Abstract
In spite of the rise of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) as an alluring field of inquiry, there seems to be a paucity of empirical studies on the actual experience of English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in the adoption of technology in their classes. In an attempt to remedy this gap, this study was designed to qualitatively examine six Iranian EFL pre-service teachers’ experiences in implementing CALL activities. The pre-service teachers first took the CALL-integrated teacher training course for the period of four weeks and upon the completion of the course, they subsequently implemented CALL in their own classes for seven weeks. To accomplish the objective of the present study, data were collected through observations, semi-structured interviews, and open-ended questionnaires. The thematic data analyses revealed obstacles, motivators, and maintenance, each with its own sub-themes. Obstacles to CALL implementation included transfer failure and facility conditions. The motivators were perceived usefulness and experience. Reasons for the maintenance of the program included social influence, requests of learners, and peer collaboration. Implications for CALL teacher education program are offered in light of the findings of the study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abras, C. N., & Sunshine, P. M. (2008). Implementing distance learning: Theories, tools, continuing teacher education, and the changing distance-learning environment. Opening doors through distance language education: Principles, perspectives, and practices. CALICO Monograph Series (Vol. 7, pp. 175–201). Sheffield, UK: Equinox Publishing Ltd.
Agyei, D., & Voogt, J. (2011). Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56(1), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.017.
Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behavior: reactions and reflections. London: Tylor & Francis
Angeli, C. (2005). Transforming a teacher education method course through technology: Effects on preservice teachers’ technology competency. Computers & Education, 45(4), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.06.002.
Atai, M. R., & Dashtestani, R. (2011). Iranian English for academic purposes (EAP) stakeholders’ attitudes toward using the internet in EAP courses for civil engineering students: Promises and challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning., 26(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.627872.
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 https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8038/.
Atoum, A., Al-Zoubi, A., Jaber, M. A., Al-Dmour, M., & Hammad, B. (2017). A new approach for delivering eLearning courses in Jordanian universities. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 4(8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.48.3071.
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–556 https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol13/iss4/2.
Boling, E. C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2012). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 118–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.006.
Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Canals, L., & Al-Rawashdeh, A. (2018). Teacher training and teachers’ attitudes towards educational technology in the deployment of online English language courses in Jordan. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(7), 639–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1531033.
Cerbin, W., & Kopp, B. (2006). Lesson study as a model for building pedagogical knowledge and improving teaching. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 18(3), 250–257 http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE110.pdf.
Chai, C. S. (2010). The relationships among Singaporean preservice teachers’ ICT competencies, pedagogical beliefs and their beliefs on the espoused use of ICT. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(3), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v19i3.1849.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.
Comas-Quinn, A. (2011). Learning to teach online or learning to become an online teacher: An exploration of teachers’ experiences in a blended learning course. ReCALL, 23(3), 218–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344011000152.
Compton, L. K. L. (2009). Preparing language teachers to teach language online: A look at skills, roles, and responsibilities. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 73–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802613831.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dashtestani, R. (2012). Barriers to the implementation of CALL in EFL courses: Iranian EFL teachers’ attitudes and perspectives. The JALT CALL Journal, 8(2), 55–70 https://journal.jaltcall.org/articles/134.
Dashtestani, R. (2014). English as a foreign language—Teachers’ perspectives on implementing online instruction in the Iranian EFL context. Research in Learning Technology, 22(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.20142.
Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Palaigeorgiou, G., Psillos, D., Vlahacas, I., Tsoukalas, I., & Pombortsis, A. (2003). “Cultures in negotiation”: Teachers’ acceptance/resistance attitudes considering infusion of technology into school. Computers & Education, 41(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00012-5.
Egbert, J. L., 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 & Technology, 6(3), 108–126 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ653846.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226206868.001.0001.
Erikson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Whittrock (Ed.), Handbook on research on teaching (pp. 119–161). Chicago, IL: Macmillan.
Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.
Fatemi Jahromi, A., & Salimi, F. (2011). Exploring the human element of computer-assisted language learning: An Iranian context. Computer-assisted language learning, 26(2), 158–176.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: N.Y. McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Groves, M. M., & Zemel, P. C. (2000). Instructional technology adoption in higher education: An action research case study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(1), 57–65 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ605307.
Guichon, N. (2009). Training future language teachers to develop tutors’ competence through reflective analysis. ReCALL, 21(2), 166–185. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344009000214.
Hampel, R., & Sticklera, U. (2005). New skills for new classrooms: Training tutors to teach languages online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(4), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500335455.
Haydn, T., & Barton, R. (2007). Common needs and different agendas: How trainee teachers make progress in their ability to use ICT in subject teaching. Some lessons from the UK. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1018–1036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.12.006.
Hedayati, H., & Marandi, S. S. (2014). Iranian EFL teachers’ perceptions of the difficulties of implementing CALL. ReCALL, 26(3), 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000172.
Hixon, E., & So, H.-J. (2009). Technology’s role in field experiences for preservice teacher training. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 294–304 https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.12.4.294.
Hubbard, P. (2008). CALL and the future of language teacher education. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 175–188 https://www.jstor.org/stable/calicojournal.25.2.175?seq=1.
Hutchison, A. (2012). Literacy teachers’ perceptions of professional development that increases integration of technology into literacy instruction. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2012.659894.
Jeong, K. O. (2017). Preparing EFL student teachers with new technologies in the Korean context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(6), 488–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1321554.
Kay, R. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into pre-service education: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(4), 383–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782466.
Kessler, G. (2006). Assessing CALL teacher training: What are we doing and what could we do better. In P. Hubbard & M. Levy (Eds.), Teacher education in CALL. John Benjamins: Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA.
Kessler, G. (2007). Formal and informal CALL preparation and teacher attitude toward technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(2), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220701331394.
Kessler, G., & Plakans, L. (2008). Does teachers’ confidence with CALL equal innovative and integrated use? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802090303.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70 https://tecfalabs.unige.ch/mitic/articles/koehler_mishra_2009_what_is_technological_pedagogical_content_knowledge.pdf.
Korthagen, F., Loughran, J., & Russell, T. (2006). Developing fundamental principles for teacher education programs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 1020–1041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.022.
Kubanyiova, M. (2009). Possible selves in language teacher development. Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 314–332). Bristol: Multilingual matters.
Lam, Y. (2000). Technophilia vs. technophobia: A preliminary look at why second-language teachers do or do not use technology in their classrooms. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(3), 389–420. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.56.3.389.
Lim, C. P., & Chan, B. C. (2007). MicroLESSONS in teacher education: Examining preservice teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. Computers & Education, 48(3), 474–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.03.005.
Llorens, S., Salanova, M., & Grau, R. (2002). Training to technological change. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(2), 206–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2002.10782380.
Lin, S., Zimmer, J. C., & Lee, V. (2013). Podcasting acceptance on campus: The differing perspectives of teachers and students. Computers & Education, 68, 416–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.003.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Liu, M. H., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (2015). Exploring EFL teachers’ CALL knowledge and competencies: In-service program perspectives. Language Learning & Technology, 19(1), 119–138 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.679.4995&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Marandi, S. S. (2010). Bravely stepping forward: Creating CALL communities to support teachers and learners in Iran. In J. Egbert (Ed.), CALICO monograph series 9: CALL in limited technology contexts (pp. 179–188). Texas: CALICO.
McNeil, L. (2013). Exploring the relationship between situated activity and CALL learning in teacher education. ReCALL, 25(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000086.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mononey, D., & O’Keeffe, A. (2016). A case study in language teacher education. In M. McCarthy (Ed.), Blended learning for language teaching (pp. 176–199). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Motaghian, H., Hassanzadeh, A., & Moghadam, D. K. (2013). Factors affecting university instructors’ adoption of web-based learning systems: Case study of Iran. Computers & Education, 61, 158–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.09.016.
Nami, F., Marandi, S. S., & Sotoudehnama, E. (2016). CALL teacher professional growth through lesson study practice: An investigation into EFL teachers’ perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29, 658–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1016439.
Ngai, E. W. T., Poon, J. K. L., & Chan, Y. H. C. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers & Education, 48(2), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.11.007.
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., Newby, T., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002.
Park, C. N., & Son, J. B. (2009). Implementing computer-assisted language learning in the EFL classroom: Teachers’ perceptions and perspectives. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 5(2), 80–101. https://doi.org/10.5172/ijpl.5.2.80.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the horizon, 9(5), 12–24.
Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow’s teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 863–870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.024.
Pope, M., Hare, D., & Howard, E. (2005). Enhancing technology use in student teaching: A case study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 573–618 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285844658_Enhancing_technology_use_in_student_teaching_A_case_study.
Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring pre-service teachers’ beliefs about using web 2.0 technologies in K-12 classroom. Computers & Education, 59(3), 937–945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.001.
Saito, E. (2012). Key issues of lesson study in Japan and the United States: A literature review. Professional Development in Education, 38(5), 777–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2012.668857.
Savenye, W. C., Olina, Z., & Niemczyk, M. (2001). So you are going to be an online writing instructor: Issues in designing, developing, and delivering an online course. Computers and Composition, 18(4), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(01)00069-X.
Shaltry, C., Henriksen, D., Wu, M. L., & Dickson, W. P. (2013). Teaching prospective teachers to integrate technology: Situated learning with online portfolios, classroom websites and Facebook. TechTrends, 57(3), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0658-9.
Shin, H.-J., & Son, J.-B. (2007). EFL teachers' perceptions and perspectives on internet-assisted language teaching..CALL-EJ Online 8(2) http://www.tell.is.ritsumei.ac.jp/callejonline/journal/8-2/h-js_jbs
Sutton, S. R. (2011). The preservice technology training experiences of novice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2011.10784678.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144.
Teo, T. (2008). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards computer use: A Singapore survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 413–424. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1201.
Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006.
Teo, T. (2015). Comparing pre-service and in-service teachers’ acceptance of technology: Assessment of measurement invariance and latent mean differences. Computers & Education, 83, 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.015.
Thomas, G. (2011). How to do your case study: A guide for students and researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Toffoli, D., & Sockett, G. (2015). University teachers’ perceptions of online informal learning of English (OILE). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2013.776970.
Tondeur, J., Forkosh-Baruch, A., Prestridge, S., Albion, P., & Edirisinghe, S. (2016). Responding to challenges in teacher professional development for ICT integration in education. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 110–120 https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.3.110.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009.
Vodanovich, S. J., & Piotrowski, C. (2005). Faculty attitudes toward web-based instruction may not be enough: Limited use and obstacles to implementation. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(3), 309–318. https://doi.org/10.2190/V2N7-DMC4-2JWB-5Q88.
White, C., & Ding, A. (2009). Identity and self in E-language teaching. In Z. Do휖rnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 333–349). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fathi, J., Ebadi, S. Exploring EFL pre-service teachers’ adoption of technology in a CALL program: obstacles, motivators, and maintenance. Educ Inf Technol 25, 3897–3917 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10146-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10146-y