long way. They push consistently the use of Blackboard and ICT tools. Therefore, the barriers which are left will be the teachers own proclivities or disinclination to engage. Those are the two main issues. Those cancel out into it being a human issue. Do people want to? Whether they want to or not depends on many things, but thats the underlying point. The barrier is peoples feelings. Barriers have to do with people. If its on the management side, people are not supplying the equipment or training. If its on the teachers side, then its because the teachers are not interested sufficiently. (firstly clarifies the interviewees employment position currently 1-1 freelance but soon to be employed) Correct. (asks about training/support expectations from an employer) I am not expecting much. Im not expecting to be trained. Im not expecting to be given anything. Im expecting that I will have to either figure it out myself, which is highly likely or ask people who have been there longer than I, and try to borrow some of their time, to do that. I would hope it would otherwise. Especially as there is now a trend to try and incorporate more ICT in education and director of studies are quite interested by that and they really want to push for that, but they dont know what to do with it. So Im seeing [my future employment] as being very self-directed. (asking if teachers like her can take a lead) Yeah, Im expecting that to be the case for me. I know, because I have also done a bit of research on ICT in education. I would hope that its not like that but I do think it will be. I think there is a very strong possibility for teachers to take the lead and I think that they will have to, but unfortunately teachers dont always have that much time to do that. (asking about awareness of teachers not prepared to be autonomous and self-directed, not wishing to over-represent fully autonomous teachers) Yes, absolutely. For example, I will be teaching on an English teacher-training course [soon]. What this means is that, now in the Netherlands, there is a push for bilingual education. As you can imagine, there are strong proponents and strong opponents. What this means is that for teachers in primary and secondary education who had not been hired to teach bilingually, are now being told that they have to teach in English and how to run their classroom. Even if they have been teaching for forty years. I think that has been quite a barrier to this sense of autonomy and motivation for development, because they are being forced to go through professional development. Both [with the medium of instruction] and with technology. (picking up on the
APPENDIX E
6.
7.
enforcement and the increase of technology use in the classroom, and the possible resistance of more experienced teachers) Im not sure. My feeling is that there is a lot of money has been invested in getting laptops for schools and getting computers. But its putting technology at the centre of education as opposed to the actual teaching. (exploring the idea of there being a gap between expectation of teachers from institutions when technology is introduced and a lack of training). My answer has to be in two parts. One is that I cannot totally answer because Im not working in an institution at the moment. But I can let you know in a month or so. The other side is, yes, I would expect training. That is what is logical and I would expect it, but realistically Im not expecting it. Do you see the difference there? I think its right that we should be given training but I think they wont go about it properly. (reflecting that interviewee already setting themselves up for this gap) Right, and normally Im not like that in life but my professional life, I am. Then Im not waiting for anything to be given to me. 8. (asking to what extent do institutions provide training when they bring in new technology/tools) This is a lot of my very sore, haha, points at my university. There is basically no training, especially for the new things. I am doing an e-portfolio, an online course for Mahara. Here I get training, but I find out by accident that it takes place. There are only two from our institute taking part. My university pays for it, thats not a problem. But usually like the IWB there is no training. There was a demo session. My boss liked it, so haha, we bought it, well, he ordered it, but we had no training whatsoever. (referring to answers from survey Q16) Well, Ive got friends who help me along but this is not official way of doing it. It is my own interest that motivates me to find out more. (asking if she feels frustration in the gap in training support) Well, I would say it is my own expectations that I want to use it. My boss is not too keen on all these, urrr-huh, technologies. He hasnt even got a mobile phone, so he is not too interested or supportive enough. (checking if where requirement to use technology is more explicit because it has been paid for that training is more expected) Exactly! Sure, we should be properly trained to use that new technology. (and if that is the case in other institutions?) Hmmm, not easy. There are places where they offer support and training etc but I am not too familiar with other universities in Switzerland. Not too many of my colleagues are that interested in technology. (asking if she is the one pushing?) Im pushy, yes. No, no, this is what my boss thinks. (asking about what expectation from the employer to use technology/tools, do they encourage or leave employee alone) There has been a lot in the Internet about democracy in the classroom and so on. Well, I like to breathe down my students necks. By introducing lots of web applications, first of all, I am showing them that I am the same level regarding computer technology. They come to my classroom equipped with tablets, smartphones and so on. But when I ask them to use these applications, lots of them are at a loss, they dont know how to go about it. Usually they only use two buttons on their smartphones the red one and the green one. They are shocked. At the start of the school year I explain [that] my mission is not only to teach you English, that is enjoyable and very rewarding, but to show you that there are oceans of interesting web applications which you can use not just for studying foreign language. You can use in your future careers. As for encouragement, right now it is all the buzz. To have such things in your arsenal, I mean, if there is a conference or you want to make an impression on some conference delegation, I am here to show how good we are using technology. Im not familiar with other departments, maybe they do something but I am not sure. So, I have all the encouragement .... and we will try to register some [work] with the ministry of Education. Im getting help from native speakers in forums. Encouragement, yes, pat on my back! Im not getting any money for that. (clarifies that, at no point, institution doesnt train or support directly) Sometimes, last year, again on the recommendation by my head of department, I attended an online course organised by British Council, Ukraine. It was called e-moderators essentials. I showed the participants lots of educational applications because they knew nothing about this. But that was last year. Since then, there has been no collaboration with the BC. I am just trying to answer do they provide any support. No, actually, thats why my applications must be free (see continuation under barriers).
9.
APPENDIX E
10. (asks if employer supports the interviewee) This is only by my self-knowledge. No people provide me the ideas to use these technologies, inside and outside of the classroom. In the beginning, I was unable to use, even a mouse. Later, right now, I am able to bring the ICT world inside the classroom. So it is my pleasure. (reflects he has had no encouragement) Yeah, myself. And the use of technology (lost connection) this is my self-exploration, and self-inspiration and reflective understanding. Because of these things I am able to bring it inside the classroom. (repeats himself a few times). 11. (following on from question on relationship, someone on the technophile end who is frustrated by a practical lack of technology and nature of class and a possible lack of support/training) Ive started doing my masters in ed tech and everything Ive learned I kind of have to fight for myself. There has been no training in any of my institutions. I wouldnt say that they are resistant to it. They want teachers to bring in what they know but they are not doing anything to help you learn more. So, its up to you to figure it out yourself. (shares experiences from other interviews on the issue of some support, but lack of training) Yeah, thats why it was interesting to see myself against others. When you work where its all up to you to figure it out yourself, it tends to be very isolating. You feel like you are working in a vacuum where you dont know if anyone else is going through this, because you are not connected with anyone else. Even within the same school, you dont know if other teachers are doing this or not, we just dont discuss it. You feel like you are working against the stream, against the wind. (later, asking more specifically about what support and/or training has the interviewee ever received from an employer in this area) No.. [hesitates, thinks] I dont believe so. About seven years ago, I had one employer try to introduce MOODLE into our classrooms, but they didnt know what it was or how to use it either. They kind of plunked it in front of us and said here is a thing we want you to use called MOODLE and heres a bunch of stuff that weve loaded onto it. There you go, use it. And that was the end of MOODLE. Nobody ever used it. (laughs) No, I cant say Ive ever had any training. Ive had to figure it all out myself. I think they dont really know anything about it either. They were business people, not teachers. They just wanna make a buck, really. (reflects on institutions wasting their money on ideas which arent followed through with proper training). (explores whether hypothesis of where an institution has implemented new technology that teachers sit back and expect training) Yeah, I think you are right on the money, there. At the current job, that is kind of the way they look at it. They have given us these computers and they want us to use MOODLE and they have made us aware of that. We are supposed to be incorporating it into our classrooms. But has been nothing on how to do it. You are expected to figure that out for yourself go home and play with it. A lot of people are resistant because (a) Im not paid to figure this out, its a unionised environment and if you are not paying me, Im not doing it. (b) I dont know where to start. Ive always done it my way and I dont know where to start learning about it. [Furthermore] I dont have time, I think I do a lot of work outside of my classes that [already] Im not paid for. They tend to come at it a bit backward, especially when it comes top-down, you know, you have to do this but were not going to help you. (reflects on this common theme with other respondents). 12. So basically we have not so much institutional resistance but sometimes with new products and new things we are expected to use we are given a basic PPT training package, and thats all. So this comes from individual managers in each school and maybe talented, technological teachers, who help share their experience and knowledge, and help train others. (reflects on this) Something that happens a lot is that there is a sharing of best practices. It seems to be a big thing this year, I dont know whether it is just in Asia or China or just EF, there seems to be a lot of encouragement of certain individuals at certain schools, in a certain region, sharing their best practices with other schools. Groups of people with talent in certain areas are encouraged to share these practices, which I think is a good thing. (makes assumption that EF, being large organisation, has cross-training) Yeah. There is regional training quite a lot every year, sometimes people will be sent to Shanghai or Beijing. Or else [there are] visits to individual schools, giving specialised training, as each school is very highly individualised as well. (suggests as DOS his role and his background is greater than most and an expectation for him to do training) Yeah, very much so. This normally happens if someone has a useful skill set that person then becomes the person as the expert in those skills. So if I was a technophobe and my senior teacher was a technophile he would have a more dominant role when it comes to training on the IT side. (what happens to a new teacher with little skills) As part of my recruitment process I will ask teachers for certain IT skills. If someone has no IT skills, its not a problem; they will get some induction training, which includes showing best practice in weekly
APPENDIX E
training. People learn and people need to realise its a school where technology is coming to the forefront. Expectations [of the teacher] will be pretty high. 13. (Following on from other teachers barriers to ICT, does she inspire them?) No, I mostly share with [the other teachers] what I do. Ive run a few training sessions with my English teachers on my own time. (Following on from other teachers barriers to ICT, does she inspire them?) No, I mostly share with [the other teachers] what I do. Ive run a few training sessions with my English teachers on my own time, haha. About using technology. So that some of them are really enthusiastic but as they cannot access the lab at school, it is very difficult for them to plan things. They can assign some of these things as homework, but not during school time. (asks question about provision of training from institution) There is no provision, whatsoever. The only reason I can use it is because I have proved that I have enough knowledge to be in charge of the lab without breaking anything. The school has never offered any training. (asking about support and if she has freedom) Exactly, that is what is happening. They know Im innovative and they are interested in what I can offer, so they want to take advantage of that. (and by taking advantage that presumably means offering teachertraining) I hope so. In fact I am writing a proposal for a professional training option now, not just English teachers, but all subjects in ICT. So Im hoping they will say yes. (later, asks if institution should provide training) I do. I do think it should. The problem in my country (Argentina) teachers are not full-time, they have two or three jobs. They run from one school to another. Its very difficult to have all the teachers from one school present at the same time. So, any professional development offered by the school is very difficult to schedule that or those who are willing to come on a Saturday and those who wont (so clarifies that those prepared to give up their free time only would get benefits). 14. (worded question as what does the institution do in terms of support or training for the teachers instead of what does she receive personally) Not enough. To put it in context, its a public institution and part of state government. I think weve very good conditions and in terms of Australian teachers, we have very good conditions you probably havent heard that very often. Part of our enterprise agreement, our workplace conditions that we fought strong and hard for is allocation of professional development hours and money. Now its not much compared to general public service, but we do get that. It doesnt have to within technology and ICT. I probably spend half and half on developing my skills in technology, language teaching and dealing with issues with groups of new migrants coming in. Each teacher gets to choose what they spend their PD money on. Weve got fabulous tools, such as Interactive Whiteboards and a wonderful suite of tools for our LMS. We have a whole area which just helps teachers with technology. Half of my hours for four years was just to help people in my faculty with technology. So the support is there, but on the ground, giving teachers time to access that support isnt there. I get really frustrated because they roll out these new things and say youve got to use them, but its only people like me who spend every waking moment playing with this stuff, trying to learn it. only the technophiles will take advantage of it. I planned a whole series of workshops over a long period time, it was over a whole semester, two hours per week. I put an awful lot of my time into that and I managed to get time from teachers to do this. Some of it had to come from their own PD and then the teachers stopped coming. I dont think it was about [my teaching, but there priorities changed and time restricted their attendance]. I would like to work out how to get through to these teachers [who are more resistant]. That frustrates me. There is the support, I dont think there is enough support in time and that teachers could have an awful lot of PD in technology if they chose to. They say we dont have time, but they dont chose to spend the time they do have learning technology. (reflects that in this interviewees context, teachers are making choices when support is there not to take it up leading to autonomous behaviour, or lack of it).
APPENDIX E
AUTONOMOUS BEHAVIOUR 5) Where does your autonomous behaviour in relation to this topic come from? Have you had to become more autonomous in learning about certain technologies and ICT tools? 6) What do you think you teach others about autonomous behaviour?
1.
Probably my [autonomous behaviour] is rooted in personality. I tend to be self-reliant and independent. So, its about a sense of impatience, so I dont want to wait for somebody else. If something is interesting or useful Id like to just go ahead and find out about it for myself, but its also a drive to avoid stagnating. If I had to teach in the same way every year with the same materials, it would be terribly boring. So learning to use technology offers more resources, more variety, it offers a diversity, the kind that you cant always get with just books and a whiteboard. (on being asked if she has had to become more autonomous) Paul and I started doing our TESOL diploma in Sarajevo, 2-3 years ago. Because there are very limited resources there we just had the internet to find books and resources to do our research, so for that we had to be really autonomous. Yeah, I think thats a big draw, when it comes to technology. A lot of teachers live in places where they dont have good physical) resources so the internet offers them a lot. [In terms of teaching others] maybe it just aspects of personality strong reliance, strong independence, not having to wait for somebody else to lead or to offer training. I think teachers just observing each other is really helpful and really important, and not judging each other. Autonomy is definitely important for learning, and it is an area of interest of mine, but I wouldnt want to make the mistake of judging other teachers. (asking if she has had to become more autonomous) Yes, absolutely. I go out to conferences and am quite interested in seeing the IATEFL LT SIG, looking at that and following up the links, from the website, the newsletters, from things that people put out on Twitter, just to see if there is anything useful in them. Yeah. (asking what a teacher-trainer can teach others about AB) I think I do have a role to play in actually giving the people the tools to develop for themselves. One of the first things that I make sure my trainees have is some kind of Professional Learning Network that they can build on and develop from and if it parallels mine and if it actually moves away from me thats also very good because people develop at their own time and own speed. Its not a bad thing at all. I do have a significant role, certainly when they are trainee teachers in helping that along at the beginning. I think teachers who are no longer learners are doing their students a disservice. I think teachers should be learners. What you are actually learning doesnt really matter, and if its not your thing to go online and find out about online things you can still be a learner and you take that enthusiasm into the classroom with you. (refers to CPD to Dinosaurs #ELTchat) We have a meeting every Monday. I do one website, and I do a 5-min website. We look at it, what you could do with it. I then do a screen capture and laminate the page so that any of the real dinosaurs will recognise it when they open it up and on the back a list of things that you could use it for in classrooms and just one website a week seems to suddenly, its a bit like the water-torture you know, one drop at a time, and its beginning to pay off. (having reminded interviewee of items chosen on survey) I think it is just about my kind of personality. I try to be an independent, autonomous person. I dont usually rely on other people. I try to rely on myself in everything. This is the most confident way. In this respect I prefer to be the pioneer. For example, the presentation [referred to above], I could of course, wait, until go to some other event. But I decided to organise such an event myself. I think I will continue not to wait, to be the guide. Mostly I rely on the Internet and the blogs, in this respect. And I want to make some change in the local community of teachers and I have lots of ideas we can change it, how to move the process.. and how we can bring the modern world into the traditional classroom. (what can she teach others?) I can just show the way, give the information about being more autonomous. I can give some tips for people who are willing to use these tips.
2.
3.
APPENDIX E
4.
(asking how she learns the tools) Such as JING, I download some video recording from [TTV] site. Because he explained it clearly, so I followed that kind of video recording, so from [that point of view] I teach myself. (asking about autonomous behaviour) Mmm, [silence, couldnt answer] (further prompt using survey answers suggesting very autonomous person) I cant say its my autonomous behaviour, but I dont know how to answer that question. (yet another prompt trying to find out how she really feels about autonomous behaviour, but interviewee didnt really understand and lots of background noise cut in). By coming here [Sweden] I think I got this idea. (advice for others?) I, as a teacher, should want to have these facilities. Then If I want to have these kind of skills but first I need to feel that I want something, then I can find a way by searching the Internet. A person like me who wants to learn about these tools its not so enough information and training on the Internet. [very unclear what she really meant]. (A guide on the side suggests you are a keen advocate for learner autonomy) Yes, and all of the buzzwords that go with it -> Critical thinking skills -> Independent Learning Style -> Knowing your style and preferences. But what I love with the world getting more and more social online is that we dont have to do all the work. If its a social platform, not limited to a tiny classroom. Its social, open. Other people help other people. The backchannel on whatever they want it to be. [The importance of] encouraging that, making that totally OK, even if [] not spot on if you can help by save me time by helping someone else. Help them, show them how to do things. (How does translate into you as teacher having learner autonomy using these tools and technologies ) For me, it makes for strong learning experiences because its relevant. When you have relevance in your learning and thats what creates autonomy and independent learning. You know what you want, you find it, you work with it. The strongest challenge from both peers and learners is is this really learning? Is this a place where I can truly improve my English? Can I get professional, business, academic? Yes. Its most often if I give a lot away for free or if people take the chance and pay for classes. Not being able to offer a credential is a drawback. There is lots of talk about badges and different credentialing systems. Im trying to be part of that. She typed the following quote My autonomy then is the secret of my success = minimal support from institution (not ready yet) institutional change comes TOOOOO slow! Im now converted to smart notebook software because it has taking teaching organisation, preparation and delivery to a new level. Somehow it has changed things qualitatively. Im no longer sitting in front of a blank sheet of paper, wondering what to do. Now I have a series of slides to fill in and things are a lot slicker, more efficient in the classroom and Ive got a record of what was done, or not done. Given those characteristics or features I find some endless benefits. Ive moved since Saudi, Id say. It started when I met smart boards through the British Council, where training was given, because BC wants to improve and maintain its position in the market place, through a state school in the UK. In particular, I saw one teacher using smart boards extremely efficiently. Given the students age, they seem to absorb very fast. Since experiencing these sorts or things and getting some software free [from former employer] I started to realise my movement into ICT is something that has been germinated from some seeds planted here and there. Given that progression and an inclination to try and get away from inefficient teaching approaches, I think that is the process, by which, a teacher can develop into ICT. They have to be given opportunities to see what the benefits are. I feel that I could do workshops for teachers on the way that smart notebook can be used. There are various aspects of ICT that I could tell people about but it is characteristic of where ICT is in TEFL, there hasnt really been sort out by employers or other teachers. Im certainly more IT literate than some, also a generational thing and at 47 my peers and seniors are often woefully unaware of, whereas the digital natives of your generation and younger are often way ahead. (confides that interviewer is only 6 years younger, questions using that term and brings in residents and visitors) Yeah, interesting concept and I misjudged the age differential and I would be interested in seeing that article. I would say [the immigrants/natives dichotomy) is a very visual and divisive. A native has the luxury of being born into it. There is importance of not losing the essence of the teacher-student relationship which is something very human and timeless which the frailties and contingencies of net life cant really support very well. The essence of teaching remains the relationship between people, even if tools can enhance this and save time when it comes to presenting and connecting, but in terms of the essence, the look, the touch and the voice, the kinaesthetic, if you like, theres no real substitute for that.
5.
6.
APPENDIX E
7.
(asking what kind of person she is on discovering tools) I would say that I dont find the tools myself, as primary sources. I wait for others to tell me about them, but not my colleagues, more people on online forums or people on social networking sites. Or blogs. In my community of physical people, Id be the first, but I dont actively search. Its not that high a priority that I can read and curate the information. (reflecting that a lot of people already doing the job of curating) Yes, curating, I guess, is a buzzword these days. (asking if her existing approach in 1-1 to encourage learner-autonomy impacts on her teacher-learner autonomy, and what is the precise process of learning how to use these tools) Yeah, generally by trial and error. If there is something which is really frustrating me, Ill go search for a tutorial or the FAQs. For example, with Edmodo, I had no idea and I just kind of lets see what happens, and I just figured it out, but I realise that takes more time. Trial and error takes more time. Its a bit more passive but I would still regard it as autonomous because its in my free time. (challenging whether it is passive) Its more passive than it could be. Maybe its that my standards can be quite high. In the sense that Im collecting a very broad range of information. Im not going in with a goal in mind [when learning these tools]. (Am I right surmising that when you get a tool, you teach yourself?) Basically, yes. I bought the iPad and a friend knew about a short introduction to it, so I was able to go there and spend 3 hours practicing a bit. Err, basically most things I just try them out, learning by doing. It depends.. but I dont like people showing me how to do things. My husband is very good with Excel, for example, and he goes click, click, click and I still dont know how to do it. (asking if she agrees that experts teaching how to use something to beginners isnt always effective and can be a barrier) I do agree with that, except if you can all sit at your own computer and just repeat what the, hmm, professional showed you how to do it. Now with screenshots and things like that, its easy and you know what? Russell Stannard with his videos are fantastic. I usually try to attend his sessions at IATEFL and have a subscription for [the magazine] English Teaching Professional. So, I always try out the kit that he puts down there. So, thats great. And I go back to my employer, to people who are data processing specialists and I tell them, or rather I ask them if they happen to know this program and I show them one or two videos. (what can you teach others about autonomous behaviour?) I can try and facilitate it, but actually teaching? (acknowledges it is probably something you cant teach). Giving them a good example, is what comes to my mind. (acknowledging interviewee has demonstrate already autonomy but asking if this has always been his way) Well, I think it developed with time. When I came to [this] university I would say I was cautious, because it was a new environment. Lots of ladies around and you have to be very careful. Slowly but surely, now I am very autonomous. Everybody knows about my activities and lots of people, when I start to show them, are just baffled at first [believing that] I tried to cheat them and tried to impose sometimes. But I am very autonomous [now]. Nobody stops me, everybody listens to me. Again, whenever there is a chance everybody tries to show how good we are by using all these web applications, even in my single case. (what can you teach others?) If you find your niche, its very important. Most of my colleagues are, I would say, great teachers, with their own techniques, who I try to emulate. Some of them are quite good at vocabulary, developing speaking skills, but they do it traditionally. They use scissor-work, they just use scissors to cut out something interesting, they use projectors for presentations. In their own way, they are trying. I wouldnt say they are stick-in-themuds! I think if they used more web applications it would be better. Sometimes I dont understand the reason why. Maybe they think [I just] use these applications for no [extra] payment, just for enthusiasm, thats all. But its my opinion only.
8.
9.
10. (follow on from lack of training.. asks how he educates himself) Oh, from online resources, different blogs and following tutorials. Next one, in the beginning I used to follow [books]. Basically there is one of my professor, in Hawaii called Michael Long, have you heard of him? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Long_%28academic%29). (moving onto taking full responsibility for own learning and if institution provide a barrier) I myself have to manage the problems. Why? Because I am a teacher of this post-modern era. (asking if he has freedom to choose ) Psychologically, I didnt face any problems. Other teachers, the more traditional ones, who are unable to use ICT, I would like to call them traditional they basically use the chalk and talk method. Sometimes, they criticise me, but I dont care for [them]. (Does he influence/inspire others?) Oh they are calling me to sort out (unclear answer).
APPENDIX E
11. (on learning a tool for yourself, how do you go about this?) I usually sit down and figure it out myself. I spend a lot of time online, on my computer after work. Sometimes I find them on blogs or sometimes I might just find a tool as I am surfing the Internet and looking at different sites, such as games sites or comedy sites. I might find something which I can use and I will just pay with it for a couple of hours and see how it works. My goal is always to find something easy enough for my students. So, if I can figure it out by myself in an hour then [it qualifies]. (mentions Glogster see Q2) (Is it important to have command of the tool before introducing to students?) For sure. Because with my level they dont have that autonomy to go and figure it out for themselves. If I dont show them, step-by-step theyre not going to do it. It helps things to be visual, too. Anything more complicated, Excel, for example, I dont think I could do because I dont have enough familiarity myself. (later, being asked about autonomous behaviour) I think I used to expect to have that to have that training or the institution set some standards or set expectations. Over time, I have realised that that is never happening, so if I want to use this it is up to me. So my perception of what I have to do has changed over time. Its because I saw myself as in a world where there was technologies everywhere and every day I am seeing this battle against cell phones and the stuff that is buzzing in my classroom. And nobody is acknowledging it. So I figured out that if I dont do it, my institutions are never going to do it. So, I [used to be] dependent on them to make those initiative moves, but now Ive decided to take it upon myself. 12. Basically if I feel comfortable within the realm with whatever the technology is, for example, Blackboard Collaborate, I find quite easy to navigate my way around it, because I used to design software with menus. So experimenting with menus isnt a problem. If its completely alien to me then I will seek help, in forms of videos or just asking someone directly here. Maybe I will just go online to other groups or forums who can give me directions. (suggests that he is pretty resourceful) I would quite agree. My sort of motto is dive in, dont be afraid, jump in. (asks if he has become more autonomous or if it has always been a personality trait) [thinks long and hard about Q] I think that is something that I have been taught, through my education. I dont think its something I just acquired when I came to China. I think Ive had it for a long time, maybe as part of my university education where a lot of it is that you work on your own and if you dont have an immediate solution you go and find it. [In Mathematics] you have to work through a lot of things yourself, individually, so it might be related to that. Thats just my hunch. (reflects that interviewee really considered this before answering). (Finally asks if autonomy is something that can be taught) Ah, autonomous behaviour? Hmm, its something Id like to think can be acquired. I think its a skill. In our organisation at the moment, they are rolling out a new product for training and Im completely against it, because it goes beyond what I think. I think learning should be done is lots of different ways. One, you sit and receive information by a person who is lecturing or teaching or whatever theyre doing. Another one is, is it synchronous or asynchronous learning or training? Where you are given a task and your job is to go away and find the solution to complete that task. I do believe everyone is capable of doing the same and its just a skill you need to learn or acquire. 13. (suggests autonomy freedom - has been given but that has somehow been created by her, winning people over, it seems) Yeah, that is a true picture. Exactly. It means I have spent lots of my free time, haha, doing informal professional development. And its paid off. I mean Im really happy about it. I do not regret a single minute spent on that. (asks how she learns about how to use a tool) Well, I consider myself an explorer. I try it myself first. Trial and error, see what are the possibilities. If I get stuck, then I resort to trying to find somebody who has already used it a tutorial, a blog post or anything. Well, you know, Russells TTVs are great. So there is always someone else who can give you a hand, but it is usually yourself exploring. (have you always been autonomous?) I think its something I always had in me. Im restless. (suggests she is too impatient to wait giving an example) (seeks confirmation that certain types of personalities win through) I think so, it is directly related to my character. Again, you get better at it. The more you do it. The more you know how to do it. I think it does improve with time [and that confidence to use certain things] (can she teach others about autonomy?) I think the exploration does not hurt. You have to be confident enough to see something new and to get on with it. See if it fits your teaching style. The biggest barriers in teachers is fear of breaking the computer, doing something wrong, or waiting for someone to tell them the truth about
APPENDIX E
technology. The best thing is to go out and explore as there are so many things you can find out something on their own. 14. (reflects that interviewee has already demonstrated her autonomous behaviour, so focuses on her concern of getting training to those technophobic teachers, and my concern to get through to those who didnt do the survey or sign up for the interview) I guess thats one of the things I try to do. I try to model that behaviour. Im always telling teachers how I learned to do things. I came to the realisation that anyone supporting teachers has this A-ha moment where someone asks you a question and I dont know, so I just copy and paste their question into Google or another search engine. Suddenly I thought why am I doing their Google searches for them. So I started modelling that, [telling them] where I found [the answer]. Its also a self-preservation thing because people thought I knew everything. I said, I dont know everything, it is all on the Internet. This is how I learn this, this is how I do this. There is still an impression amongst other teachers that its oh, its easy for you. And Ive worked out that me modelling particular things probably isnt the best. The way I try to do it now is when Ive helped someone else do something, then I say, Wow, lets have a look at whats Elizabeths done, and they say oh, no, you did it all. I say, But it was your idea, I just helped you put that into practice. I guess that Im trying to get them more autonomous by showing them that I dont know either, this is how I learned how to do it. So teaching them about that. Ive done a few PD sessions on networking through Twitter, or learning how to do these things. I dont know how to do it, really. You can lead a teacher to autonomy, but you cant make them drink from it! I just dont know. They all just keep coming back to me. I love it when someone says Oh, I was about to ask you this, but I remembered what you told me before and I worked it out myself. To me, thats a real breakthrough. I dont want to be the support person, the one who helps them learn this stuff forever. I would much prefer to work in a place where everyone learned this way, and I just think that my passion, for sharing stuff in Twitter, and all the stuff I share in a faculty community site they just soak it up, they think its fabulous. But nobody shares anything back with me! Haha! Sometimes I think theyre just lazy or that I overwhelm them. It may just be about technology. When I was talking about PD, there are teachers, and we dont have many of them fortunately, who struggle to use their PD time/money, they just dont think they need to develop. They have been teaching for a long time and we do have a very, very old workforce. (picks up this point about introducing CPD to dinosaurs the #ELTchat mentioned in the introduction on PD) (interviewee talks about her view on the older teachers who refuse to do any PD) I dont have the answer and I was worried about what I said in [that chat]. Some of the older teachers, the ones over 60 and weve got teachers in their 70s working [here]. We dont have many younger ones. Everyone thinks Im younger [than 51] just because Im so comfortable with technology, but thats because Ive been using it for forever. There is someone, in particular, about my age, who said Ive been teaching for 20 years, theres nothing else I can learn. And I said to my manager, well I hope you took her professional development money and time off her. I report directly to our faculty director and quite often Ive just sat there and said, Look, can we just leave them behind? Its just out of frustration. It is quite obvious but weve got a lot of teachers who were casual teachers for a long, long time, desperate to have contracts or permanency. Theres one in, in particular, I dont know how she managed to get a permanent job because shes our biggest technophobe, and she teachers one of the ones who teaches the younger students who want to use technology. She doesnt go to PD sessions, she doesnt want to learn, she wants someone else to do it all for her and its people like that that I just say, Lets just leave them behind.
APPENDIX E
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES / QUESTIONS: 1 (follow-up emailed comments) Thanks for mentioning the digital visitors/residents concept. I was curious, so I found this video of a presentation by Dave S. White on the TALL blog. Just to briefly clarify my answer to your question 7: I seem to combine qualities of digital visitor and resident: I have both social and professional online identities, with my Diploma blog, my diploma resources wiki, facebook, etc, and I spend a lot of time reading ELT blogs and even commenting. Perhaps my 'digital residency' isn't fully established simply because I'm a fairly new arrival (only bought my first laptop 3 years ago), and I'm still developing. On the other hand, I agree with the idea of choosing and using tools strategically as a teacher, rather than wanting to use nothing but digital tools. One surprising thing I discovered about my 20-23 year old German students was that with regard to the moodle platforms they use with most of their courses, though they may have well developed social network residency, they are not always interested in developing their digital residency in the area of education. Many of them have much more conservative expectations about what education should look and feel like. I hope that helps. One thing I'm currently experimenting with is a research wiki, and this link is to my own private research wiki for my MATALL course. Cal Newport, a computer scientist has blogged about research wikis. 5 (On recognising that this interviewee was the only one apparently doing the majority of teaching online, a question was asked about the skills needed over and above the average teacher in a classroom setting, given the research by Hampel and Stickler). It is hard for me to identify and there are a lot of discussions going on now on Twitter and LinkedIn etc about that and as more institutions go to hybrid, blended learning and realising how many different things that approach can mean. I guess I dont always know how to label wholly at a loss for words what the skills are. The strongest that almost everyone means is flexibility. Loving what you do. Many of the same things that in my mind make a strong educator anywhere. The other thing I would strongly say is it needs to be, and this is my point of view, a guide on the side, not a sage on the stage. A facilitator, not a lecturer. The strongest thing is you have to be a facilitator. Whenever I participate in online experiences, if its a sage on the stage Im out of there. So I think my success comes from a sense of community. I think that is important in any online or offline environment. 9. (during free chat at the end) I use my camera a lot just to film what is going on in my classroom and I am planning to upload all this material on my [upcoming] blog. If this of interest to you, I will drop you a line, because I am quite open or secret about that. (challenging if it was OK to publish students personal information or work online, publically available) You know, I try to promote/provoke them all the time. Sometimes I come to them and put my head on their shoulder, and say, is it OK if I encourage you in this way? or will you file a complaint? because what I do in my classroom might surprise what takes place in USA or Great Britain. Well, I think that some people in these [mentioned] countries just overdo it a little bit. I know that I am the teacher and they are the students. As for personal information, I think I am very autonomous [think he meant to say ethical] and I will have a word with my bosses and, if there is nothing wrong, I will be open [I will publish this material] to the whole world. Here is a link to a cartoon I created after completing the British Council Ukraine emoderators essentials online course: http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/11444964/starz-movie This company has given me enough free points to create fifteen cartoons after receiving my letter. At the moment I am working on the cartoons. 13 I would like to stress that social networking has been a life changer in my life. I was very fond of technology, but starting to use Twitter and getting to know teachers all over the world and sharing on a daily basis (acknowledges good quote). That really changed my attitude towards education and teaching, so that would be something that no teacher should be missing.
APPENDIX E

Technophilia or Technophobia - Complete MA Dissertation - Full 144 Page Version

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technophilia or Technophobia - Complete MA Dissertation - Full 144 Page Version

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technophilia or Technophobia: Exploring Teacher Autonomy in Learning ICT and Web Tools for the English Language Teaching

Philip Longwell 1163612

LIST OF FIGURES (Q indicates the related question from the survey)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

I felt it was important to do this because, in isolation,

First (or native) language

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

*1. What is your gender?

*2. Which category below includes your age?

yet to teach English as a second or foreign language please state 'none'.

*4. What is your first (or native) language?

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

worked in the area of English language teaching ?

j k l m n lessthan1year j k l m n 13years j k l m n 45years

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

c d e f g Engagingwithanonlinecommunity c d e f g Attendingconferences c d e f g Voluntaryselfstudy

during the class, for preparation or for feedback?

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

c d e f g Fromablogwhichyoufollow c d e f g Onlinecommunity/group c d e f g Onlinecourse c d e f g Newsletter

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

learning about ICT/Web Tools?

c d e f g Reliability(techbreakingdown) c d e f g Norelevancetolanguageskills c d e f g Timeconsumingtolearnthem

c d e f g Financialcostinvolved(purchasing/maintaining) c d e f g Notenoughpedagogicalvalue c d e f g Lackoftechnologyavailable

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

you are selfemployed, freelance) please tick N/A.

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

APPENDIX B - NOTE: BLANK PAGES HAVE BEEN REMOVED

Taxonomy of English Language Teachers' use of ICT

1. What is your gender?

2. Which category below includes your age?

4. What is your first (or native) language?

answered question skipped question

Or describe yourself in relation to using technology:

answered question skipped question

41.1% 69.5% 61.1% 63.2% 68.4% Other method - please specify

answered question skipped question

answered question skipped question

30.0% (27) 55.6% (50)

15.6% (14) 11.1% (10)

27.8% (25) 21.1% (19)

25.6% (23) 10.0% (9)

1.1% (1) 2.2% (2)

Other - please specify

answered question skipped question

Other reason - please specify and state importance

answered question skipped question

Other method or comment?

answered question skipped question

31.5% 45.7% Other reason - please specify

answered question skipped question

21.1% (19) 11.0% (10)

answered question skipped question

16.9% (15) 11.1% (10) 13.2% (12)

40.4% (36) 51.1% (46) 37.4% (34)

answered question skipped question

answered question skipped question

88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106

Page 2, Q4. What is your first (or native) language?

Page 2, Q4. What is your first (or native) language?

Page 2, Q4. What is your first (or native) language?