Vol. 35 No. 1 (2020): Special Issue on Technology and Teacher Education
Special Issue

Finding the Right Fit: Exploring ESL Teachers and Students’ Perceptions of iLit ELL, a Technology-based Literacy Program’s Use with High School English Language Learners

PDF HTML EPUB
  • Sara Shahbazi
Sara Shahbazi
University of Windsor
Bio

Published 2020-10-30

How to Cite

Shahbazi, S. (2020). Finding the Right Fit: Exploring ESL Teachers and Students’ Perceptions of iLit ELL, a Technology-based Literacy Program’s Use with High School English Language Learners. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education Revue Internationale Du E-Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 35(1). Retrieved from https://ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1155
Copyright Notice

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this interpretative phenomenological study was to explore the lived experiences of ESL secondary teachers and their perceptions towards the use, effects, and integration of iLit ELL, a technology-based language program designed for English language learners, as well as the perceived effects the program had on students’ motivation and attitudes towards learning English. Data were collected using teacher interviews, student focus groups, and final reflections, as well as researcher observations and field notes. The collected data were analyzed through the steps of Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis to broaden the breadth and depth of the content and complexity of each narrative independently. Data were then compared across individual experiences and interpreted in a dynamic and active process that involved double hermeneutics.

Based on the data collected throughout the study, findings indicated that technology integration is affected by teachers’ adaptability to change; teacher mindset affects teachers’ acceptance, integration, and effective use of technology; when applied purposefully, technology and differentiated instruction increases student motivation and teachers’ efficiency; and technology with embedded scaffolds can enhance student autonomy and motivate student learning. From the emerging themes, the following recommendations are suggested for stakeholders and future research: differentiated professional development for teachers; applying consistent school and system-wide supports and beliefs on technology; adopting a universal designs method to teaching; further exploring teacher perceived efficacy and actual performance of technology integration; and a comparative study exploring best instructional models.

Keywords: iLit ELL, high school English language learners, technology, interpretive phenomenological analysis, ESL, student motivation

Résumé: Le but de cette étude phénoménologique interprétative était d'explorer les expériences vécues des enseignants du secondaire ESL et leurs perceptions concernant l'utilisation, les effets et l'intégration d'iLit ELL, un programme de langue basé sur la technologie conçu pour les apprenants de langue anglaise, ainsi que les effets perçus. le programme portait sur la motivation et les attitudes des étudiants envers l'apprentissage de l'anglais. Les données ont été recueillies à l'aide d'entretiens avec les enseignants, de groupes de discussion d'étudiants et de réflexions finales, ainsi que d'observations de chercheurs et de notes de terrain. Les données collectées ont été analysées à travers les étapes de l'analyse phénoménologique interprétative pour élargir la largeur et la profondeur du contenu et de la complexité de chaque récit indépendamment. Les données ont ensuite été comparées à travers des expériences individuelles et interprétées dans un processus dynamique et actif, impliquant une double herméneutique.

Sur la base des données recueillies tout au long de l'étude, les résultats indiquent que l'intégration de la technologie est affectée par l'adaptabilité des enseignants au changement; l'état d'esprit des enseignants affecte l'acceptation, l'intégration et l'utilisation efficace de la technologie par les enseignants; lorsqu'elles sont appliquées à dessein, la technologie et l'enseignement différencié augmentent la motivation des élèves et l'efficacité des enseignants; et, la technologie avec des échafaudages intégrés peut améliorer l'autonomie des étudiants et motiver leur apprentissage. À partir des thèmes émergents, les recommandations suivantes sont suggérées pour les parties prenantes et les recherches futures: développement professionnel différencié pour les enseignants; appliquer des soutiens et des croyances cohérents à l'échelle de l'école et du système en matière de technologie; adopter une méthode de conception universelle pour l'enseignement; explorer davantage l'efficacité perçue par les enseignants et les performances réelles de l'intégration de la technologie; et une étude comparative explorant les meilleurs modèles pédagogiques.

Mots-clés: iLit ELL, apprenants de langue anglaise, technologie, analyse phénoménologique interpretative, ESL, motivation des élèves

PDF HTML EPUB

References

  1. Abidin, M. J. Z., Pour-Mohammadi, M., & Alzwari, H. (2012). EFL students’ attitudes towards learning English language: The case of Libyan secondary school students. Asian Social Science, 8(2), 119–134.
  2. Atkins, N. E., & Vasu, E. S. (2000). Measuring knowledge of technology usage and stages of concern about computing: A study of middle school teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 279–302.
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
  4. Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2007.11661545
  5. Brooks-Young, S. (2007). Help wanted: For an alarming number of new teachers, the school gates have turned into a revolving door. Here’s how technology can assist districts in addressing the reasons for the rampant turnover. The Journal of Technological Horizons in Education, 34(10), 44–50.
  6. Brown, S. (2016). Young learners’ transactions with interactive digital texts using e-readers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2015.1105887
  7. Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children, 21(1), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2011.0007
  8. Castro, E. (2015). Helping English language learners succeed in school. Education Digest, 80(7), 44–47.
  9. Chen, C. H. (2008). Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? The Journal of Educational Research, 102(1), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.102.1.65-75
  10. Coleman, L. O., Gibson, P., Cotten, S. R., Howell-Moroney, M., & Stringer, K. (2016). Integrating computing across the curriculum: The impact of internal barriers and training intensity on computer integration in the elementary school classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(2), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115616645
  11. Coppola, E. M. (2004). Powering up: Learning to teach well with technology. Teachers College Press.
  12. Courey, S. J., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & LePage, P. (2013). Improved lesson planning with universal design for learning (UDL). Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406412446178
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and qualitative design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
  14. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  15. Debele, M., & Plevyak, L. (2012). Conditions for successful use of technology in social studies classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 29(3), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2012.703602
  16. Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 580–590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.580
  17. Dunbar, L. (2016). Music for music’s sake and tech for tech’s sake. General Music Today, 30(1), 38–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1048371316658326
  18. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.
  19. Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. J. (2018). Making content comprehensible for elementary English learners: The SIOP model. Pearson.
  20. Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language, Learning and Technology, 6(3), 108–126.
  21. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683
  22. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
  23. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
  24. Freebody, P., & Freiberg, J. (2001). Re‐discovering practical reading activities in homes and schools. Journal of Research in Reading, 24(3), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00145
  25. Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332
  26. Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5
  27. Hur, J. W., Shannon, D., & Wolf, S. (2016). An investigation of relationships between internal and external factors affecting technology integration in classrooms. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 32(3), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2016.1169959
  28. Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
  29. Jacobs, H. H. (2010). Curriculum 21: Essential education for a changing world. ASCD.
  30. Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. (2014). English language learners’ limited access to advanced college preparatory courses in high school. American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848–878. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214544716
  31. Keengwe, J., & Hussein, F. (2014). Using computer-assisted instruction to enhance achievement of English language learners. Education and Information Technologies, 19(2), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9214-z
  32. Kendeou, P., & Van Den Broek, P. (2005). The effects of readers’ misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.235
  33. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
  34. Labbo, L. D., Place, K., & Soares, L. (2010). Fresh perspectives on new literacies and technology integration. Voices from the Middle, 17(3), 9.
  35. Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309921
  36. Li, L., Worch, E., Zhou, Y., & Aguiton, R. (2015). How and why digital generation teachers use technology in the classroom: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2015.090209
  37. Liu, S. (2012). Teacher professional development for technology integration in a primary school learning community. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2012.719398
  38. Liu, Y., Theodore, P., & Lavelle, E. (2004). Experimental effects of online instruction on teachers’ concerns about technology integration. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(1), 27–37.
  39. Markham, P., Green, S. B., & Ross, M. (1996). Identification of stressors and coping strategies of ESL/bilingual, special education, and regular education teachers. Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01153.x
  40. Martínez, A. (2011). Explicit and differentiated phonics instruction as a tool to improve literacy skills for children learning English as a foreign language. GIST Education and Learning Research Journal, 5, 25–49.
  41. Murray, D. E. (2005). Technologies for second language literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000103
  42. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007). English language learners, ESL and ELD programs and services: Policies and procedure for Ontario elementary and secondary schools, K to 12. Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
  43. Pawan, F., & Craig, D. A. (2011). ESL and content area teacher responses to discussions on English language learner instruction. TESOL Journal, 2(3) 293–311.
  44. Pearson. (2015). Delivering learning outcomes with iLit: A summary of research. https://stvrainilitell.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/4/0/50407843/ilit-research-package-2015_1.pdf
  45. Ponticell, J. A. (2003). Enhancers and inhibitors of teacher risk taking: A case study. Peabody Journal of Education, 78(3), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327930PJE7803_02
  46. Pringle, J., Drummond, J., McLafferty, E., & Hendry, C. (2011). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: A discussion and critique. Nurse Researcher, 18(3), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2011.04.18.3.20.c8459
  47. Rao, K., & Torres, C. (2016). Supporting academic and affective learning processes for English language learners with universal design for learning. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 460–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.342
  48. Rhodes, R. L., Ochoa, S. H., & Ortiz, S. O. (2005). Assessing culturally and linguistically diverse students: A practical guide. Guilford Press.
  49. Richards, J. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal, 46(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214561621
  50. Sayadian, S., & Lashkarian, A. (2015). EFL learners’ creative thinking and their achievement emotions. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 505–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.539
  51. Shanahan, T., & Beck, I. L. (2006). Effective literacy teaching for English-language learners. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth (pp. 415–488). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  52. Shin, H. J., & Son, J. B. (2007). EFL teachers’ perceptions and perspectives on Internet-assisted language teaching. Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 8(2), 1–13.
  53. Smith, G. H. (2009). Obtaining, processing, and constructing English: Blogging in the ESL classroom. The Journal of Media Literacy Education, 1(1), 75–80.
  54. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method, and research. Sage Publications.
  55. Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53–80). Sage.
  56. Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625–649. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325896
  57. Sultan, N. (2018). Heuristic inquiry: Researching human experience holistically. SAGE Publications.
  58. Téllez, K. T., & Manthey, G. E. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of effective school-wide programs and strategies for English language learners. Learning Environments Research, 18(1), 111–127.
  59. Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2012). The “third”-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: Implications for teacher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6), 1057–1060. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.810
  60. Van Olphen, M., Hofer, M., & Harris, J. (2012). Grounded technology integration: ESOL teaching strategies. Learning and Leading with Technology, 40(4), 37–39.
  61. Wang, J. H. Y., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between US and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162–186. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.39.2.2
  62. Wang, Y., Many, J., & Krumenaker, L. (2008). Understanding the experiences and needs of mainstream teachers of ESL students: Reflections from a secondary social studies teacher. TESL Canada Journal, 25(2), 66–84.
  63. Watkins, N., & Lindahl, K. (2010). Targeting content area literacy instruction to meet the needs of adolescent English language learners. Middle School Journal, 41(3), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2010.11461718
  64. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. Handbook of Reading Research, 3, 403–422.
  65. Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. McGraw-Hill Education.
  66. Woolley, G. (2011). Reading comprehension: Assisting children with learning difficulties. Springer.
  67. Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 173–207.