social pharmacy d-pharm 1st year by Pragati K. Mahajan
Pre-service teachers views of technology for teaching and learning foreign languages
1. EUROCALL CMC & Teacher Education SIG, Barcelona, 14-15 April 2011
Pre-service teachers' views on
technology for teaching and learning
foreign languages
Shona Whyte
University of Nice, France
2. changes in
the language
classroom
‣ more learners (younger,
more diverse)
‣ more generalist teachers
‣ insufficient training
‣ more technology
3. what we know
about teacher Beauchamp & Kennewell
cognitions
Borg
‣ classroom practice affected
by beliefs and experience
(not just training)
‣ technical interactivity ≠
pedagogical interactivity
‣ procedural (not just
theoretical) training required Feryok
4. mis
mat
ch
pedagogical
recommendations ≠
classroom
implementation
9. method
12 week semester (October-December)
online questionnaire (after class, before
grades; December/January)
preliminary data analysis (February)
follow-up interviews (March)
10. subject profiles
5 groups
teachers - graduate teacher trainees
(English, primary, science)
students - undergraduate English
majors (literature or media/culture)
11. EFL teachers (ICT class)
pre-service secondary EFL teachers
second of 2-year graduate training
25 students programme
19 respondents contact class in IT for FL teaching
10 volunteers online component involved group wikis
and creation of online teaching/learning
3 interviews resources
future teaching is secondary EFL
12. Primary Teachers with TEFL
pre-service primary teachers
34 students second year of 2-year graduate training
programme for generalist primary school
15 respondents teachers
5 volunteers course on FL pedagogy for young learners
1 interview teacher used videoprojection, Google site,
Ss sent e-mail attachments
future teaching includes FL classes, but not
priority
13. Science teachers (contact/distance)
pre-service secondary science teachers
26 students first of 2-year graduate training programme
contact and distance EFL classes with
13 respondents technology (videoconference, filmed
5 volunteers student ppt presentations)
2 interviews future teaching does not include FL
(distance students will teach distance
courses)
14. English undergraduate (ICT)
undergraduate English majors
first/third year of 3-year English
43 students programme
17 respondents contact class in ICT for FL learning
7 volunteers online component involved blogs and
group wikis
2 interviews
future careers do not involve teaching
(journalism, translation)
15. English undergraduate (SLA)
undergraduate English majors
9 students third year of 3-year English programme
7 respondents contact classes in learning theory and SLA
5 volunteers teacher used videoprojection, Google site,
Ss sent e-mail attachments
3 interviews
future careers may include FL teaching
16. summary
English English
English Primary Science
ICT ICT
SLA teachers teachers
teachers students
English Y Y Y ? N
ICT
training Y Y N N ?
Teaching Y N ? Y Y
17. summary
English English
Primary Science English
ICT ICT
teachers teachers SLA
teachers students
ET PT ST EST ESS
18. Findings
cognitions about
1. language learning/teaching
2. own ICT use/skills
3. ICT for language learning/teaching
19. student profile
Age: 62% < 25 years old
Effort: 85% good attendance (57% tried hard)
ICT use: 91% e-mail; 79% films/series
ICT skills: 25% rated 4 or 5/5 (“expert”)
SL beliefs: 72% teacher correction
20. Cognitions abut FL EFL Teachers ICT
Primary Teachers (EFL)
learning Science Teachers
English students ICT
English students SLA
100
75
50
25
0
L1 imitation L1 correction Intelligence Motivation Early start L1 transfer L2
Lightbown & Spada, 1999
21. Cognitions about FL EFL teachers ICT
Primary teachers (EFL)
teaching (1) Science Teachers
English students ICT
English students SLA
100
75
50
25
0
PPP is the best approach error correction is essential group work provides “junky data”
Lightbown & Spada, 2000
22. Cognitions abut FL EFL teachers ICT
Primary Teachers (EFL)
teaching (2) Science Teachers
English students ICT
English students SLA
100
93
75
50 57
47 48
25 31
0
students learn what they are taught
23. All students
Cognitions about EFL teachers ICT
English students ICT
ICT class experience English students SLA
100
75
50
25
0
I did a lot of work online I had a lot of e-mail contact with the teacher
24. EFL Teachers ICT
Cognitions about Primary Teachers (EFL)
Science Teachers
basic internet skills English Students ICT
English students SLA
100
75
50
25
0
find websites find audio + video e-mail download freeware
25. Cognitions about learning of ICT skills
After class, I can
ppt sign up Before class, I could
90
21 46
Audacity embed
67.5 15 51
55
68 45
42
56
45
44
22.5
23
18 19 17
0
help wiki slidecast
26. Creating an account (Google sites, slidecast.net)
100
75
After class, I can
27 Before class, I could
46
60
50 58 54 46
42 44
71
25 29 29
0
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
27. After class, I can
Making a slideshow (ppt) Before class, I could
100
15 6
7
85 86
75 80 21
68
50 58
42
25 29
0
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
28. After class, I can
Making a slidecast (slides + audio) Before class, I could
100
75
50
13 24
38
25 42
100
0 27 23 29 14
0 19
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
29. After class, I can
Create a wiki Before class, I could
100
75
50
65
45
25
89
31
11 47
0 8 35 0 23
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
30. After class, I can
Help someone with an ICT problem Before class, I could
90
18
67.5
15
45 42
71
60 62
56
22.5 42 43
0 0 0
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
31. ET PT
Self-efficacy in ICT skills ST EST
ESS All
40
39
30
29
27
25
20
16
14
10
0
ET PT ST EST ESS All
I’m an expert user (4 or 5/5)
32. ICTskills
English ICT English ICT English
teachers students students
proficiency L H L
achievement H H L
self-efficacy L H L
33. ICT and FL learning/teaching
majority of respondents saw positive role for ICT for teacher
(70-100% agreement, 0-15% disapproval on 7 questions)
primary and science teachers were less enthusiastic regarding
learner autonomy (13-20% disagreement on 2 questions;
non ICT English majors were more sceptical about utility of the
internet and Web 2.0 tools for learner autonomy and
motivation
34. Conclusions - FL teaching
preference for structural syllabus and
teacher-fronted classes
views change with training
central teacher role particularly
important to primary teachers
35. Conclusions - ICT
positive view of ICT for language
teaching/learning
ICT more useful to teacher than learner
persistently low self-efficacy for ICT use
37. Beauchamp, G., & Kennewell, S. (2010). Interactivity in the classroom and its impact
on learning. Computers & Education, 54, 759-766.
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education: Research and practice.
London: Continuum.
Feryok, A. (2010). Language teacher cognitions: Complex dynamic systems? System,
38, 272-279.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Whyte, S. (2011). Learning theory and technology in university foreign language.
education: The case of French universities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 10
(2), 213-34.
Whyte, S. (to appear). Learning to teach with videoconferencing in primary foreign
language classrooms. ReCALL.
whyte@unice.fr
Notas do Editor
\n
\n
An example of resistance to technological/pedagogical innovation\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
&#x201C;teachers&#x201D; are pre-service teachers; little classroom experience\n
I&#x2019;m going to distinguish teachers, who are graduate students in teacher training programmes, but have generally no teaching experience yet, and students, who are undergraduates majoring in English (literature/culture or media/culture).\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
6 questions about first and second language learning: no differences between groups. For L1, everybody believes imitation plays an important role, correction less. IQ not a factor, but motivation is; L1 transfer is a major source of learner error and an early start is good.\n
6 questions about second language teaching: differences between language teachers and language majors. Undergraduate language majors are most wedded to PPP and error correction, English teachers least. These teachers plus SLA group least likely to find groupwork problematic. \n
Differences between language & science teachers least convinced that teaching = learning; primary teachers most.\n
All students had classes which used technology (class website, e-mail) but only those in classes with specific ICT objectives considered they had worked a lot online; only the non-ICT English undergraduates perceived teacher e-mail contact as frequent.\n
Most groups were confident in their basic internet skills\n
Differences in ICT skills before and after classes: most students could make a ppt, half felt they could help others with ICT. They learned how to create accounts on certain sites, to make wikis and embed, and make slides with audio\n
ICT classes learned most, especially the English majors\n
English Teachers learned most\n
EFL ICT class started lowest and made most progress\n
EFL ICT class started lowest and made most progress\n
EFL ICT class started lowest and made most progress\nAbility to help someone evidence of self-efficacy belief in own ICT skills\n
EFL ICT class started lowest and made most progress, but still reluctant to rate ICT skills highly. They learned to use Audacity, make slidecasts, make own wikis and embed videos/slides. Also learned to help others. Self-efficacy estimations don&#x2019;t change quickly. \n
\n
Language students are less convinced of the utility of ICT tools, unless they have training. Non-language teachers seem slightly less sure of their utility for the learners directly, rather than via teachers.\n