Re-imagining Educational Technology in English Language Classrooms
-
Upload
justin-shewell -
Category
Education
-
view
1.380 -
download
0
Transcript of Re-imagining Educational Technology in English Language Classrooms
Re-imagining Educational Technology in English Language Classrooms
44th Annual TESOL ConventionBoston, Massachusetts, USA
March 25, 2010 (2:00 2:50 PM) Boston Convention Center Room 206 A
Justin ShewellArizona State [email protected]
Overview
Rationale
Research Questions
Methods
Results
Suggestions
Rationale
Technology is an important tool in today's educational world
Teachers often do not use technology to its full potentialaccess to authentic content
promote higher-order thinking skills
student-centered learning
facilitates learning on many different levels
Rationale
Meskill & Mossop (1997)surveyed ESL teachers in New York
did follow-up interviews with 56 ESL teachers who said they use technology in teaching
divided teachers into two groups:those who felt technology was best used to supplement classroom teaching
those who felt technology was an integral part of the curriculum and used technology to stimulate students
Exploratory
Research Questions
AccessDo students have adequate access to technology in ESL/EFL settings?
IntegrationTo what extent is technology integrated into the curriculum?
What technologies are used in ESL/EFL teaching?
What skills or skill areas are being impacted by technology?
Research Questions (continued)
MotivationWhat are teachers' attitudes toward using technology in teaching?
Methods
Participants54 males, 115 females (Total: 169)
Ages ranged from 25 to 64 (approx.)45 54 (33%)
35 44 (25%)
55 64 (23%)
25 34 (15%)
Other (4%)
25 - 3435 - 4445 - 5455 - 64Other
Methods (continued)
ParticipantsTeaching ExperienceMore than 20 years (32.10%)
16 to 20 years (20.37%)
11 to 15 years (19.75%)
6 to 10 years (17.28%)
1 to 5 years (8.64%)
Less than 1 year (1.85%)
Teaching LoadMajority were full-time teachers (81.33%)
Majority teach Listening, Reading, Writing, Grammar, Speaking and Vocabulary (over 80%)
Other
1 to 5 years
6 to 10 years
11 to 15 years
16 to 20 years
20+ years
Methods (continued)
ParticipantsLocation
Access
Availability of Computers in Classrooms78% with more than 15 students per class
31% with no computers in classroom
10% with only 1 computer in the classroom
36% with 15 or more computers in classroom
Availability of Internet in Classroom26% with no Internet
8% with 1 connected computer
35% with 15 or more connected computers
13% not applicable
Access (continued)
Computer Labs44% reported no time in computer lab
34% reported 2 hours or less
3 main groupsalmost 1 to 1 (student to computer) 36%
almost no access (very high ratios) 36%
middle group (mixed access ratio) 28%
Integration
High Access GroupComputer Usage by Students20% reported 10 hours per week
29% reported 3 4 hours per week
23% reported 5 6 hours per week
mixed usage (low and high)
Internet Usage by Students25% reported 1 2 hours per week
26% reported 3 4 hours per week
15% reported 5 6 hours per week
10% reported 10 hours per week
Integration
Low Access GroupComputer Usage by Students45% reported 1 2 hours per week
19% reported 3 4 hours per week
17% reported less than 1 hour or none
Internet Usage by Students45% reported 1 2 hours per week
20% reported 3 4 hours per week
25% reported less than 1 hour or none
Integration (continued)
High Access GroupTechnologies Used Most (Daily or Weekly)Computers in general (91%)
Internet (84%)
Email (83%)
Search Engines (79%)
Word Processing (78%)
Online Courseware (65%)
Technologies Used ModeratelyDrill and Practice (49% daily/weekly, 30% never)
Blogs (31% weekly, 52% never)
MP3 (26% weekly, 47% never)
Integration (continued)
Low Access GroupTechnologies Used Most (Daily or Weekly)Computers in general (75%)
Internet (65%)
Email (58%)
Search Engines (52%)
Word Processing (51%)
Technologies Used ModeratelyOnline Courseware (45% daily/weekly, 48% never)
Drill and Practice (37% daily/weekly, 41% never)
MP3 (28% weekly, 50% never)
Integration (continued)
High Access GroupHow are computers used?Plan, draft, proofread, revise and publish written text (75%)
Organize and store information (75%)
Support individualized learning (69%)
Remediation of basic skills (64%)
Create visual displays of data or information (eg. charts, graphs, maps) (62%)
Communicate information as the result of investigations (57%)
Integration (continued)
Low Access GroupHow are computers used?Plan, draft, proofread, revise and publish written text (52%)
Organize and store information (48%)
Communicate information as the result of investigations (44%)
Create visual displays of data or information (eg. charts, graphs, maps) (41%)
Support individualized learning (41%)
Remediation of basic skills (34%)
Integration (continued)
How is the Internet Used?High Access GroupGather information (84%)
Authentic language input (77%)
Communicate with others (72%)
Low Access GroupGather information (69%)
Communicate with others (49%)
Authentic language input (49%)
Integration (continued)
NoneA littleSomeA lotN/ATotal
Grammar1.7%33.9%27.1%35.6%1.7%59
15.3%30.5%32.2%15.3%6.8%59
Listening1.7%10.3%25.9%58.6%3.4%58
14.8%8.2%34.4%37.7%4.9%61
Reading3.3%3.3%42.6%47.5%3.3%61
13.6%15.3%49.2%20.3%1.7%59
Writing3.3%9.8%37.7%47.5%1.6%61
15.5%17.2%36.2%29.3%1.7%58
Speaking24.1%20.7%34.5%17.2%3.4%58
27.9%21.3%24.6%23.0%3.3%61
Vocabulary3.3%11.7%33.3%50.0%1.7%60
9.8%14.8%41.0%31.1%3.3%61
Computer Usage by Skill Area
Integration (continued)
Obstacles62% said not enough computers
55% said old or malfunctioning computers
63% said slow Internet access
53% said not enough time
51% said not enough support to fix problems
49% said not enough support from administrators
Motivation
Teachers Attitudes toward Technology92% felt technology is an asset in accomplishing curricular objectives
82% felt Internet had a big impact on teaching
55% felt technology best at supplemental activities outside of class
55% felt technology should be totally integrated into curriculum
Professional Development
Time Spent in PD14% reported no PD related to technology
20% reported only 1 hour per month
14% reported 2 hours per month
12% reported more than 20 hours per month
PD Activities (top 3)80% had informal conversations with colleagues
63% attended institutional workshops
63% read journals or academic resources
Professional Development
Learning about technologyOther teachers (80%)
Exploring alone (76%)
Workshops (including conferences) (70%)
Suggestions
Low Access Grouprevolving access groups
allow students to use their own equipment in the classroomVail, Arizona
design technology based activities to be done outside of class (perhaps at home)
Limitations & Conclusions
Survey questions confusing?
More analysis of responsescomparing sub-groups to find correlations
ConclusionsEven in high access situations, technology is not utilized fully
Access is only one predictor of integration level
?