A developmental framework for teacher adoption of interactive technologies in the language classroom
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

A developmental framework for teacher adoption of interactive technologies in the language classroom

on

  • 219 views

PL-CALL keynote on study of IWB-mediated EFL teaching in France. Analysis of video, questionnaire, and interview data allow an exploration of a) teachers’ IWB use in terms of IWB features and ...

PL-CALL keynote on study of IWB-mediated EFL teaching in France. Analysis of video, questionnaire, and interview data allow an exploration of a) teachers’ IWB use in terms of IWB features and teaching objectives, b) their choices with respect to the design and implementation of learning activities, c) their self-efficacy beliefs with respect to the IWB and ICT in general, and d) their orientation to professional development in language teaching with this tool. Through a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative analyses, a number of teacher profiles emerge, revealing differential exploitation of IWB affordances in relation with differing beliefs, goals, and competences. The patterns of technology integration shown by teachers in the various school contexts investigated offer a starting point for a developmental framework to account for the evolution of teaching practices as teachers acquire techno-pedagogical competences (Guichon & Hauck, 2012). They also suggest a pressing need for more pedagogically oriented support to enable teachers to adopt interactive technologies efficiently and effectively.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
219
Views on SlideShare
108
Embed Views
111

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

2 Embeds 111

http://shonawhyte.wordpress.com 95
https://shonawhyte.wordpress.com 16

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    A developmental framework for teacher adoption of interactive technologies in the language classroom A developmental framework for teacher adoption of interactive technologies in the language classroom Presentation Transcript

    • A DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK FORTEACHER ADOPTION OF INTERACTIVETECHNOLOGIES IN THE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM: A COLLABORATIVE ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT IN FRENCH SCHOOLS Shona Whyte Université Nice Sophia Antipolis PL-CALL Building Bridges Between School and Academia. Warsaw, Poland, 5-6 June 2014
    • SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING RESEARCH CALL research other teachers teacher educators researchers (SLA, SLT) OBSERVATION REFLECTION TRAINING feedback action research INTERACTION technologies CONTEXT learner ACQUISITION teacher learner bit.ly/1l3BpFF
    • CALL RESEARCH what learning opportunities do we offer learners?! how do teachers view these opportunities?! how can we research this context and what conclusions can we draw? recursive
    • CALLTEACHER EDUCATION until learners have learned vocabulary and grammar until teachers are ready (trained, proficient …) until technology is in placepencil sharpening = ! postponing “the good stuff”
    • ! 1. ITILT PROJECT
 2. BACKGROUND
 3. IWB USE
 4. TEACHER COGNITION
 5. DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK
    • 7 countries 6 languages website with video examples of IWB-supported classroom practice with additional materials! Dutch! English! French! Spanish! Turkish! Welsh! Belgium! France! Germany! Netherlands! Spain! Turkey! UK! primary! secondary! university! vocational 4 sectors 44 teachers, 81 films, 267 clips http://itilt.eu
    • THE INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARD (IWB): 3 components touch-sensitive display linked to computer ! via USB cable operate computer with pen (stylus) or finger
    • videoprojector linked to computer ! viaVGA cable board functions as computer screen
    • computer linked to display and videoprojector ! specific IWB software ! (different for each board brand e.g., SMART, Promethean, eInstruction) !
    • IWB EDUCATION & RESEARCH Hennessy & London, 2013
    • COLLABORATIVE ACTION RESEARCH 9 French EFL teachers! university researchers! data-gathering, analysis/reflection, action How can we use the IWB for communicative language teaching?
    • ! 1. ITILT PROJECT
 2. BACKGROUND
 3. IWB USE
 4. TEACHER COGNITION
 5. DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK
    • SOME BACKGROUND task-based language teaching! teacher efficacy! technology integration! situated learning
    • TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING Ellis (2003), Common European Framework! Breen: task-as-workplan and task-in-progress! goal, language, outcome! task-oriented activity versus pedagogical exercise
    • TEACHER EFFICACY “people’s beliefs about their capabilities to exercise control over their own level of functioning and over events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1993)! a teacher’s “judgement of his or her capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of student engagement and learning” (Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy, 2001)
    • TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION perceived usefulness versus perceived ease of use (technology acceptance model; Davis, 1989)! => IWB = complex tool! IWB developmental frameworks
    • SITUATED LEARNING Lave & Wenger 1991! community of practice! shared purpose, informal learning! legitimate peripheral participation
    • ! 1. ITILT PROJECT
 2. BACKGROUND
 3. IWB USE
 4. TEACHER COGNITION
 5. DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK
    • IWB TOOLS AND FEATURES IWB USER: TEACHER OR LEARNER? LANGUAGE TEACHING OBJECTIVES TASK ORIENTATION balance between embedding and activity clear preference! for learner use of IWB balanced use of IWB for skills and subskills general preference for pedagogical exerciseslimited range of tools and features used much more speaking + listening than reading + writing focus on basic features:! images + sounds; pen + drag/drop individual learner at IWB, not pairs or groups strong focus on vocabulary, also pronunciation some task-like goals and outcomes but language focus on accuracy rather than appropriatenessrare use for grammar LIMITED RANGE OF BASIC FEATURES! USED TO TEACH ORAL SKILLS AND VOCABULARY! WITH INDIVIDUAL LEARNERS AT THE IWB ! WORKING ON PEDAGOGICAL EXERCISES
    • ! 1. ITILT PROJECT
 2. BACKGROUND
 3. IWB USE
 4. TEACHER COGNITION
 5. DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK
    • RESEARCHING & SUPPORTING TEACHER DEVELOPMENT pre- and post-project ICT and IWB efficacy questionnaires! video feedback questionnaires and focus group discussions! Google+ circle
    • AB C D E F G H I project ! engagement IWB efficacy ! beliefs IWB experience! & access TEACHERS’ INVOLVEMENT IN PROJECT
    • C G I peripheral participants:! limited development A E H semi-peripheral participants:! technical development B D F core participants:! pedagogical reflection
    • ADVANTAGES DRAWBACKS motivation learners were more enthusiastic about IWB activities learners in other groups are often distracted by those working with the IWB efficiency everything is easily available when you want to repeat it and you can keep track easily wasting time because of technical problems (software or IWB itself) flexibility the adaptability of the tool to different ages and levels; visual support for listening comprehension problems of software compatibility professional development increased likelihood of sharing among teachers difficulties convincing colleagues to invest in new technology
    • MOTIVATION There are tools that are fabulous but will the IWB really make them learn English better? I’m not so sure.! Teacher A I'll always have 25 hands up whenever I want someone to come to the board.They really are enthusiastic about it.! Teacher F It's obviously a very big defeat for the classical idea of learning by rote, learning pattern drills:“I can sit here and concentrate on this and later on that will be beneficial to me.” But you know, we have to live with the times.! Teacher H
    • EFFICIENCY This saves paper and does make it more generally interactive. It also gets them inter-correcting much more.This recently came in very handy […] they could really help each other, which would have been very laborious on paper. Saving and reusing everything is also a big advantage.! Teacher H You can show it once, what to do, for all of them. Because even those who are staying with me at the IWB, then they are going to the computer, eventually. So I like to show them on the IWB what to do...! Teacher C And it's a problem for me because it's very marvellous material but we can't use it for the moment correctly because we don't have the time! Teacher A
    • FLEXIBILITY I can prepare all I need for my teaching unit in the same file but at the same time it still leaves me a huge part of freedom. I can always change anything at the last minute or even during the lesson. I can always change my mind or adapt the activity to the students.! Teacher F You have to think before what you're going to do, and do it very carefully. Because when you begin, it's impossible to correct when you're doing the thing. Because it's done on the [IWB] so you are obliged to go on with what is going on. You can't correct. When you have flashcards, if you have an idea that something is wrong in your plan], you can correct it. In the [IWB] you can't! Teacher A
    • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT English is the only [subject] where I do workstations.When I use the board in French or mathematics it is collective. It’s interactive but whole class.And I am thinking for next year - because every year I change something - and perhaps in mathematics one day every week I [will] do work stations in mathematics.! Teacher B The problem is to find enough time to create [IWB files] and to try new ideas.! Teacher A! I had one kid who said to me "I'm not going to [take a literary option], because my God you have to read books!” and I think that might be a negative point of all these screens.A “screen” is also you know something you don't want to see, right, you hide behind a screen.We have to be very careful, I find, about the use of all this, this new technology, ! Teacher I
    • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT We didn't say "OK this is going to help me analyse my teaching,” not at all.That came after.! Teacher E
    • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Then once I've got started, I'm going to say, "What else can I do? What's this and what's that?" Not me. I'm only doing this. That's ALL I'm doing.! And then you're going to want to go further.! Of course, that's exactly what I mean. It's intriguing. You get drawn in.!
    • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Somewhere I had access to training with someone! Maybe later, in another school?! Oh, it's very useful because I save things, but that's all I do. I never use any of the other functionalities.! I could NEVER find time to go further. I know that now.! Is that right?! Really?!
    • ! 1. ITILT PROJECT
 2. BACKGROUND
 3. IWB USE
 4. TEACHER COGNITION
 5. DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK
    • for classroom interaction?! for technology integration? ! for language teaching?! for teacher education?! for research? What does this mean …
    • WHAT DOESTHIS MEAN … teachers shouldn’t over-prepare, leave space for learners ! don’t wait to read the manual, try things out now ! focus on teaching/learning puzzles, not on tools (usefulness, not ease of use) ! watch other teachers, and talk to them, don’t wait for official training courses! involve teachers as agents and reflective practitioners
    • CliNKer Telegraph KeepBusy taringa.net A DEVELOPMENTAL FRAMEWORK FORTEACHER ADOPTION OF INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INTHE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM: A COLLABORATIVE ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT IN FRENCH SCHOOLS bit.ly/1l3BpFF
    • Shona Whyte! http://efl.unice.fr! ! whyte@unice.fr! @whyshona! bit.ly/1l3BpFF