Published in the Canadian Modern Language Review - Volume 56, No. 3,
March / mars 2000
To see more articles and book reviews from this and other journals visit
UTPJOURNALS online at UTPJOURNALS.com
Technophilia vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why
Second-Language Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology in
Their Classrooms
Yvonne Lam
Abstract: Given the increasing pressure exerted by technological developments on
education, it is important to understand the perceived `technophobia' of teachers
and to determine whether fear is the underlying factor behind their decisions
regarding technology. Oral interviews were conducted with 10 L2 teachers and
analyzed for their content in light of the following questions: (1) What are the
reasons behind L2 teachers' decisions to use technology for teaching? (2) Why do
some L2 teachers choose not to use computers in their teaching? (3) What factors
influence these decisions? The main reasons are related to the teacher's personal
belief in technology's benefits, or lack thereof, rather than to a resistance to
technology. This finding suggests that teachers are not really `technophobic' and
that institutions are perhaps overly `technophilic' in their rush to obtain the latest
innovations without considering the needs of teachers and students.
Résumé : Etant donné la pression croissante d'intégrer les nouveautés
technologiques en éducation, il s'avère important de comprendre la " technophobie "
que l'on croit observer chez les enseignant.es et de déterminer si la peur est à la
base de leurs décisions concernant la technologie. Cet article résume les analyses
d'entrevues faites auprès de 10 enseignant.es de L2. Nous nous sommes penchés
sur les questions suivantes: (1) Quelles raisons sont à la base des décisions des
enseignant.es de L2 d'utiliser la technologie pour enseigner ? (2) Pourquoi des
enseignant.es de L2 ne choisissent-ils pas d'utiliser les ordinateurs pour enseigner ?
(3) Quels sont les facteurs qui influencent leurs décisions ? Les raisons principales
ont rapport à la conviction de l'enseignant.e des avantages, ou des inconvénients de
cette technologie, plutôt qu'à la peur de la technologie. Cette conclusion suggère que
les enseignant.es ne sont pas vraiment " technophobes " et que les institutions sont
peut-être trop " technophiles " ; elles se seraient précipitées trop rapidement pour se
procurer ces dernières innovations sans tenir compte des besoins des enseignant.es
et des étudiant.es.
Technology can be acknowledged to be an integral part of teaching today. Whether it
be state-of-the-art computers or older VCRs, the arsenal of teaching tools is no
longer limited to paper and blackboard. The rapid development of machines has
helped to enhance the way teachers present material to students. For instance, one
Canadian post-secondary institution recently spent $3.7 million outfitting a classroom
with the latest technology so that the teacher can project an image of a book using a
document camera, display the contents of his laptop computer screen, or start a VCR
with the touch of a button on the lectern (Danard, 1999). At the same time, it is
often remarked that
teachers, while often among society's most liberal members, are also, as keepers
and carriers of tradition, at the same time conservative and slow to change.... While
the growth of technology has been rapid, teachers have been generally slow to adopt
this technology, and even slower to make productive use of it. (Gratton, 1998)
There is an obvious discrepancy of opinions between those who provide the
technology and those who actually use it. Such a conflict can be viewed in one of two
ways. The first interpretation considers educational institutions overly `technophilic,'
charging that they install new technology without consulting the teachers, who end
up with resources they do not need (e.g., Connor, 1984). The second interpretation
is reflected in the passage quoted above and regards teachers as `technophobes'
who refuse to take advantage of new developments. The prevailing view seems to be
the latter, blaming the `technophobic' teacher rather than the `technophilic'
institution. No institution has ever been criticized for spending money on technology:
there is a continual `technological power game' in our society in which those who
have the latest technology are perceived as better than those who do not. The
teachers who choose not to play this game are therefore considered the losers
(Connor, 1984, p. 63).
This biased perception underlines the need to obtain a more balanced view of the
situation by examining more closely the `technophobia' of teachers. Is it really a
question of fear of technology and of overcoming this fear? This preliminary study,
based on interviews conducted with 10 second language (L2) teachers, attempts to
provide some answers to this question by exploring the reasons why these teachers
decided to use or not to use technology as well as the factors that influenced these
decisions. Only by understanding whether or not it is `technophobia' that motivates
teachers can we ensure that the money spent by `technophilic' institutions does not
go to waste.
Previous studies
Not much research has been done on technology from the point of view of the
teacher. The focus has largely been on students and how technology affects them,
and it has therefore addressed why teachers should or should not use technology,
rather than why they do or do not. For example, Nutta (1998) examined the
effectiveness of computer-based grammar instruction, while Baltova (1999) studied
the effect of subtitling video on content comprehension and vocabulary acquisition,
and González-Bueno (1998) analyzed the impact of e-mail use on the development
of L2 discourse. Other studies have looked at student reactions to using technology,
including Osuna and Meskill (1998), who examined students' attitudes towards
learning via the World Wide Web. The limitation of such studies is that by focusing
on the students, they fail to take into account the teachers' own beliefs and
experiences as factors influencing technology use in the classroom.
The small number of studies that have focused on teachers generally reveal that the
use of technology is a complex decision that extends beyond the consideration of
student needs. As McFarlane, Green, and Hoffman (1997) note, the educational
utility dimension is merely one component of teachers' attitudes towards technology,
the other two components being the usefulness of the technology for job
performance and its ease of use. Cuban (1986) found that teachers evaluated
technological innovations according to a `practicality ethic' that measured the
personal cost of integrating the technology against its return and its efficiency. The
compatibility of the innovation with the teacher's beliefs, attitudes, and/or teaching
context also affects its likelihood of being used (Kennedy & Kennedy, 1996).
Although technology has primarily been used for instructional purposes, such as
presenting essential information (Librero, 1981), clarifying concepts (Anderson,
1989), bringing unattainable experiences into the classroom (Mohammed, 1994),
and giving students experience with the technology (Zammit, 1992; Winnans &
Sardo Brown, 1992), the main obstacles cited by teachers often have little to do with
its pedagogical purpose. Deterrents include a lack of time to find and review
materials (Librero, 1981; Zammit, 1992; Mohammed, 1994), a lack of professional
development to prepare teachers for the integration of technology into the
curriculum (Akins, 1992; Zammit, 1992; Winnans & Sardo Brown, 1992), and a lack
of access to multimedia facilities and materials (Akins, 1992; Moore, Morales, &
Carel, 1998). Zammit found that teachers who did manage to access the facilities felt
obliged to use the equipment more than was necessary in order to justify their use of
it.
Intrinsic factors also play a role in determining the level of technology use. Teachers
who lack confidence in their skills with technology are less likely to use it because it
threatens their sense of competence in front of their students (Zammit, 1992;
Winnans & Sardo Brown, 1992; George & Camarata, 1996). Moreover, since the
implementation of the innovation typically originates outside the classroom, some
teachers may resent having their behaviour dictated by a higher authority and
therefore refuse to use the technology (Terrell, Dringus, & Rendulic, 1995).
Marcinkiewicz (1993) found a relationship between specific personality traits, such as
innovativeness and self-confidence, and the use of computers in a questionnaire
survey administered to 170 elementary school teachers in the United States.
Shneiderman, Borkowski, Alavi, and Norman (1998) discovered that although the
faculty at an American university recognized as positive the motivational aspect of
technology for both teachers and students and the ability to vary the mode of
presentation, many had backup lesson plans in case too many technical problems led
to the technology becoming the focus of the lesson. In addition, teachers are often
suspicious of the claims to effectiveness of technological innovations; for instance,
some teachers do not perceive audiovisual and computer technologies as a
legitimate educational tool because of the influx of computer games, video, and film
as entertainment (Albaugh, 1997), while other teachers resist being supplanted by
machines (Cuban, 1986; Marcinkiewicz, 1993).
A number of studies have examined the correlations between teachers' background
and their attitudes to the use of technology, especially computers, although no
definitive conclusions seem to have been drawn. Clerc (1985) and Mohammed
(1994) both found that age and years of teaching experience were positively related
to the acceptance of computers, but other studies saw no correlation between age
and the predisposition to learn about computers (Stenzel, 1982) or between years of
experience and positive attitudes towards computers (Burke, 1986; Forgette-Giroux,
1990). Gender was a factor in several studies that showed male teachers as more
favourable towards computers than female teachers (Burke; Forgette-Giroux), but
gender did not have an influence in Stenzel's study of American elementary and
secondary school teachers. Some studies have cited a positive correlation between
the amount of computer knowledge, whether from personal computer use or from
training, and positive attitudes towards computers (Bradford, 1984; Burke, 1986;
Clerc, 1985; Kellenberger, 1994; Taylor, 1986). However, Sofranova (1993) found
that despite a positive attitude among teachers towards the use of computers
(68%), they were used regularly by less than 8% of the teachers in the three
Russian schools she studied.
Among the few studies that have focused specifically on L2 teachers, Gray (1996)
found that as a result of pre-service training, 24 modern language education
students in Britain improved in their capabilities with computers and gained insight
into the computer's applications for language teaching; consequently, the majority
intended to use computers from the start. Al-Juhani (1991) found a correlation
between in-service training on computer-assisted language instruction and greater
positive attitudes among 60 English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in Saudi
Arabia. Leh (1995), however, did not find a significant change in attitudes among 12
American language teachers despite a two-week workshop, although they did gain
more confidence in their knowledge about technology.
Factors other than the amount of training have also been examined as influences in
the use of technology in L2 instruction. Tutunis (1991) discovered that, since English
as a second language (ESL) teachers in Britain were not given enough time and
financial assistance for self-development, they preferred conventional teaching aids
to computers. Burnett (1997) found that linguistic difficulties and technical problems
with the computer prevented a group of French teaching assistants at an American
university from creating an environment conducive to sustaining lessons in French
and that, as a result, computer literacy was privileged over linguistic proficiency.
Lamerand and Tracy (1975), in a survey of 80 French and English teachers in
Canada, found that professional support, ease of access to the equipment, and the
opportunity for teachers to have input into the implementation of television in the
classroom also served to increase its acceptance. As for relationships between
teacher background and technology use, Moore et al. (1998) found that the level of
education and the amount of teaching experience correlated positively with the use
of computers and video for culture teaching among 388 foreign language teachers in
the United States.
Leh (1995) found that despite positive attitudes by 12 American teachers towards
the use of technology in language teaching, their actual level of use was minimal,
since they lacked access to equipment and knowledge of how to use the technology.
Pickard, Chan, and Tibbetts (1994) and Dunkel (1987) note that integrating
technology into teaching requires a major adjustment to teaching practice, which
some teachers are unwilling to make. Other studies have observed that some
teachers question the effectiveness of the technology even while making use of it
(Dunkel, 1987; Harvey, 1987; Hopwood, 1989). Pickard et al. also found that
teachers in the Hong Kong schools they studied saw the computer as a subject to be
taught, rather than a tool to be used in teaching.
In sum, these studies have shown that the use of technology is determined by a
wide range of factors, ranging from external factors such as access to appropriate
materials and professional development opportunities to more internal factors such
as awareness of the benefits of technology and personal attitudes towards
technological innovations. The major limitation of these studies is their principal
focus on computers, although a few did examine the use of video and other
audiovisual media (e.g.. Lamerand & Tracy, 1975; Librero, 1981; Anderson, 1989;
Mohammed, 1994; Moore et al., 1998; Shneiderman et al., 1998). Another limitation
is the lack of focus on L2 teachers, since most of the studies looked at teachers in
general.
This study will attempt to address some of these limitations by taking into account
not only the use of computers but also the use of audiovisual technologies such as
videos and cassette tapes, which few studies have addressed. It will specifically
examine L2 teachers, thereby focusing on a relatively neglected area of prior
research. I will take into account the factors already raised as well as additional ones
that I feel may be relevant, such as teachers' perceptions of technology and their
own experiences with it when they were L2 students. This study was conducted in
the form of oral interviews, rather than the written questionnaires that characterize
many of the previous studies. This format, together with the smaller sample, allowed
me to give more emphasis to the teachers' own experiences with teaching with
technology, rather than just their attitudes and beliefs, and to examine in greater
detail the motivations behind the teachers' use or non-use of technology.
Methodology
Definition of `technology'
The term `technology,' in its most general sense, could simply be defined as
`machines or tools designed to accomplish a specific task or tasks.' The set of
objects it refers to depends on the culture and on the context. For instance, the word
`technology' in an L2 teaching context is unlikely to evoke the microwave oven or
the space shuttle. Rather, it conjures up images of overhead projectors, cassette
recorders, video players, film projectors, computers, and so on. In this study, the
word `technology' and its related terms refer to any machines that can be used for
L2 teaching. The ones mentioned by the participants are cassette recorders, video
players, and computers; however, the application of the findings is by no means
limited to these three machines. Had this study been conducted 30 years ago,
participants would no doubt have discussed film and slide projectors rather than
video players and computers.
Research questions
The initial research questions were
1. What are the reasons behind L2 teachers' decisions to use technology for
teaching?
2. Why do some L2 teachers choose not to use technology in their teaching?
3. What factors influence these decisions?
However, among the three technological tools mentioned by the participants
(cassette tapes, videos, and computers), the only variation was in the use of
computers; all the participants incorporated cassette tapes and videos into their
teaching. As a result, the second research question required further definition,
resulting in the following reformulation:
2. Why do some L2 teachers choose not to use computers in their teaching?
The formulation of the first question remained the same, since the participants who
used computers in addition to cassette tapes and videos often had the same
motivations as those who used only cassette tapes and videos.
Participants
Since the purpose of this preliminary study is to explore factors that affect teachers'
decisions to use technology, I drew a convenience sample of 10 participants from
among my colleagues. Table 1 provides a description of each participant.
There were four male and six female teachers. Five participants taught English, three
taught Spanish, and two taught French. One participant taught at the elementary
school level, another taught at the intermediate school level, and a third taught
children, adolescents, and adults at private language schools, while the rest all
worked only with
396Lam
TABLE 1
Profile of the participants
Age Taken Used
Years of Age Countries Highest Hold Degree general computers
20- 31- 36- 41- 46- teaching group Language taught degree teaching in computer in
Currently
Teacher 30 35 40 45 50 Gender experience taughta taughta in completed certificateb
progress course teaching teaching
1 X M 17 adult Spanish Canada, MA N PhD N Y Y
Europe, (Linguis- (Spanish
Japan tics) linguistics)
2 X M 6 adult ESL Canada, BA Y (TESL) MA (L2 Y N Y
France (French, education)
Spanish)
3 X F 5 middle French Canada BA Y MEd (L2 N Y N
school (core/ (French) education)
immersion) and BEd
4 X F 20 adult ESL Canada, MA Y EdD (L2 Y Y Y
Iran, (educa- (RSA- education)
Japan, tion) Britain)
Singapore
5 X F 10.5 adult ESL Hong MA Y PhD (Educa- N N N
Kong (English tion - teacher
language development)
teaching)
6 X F 3 adult Spanish Canada MA N PhD N N Y
(Spanish) (Spanish
literature)
7 X F 5 elementary French Canada BA (French, Y MEd (L2 Y Y Y
school immersion Economics) education)
8 X M 2 children, EFL Japan BA N MA (L2 Y N N
adolescents, (Religious education)
adults studies)
L2 Teachers' Use of Technology 397
TABLE 1 (continued)
9 X M 7 adult Spanish Canada MA N PhD N Y Y
(Spanish) (Spanish
literature)
10 X F 15 adult ESL Canada, MA Y PhD (L2 N N N
US, Hong (TESOL) education)
Kong, and MEd
Philip- (Elementary
pines education)
Note: The participants are listed in no particular order.
a These two categories refer to the students they work with most or have most
recently worked with, since many of the participants have had a range of experience.
b Unless noted, "teaching certificate" refers to a public school teaching certificate.
adult learners. Years of teaching experience ranged from two to 20; ages ranged
from 25 to 50. All of the participants taught in developed countries.
The participants were all graduate students at the time of the study: seven in
education, two in literature, and one in linguistics. They came from varied
educational backgrounds; not all of them held previous education degrees or
teaching certificates. However, all of them had been second language learners
themselves. Of the 10 participants, six were teaching at the time of the study, while
the remaining four had taken a leave of absence to pursue full-time studies.
Participants who were teaching spoke both of their current experiences and of their
past experiences, while the four on leave of absence could only speak of past
experiences. With the exception of Teacher 6, all the participants were actively
involved in the teaching profession, either through reading journals, attending
conferences, belonging to professional associations, or all three.
The participants all owned computers, which they used a minimum of three to four
times a week, mainly for word processing and e-mail. However, only five of them
had used computers in teaching, although all of them had used audiovisual media.
Four participants had taken general computer courses, but none had taken a course
that dealt specifically with educational technology, although a few had attended short
workshops on using multimedia for instructional purposes.
Data collection
The participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their professional,
educational, and personal background (see Appendix A). I then conducted a semistructured oral interview with each individual, based on a list of questions I had
generated using the suggestions made by Payne (1951) about forming unbiased
questions (see Appendix B). However, the questions were by no means limited to the
list, which allowed me to follow the flow of conversation and to ask for elaboration of
certain points or probe other issues that were not mentioned by the participant. As a
result, questions were not asked in the same order for each participant, nor were
exactly the same questions asked. However, I made certain that I first asked the
general question - why the participant did or did not use technology - so that he or
she could formulate an initial answer without any undue influence from the
interviewer. Each interview was tape-recorded and transcribed upon completion of
the data collection process.
Data analysis
The transcripts of the interviews and the background questionnaires were analyzed
for their content in light of the research questions. The content analysis consisted of
listing the range of responses given by the participants, then grouping together
common elements and recurrent patterns into larger descriptive categories. No
statistical analyses were performed on the data, since this study was qualitative in
nature, although I did look for possible links between various factors and the use of
technology.
Analysis of results
Analysis of the data revealed four main categories: (a) teachers' perceptions of
technology; (b) their stated reasons for using technology; (c) their stated reasons
for not using computers; and (d) other factors mentioned by the participants that
influenced their decisions about using technology.
Perceptions of technology
The participants all viewed technology from a utilitarian perspective, as something
that simplified everyday tasks or enhanced their way of life by allowing them to do
more:
They allow us to do things quickly and efficiently. (Teacher 4)
Technology is tools ... anything we can use to extend our ability.
(Teacher 8)
It's some machines that you use that would make things easier.
(Teacher 10)
When I probed the participants' attitudes towards innovation in technology by asking
them whether they would consider purchasing a video phone or a palm-top
computer, the general reaction was cautious; their decision depended on whether or
not they had a use for the `gadget,' as Teacher 1 called it:
I'd have to have a use for it and if I did, then I would get one.
(Teacher 3)
I have no use for that, not now. (Teacher 6)
This utilitarian perspective is also reflected in the role the participants attributed to
technology in language teaching:
A means to facilitate language teaching. (Teacher 2)
It aids instruction, but it doesn't drive the instruction. (Teacher 4)
I think it can be a good supplement to enhance teaching and learning.
(Teacher 5)
It's more of a resource that's used to achieve an outcome. (Teacher 7)
Technology-based language teaching was perceived as using technology in a
supportive and supplementary role, as an aid or a tool for the teacher, but not as a
substitute. As a result, none of the participants felt threatened by advancements in
educational technology. As Teacher 10 stated: `the students still need me, more
than they need the machine.'
This attitude towards technology as a tool was further reflected in the responses
given by the participants when they were asked whether we should be looking at
technology in the language classroom or at the language classroom in a technologybased society (Warschauer & Healey, 1998). Six of the participants agreed with the
former, while three chose the latter and one saw the relevance of both. Interestingly,
the three participants who chose the latter view did not support it wholeheartedly:
much as they saw the language classroom as having to `reflect the realities outside'
(Teacher 4), and that it would thus be `negligent' of them to not bring it into the
classroom (Teacher 3), none of them saw `the classroom being swallowed up by
technology' (Teacher 8). Technology was seen as a means, not an end.
A second finding revealed that for six participants, using technology in language
teaching explicitly meant using computers:
I would think it means using the computer to assist language learning. (Teacher 5)
[Technology-based language learning is] software that would allow, ideally, students
to progress at their own rate. (Teacher 7)
More the use of computers, though. I guess that would be more getting technology
into the language learning process. (Teacher 9)
These teachers talked almost solely about computers, despite the fact that I
deliberately used the term `technology,' and several needed to be prompted before
they would talk about using video or cassettes. Moreover, while filling out the
questionnaire, a number of participants answered that they had never experienced
technology-based language teaching as students, although, when specifically probed,
they did admit to having used video, cassettes, or both. It appears that the use of
cassettes and video is now accepted as an unquestionable part of language teaching,
which is not yet the case with computers.
To sum up, technology, as perceived by language teachers, is seen as a tool to
supplement their teaching. The prototypical case of technology in language teaching
seems to be the use of computers, since the use of cassettes and video is essentially
considered as given.
Reasons for using technology
Table 2 summarizes the reasons given by the ten participants for using technology in
their classrooms, along with their distribution.
Different mode of presentation
Seven of the 10 participants mentioned technology as allowing them to present the
language in a varied way, thereby enhancing the students' learning experience.
Technology offered `a change from grammar' (Teacher 6) that brought `a different
dimension to class' (Teacher 2). It gave the teacher the opportunity to `add some
flavour to [his] teaching' (Teacher 5) and benefited the students who were `getting
bombarded with different approaches or different presentations of the language, and
also using the language different ways themselves' (Teacher 3).
Motivation for students
Just as important as the variety that technology offered was its motivational aspect,
mentioned by seven participants. It made the class `more interesting' (Teacher 1)
and provided `more of a stimulus' xxxxxxx
TABLE 2
Why L2 teachers use technology for teaching
Reason Number of responses (n=10)
different mode of presentation 7
motivation for students 7
authentic context 4
teaching of a specific skill or syllabus 4
availability of materials 3
source of information (computers only) 2
increased student response (computers only) 2
personal experiences as a student 1
(Teacher 8). Videos helped the teacher `attract students' attention' (Teacher 5)
because `it's more lively than reading' (Teacher 10). As for computers, `kids are
very interested in the Internet, they're very drawn to the computer' (Teacher 7).
Teacher 3 even mentioned that `it's interesting for me' and motivated her as well!
Authentic context
Four participants used technology to present the language in a more natural,
authentic context. Teacher 7 used the Internet to provide `authentic communication'
with other French speakers. Cassettes and video helped students learn `how to deal
with the situation of the language' (Teacher 1) and `understand something in
context while it's going on' (Teacher 8). Teacher 2 used videos because
it's culturally embedded, the input, and it's contextual so the students can decipher a
lot of the language through the picture and through the images, and through the
interaction they see, and the body language, and all those aspects that aren't easily
taught in a traditional classroom.
Teaching a specific skill or syllabus
Technology was used by four participants for a specific purpose, namely using
cassettes or video for developing listening skills or for teaching culture, or both. One
ESL teacher (Teacher 4) mentioned that the mere use of technology, especially
computers, was a culture lesson in itself, since it helped students `construct a view
of [our] culture' where technology was prevalent.
Availability of materials
Three of the participants chose to use technology because they were constantly
being made aware of the existence of multimedia materials. As Teacher 3 said
simply, `the materials were there.' Teacher 10 found that `you open a catalogue and
there are so many good ones,' while Teacher 2 felt a slight pressure to use these
materials: `if it's there, I will use it, and integrate it into the classroom.'
In fact, four participants said that they began teaching with technology just because
it was available and they decided to explore it as an option for teaching:
it wasn't really anything that anyone informed me about, it was just, you know, I do
this at home, why don't I tape the news tonight and show it to the students
tomorrow and try to do some activity around it. (Teacher 2)
Teacher 1 acted out of `curiosity how these things could be used, could be of any
use for a class.'
Source of information
Two of the participants mentioned using computers, specifically the Internet, as a
source of up-to-date information in the target language. As Teacher 7 explained,
`there's so much available at [the students'] fingertips.' Interestingly, both of these
teachers taught a foreign language, French or Spanish, yet neither of them
mentioned having difficulties finding information in that language. The overwhelming
predominance of English on the Internet did not appear to be a disadvantage, at
least not for teachers of the more common foreign languages.
Increased student response
Two participants said that some of their students appeared to feel more at ease
working with computers. Teacher 7 observed that some of her elementary school
students `respond to the technology more than to the teacher. ... There are some
students that really like to work independently, they just want to be in front of a
computer screen.' She did not feel threatened by this reaction from her students,
however: `if it works for the student I think we should follow it.'
Personal experiences as a student
One participant explicitly mentioned that he used cassettes `because my teachers
used [them] with me, so it's natural that I tend to follow that line of thought'
(Teacher 2). Although none of the other participants mentioned their own
experiences as L2 students, the influence of these experiences perhaps explains why
all the participants used cassettes, video, or both in their classrooms, since all of
them had been exposed to these media as students, as was revealed by the
questionnaire. This was not the case with computers, however; only Teacher 6 and
Teacher 9 had used computers in their own language learning.
Reasons for not using computers
Five of the 10 participants had never used computers in teaching. Table 3
summarizes the reasons given by these five participants for not using computers:
TABLE 3
Why some L2 teachers do not use computers for teaching
Reason Number of responses (n=5)
lack of knowledge about teaching L2 with computers 4
lack of access to computers 3
lack of confidence in computer skills 2
inadequacy for students' needs 2
Lack of knowledge about teaching L2 with computers
Only one of the participants who did not use computers in teaching (Teacher 2)
considered himself knowledgeable about the pedagogical use of computers: his only
deterrent was a lack of access to computers. The other four participants all cited a
lack of knowledge about applying computers to language teaching as their main
reason for not using computers:
o I didn't see how I can use the computer in language teaching. (Teacher 5)
o I'd have to know more of what, how it would benefit the student. (Teacher 6)
o I was not aware of computers, using them, even though we had a whole computer
room with word processing going on, but it never occurred to me how computers
would be used [as a teaching tool]. (Teacher 8)
o The thing that puzzles me is, when every student is facing the screen, then how
am I going to talk to them, through e-mail? So I have to learn the pedagogy first,
the classroom teaching method using computers. (Teacher 10)
Both Teacher 5 and Teacher 6 saw computers as beneficial for their own use at
home, but they did not see how computers could be integrated into the classroom.
Lack of access to computers
In three cases, a lack of access to computers discouraged the participants from
integrating them into their teaching. Teacher 2 and Teacher 10 had computers in
their institutions, but they were not available for class use, only for student word
processing. Teacher 6 did not have access to the software programs used by the
students, who were expected to go on their own to the lab; therefore, she was not
aware of what benefits using computers could bring to her students.
Lack of confidence in computer skills
Two participants were uncomfortable with using computers in front of a class:
For a teacher who has no experience with computers, it represents a great step
ahead to get into them. ... If you're a teacher, you don't want to step into a
classroom with something you don't know how it works, because you look like an
idiot. It's already stressful to use something in a classroom, but if you don't know
[how to use it], that's adding more stress. (Teacher 8)
This lack of confidence in their computer skills suggests that these two teachers did
not see their students as a resource (M. Swain, personal communication, May 20,
1999). They seemed to prefer the traditional role of the teacher as expert, which
could imply that their discomfort was perhaps not so much with the lack of computer
skills, as they claimed, but rather with the idea of relinquishing their expert role (see
Warschauer, Turbee, & Roberts, 1996).
Inadequacy for students' needs
Another reason for not using computers was the perception that computers could not
meet the students' needs. Teacher 5 had seen some computer programs, but she
thought `they were pretty stupid and too mechanical,' while Teacher 8 did not feel
that computers were fast enough or language-rich enough.
When these five teachers who did not use computers were asked whether they would
use computers if circumstances were different, two said yes, one said no, and two
still had some reservations. For the two teachers who would use computers, Teacher
2 was hindered only by a lack of access to computers, while Teacher 10 had since
been using the computer more in her personal life and thus felt more confident in her
skills. Teacher 8 continued to express reluctance because he still did not feel
comfortable with the computer, especially since he taught overseas, in a country
where the language used on the computer was different. As for Teacher 5 and
Teacher 6, who still had reservations, they admitted seeing some benefits to using
the computer, such as giving students access to other students or practising writing
skills, but they were not yet convinced of any other advantages.
Factors influencing the decision to use technology
Table 4 lists other factors cited by the participants that affected their decision about
using technology in their teaching, whether it be computers, cassettes, or video.
Professional development opportunities
Four participants felt that there was inadequate training for teachers on using and
particularly on integrating technology into the classroom. The few in-service
workshops that they attended dealt mostly with the technical aspects of using the
technology, not with the pedagogical aspects. Teacher 9 expressed the view that
technology is often treated as something `peripheral and departments have a hard
time incorporating it into the actual language learning.' The lack of training was
initially a deterrent for Teacher 2 to use videos `because it seemed that [they] didn't
really serve much of a purpose, [they] just confused the students and demotivated
them.' However, the absence of professional development opportunities did not seem
to prevent teachers from using technology: all four managed to learn how to use
technology effectively through trial and error, despite explicitly citing a lack of
training. In fact, the other six participants did not mention professional development
as a factor, which suggests that providing training in using technology is by itself
insufficient in encouraging teachers to use it.
Resources and money
Insufficient resources can also discourage teachers from using technology. Teacher 4
was trying to find a computer-equipped classroom with a data projector, an
experience which turned out to be `a real hassle and I found that unnecessary.' For
Teacher 10, the problem was not only the lack of resources but also the lack of
resource people who TABLE 4
Influencing factors
Reason Number of responses (n=10)
professional development opportunities 4
resources or money 4
student background 4
administrators' attitudes 3
language level 2
time 2
attitudes of the parents 1
could help her. Teacher 3 and Teacher 7 mentioned that they were willing to invest
the time to search for materials, but that, because of limited financing, they felt that
it was almost `a waste of time' (Teacher 7).
Student background
The background of the students in the class was mentioned by four participants as a
factor to be taken into consideration. Two ESL teachers (Teacher 2 and Teacher 10)
spoke of dealing with immigrant students who had never seen a computer or a VCR
and so first needed to be exposed to the concept of these machines before
experiencing them. In another case, the EFL teacher (Teacher 8) recognized that
students in the culture he was teaching in would have felt threatened by technology
because they were afraid of making fools of themselves; therefore, he had to change
the way he used the technology so that students would feel successful with it.
Teacher 1 mentioned the age of his students as a factor: `if you have to teach it to
older people, I don't think it would make that much of a difference at all.'
Administrators' attitudes
The attitudes of the person in charge can sometimes make a difference in whether or
not teachers decide to use technology. Three participants explicitly mentioned
administrators' attitudes as an influencing factor. These attitudes can have a positive
effect: in the case of Teacher 4, it was the coordinator who showed her how to
create Web sites for her class. Conversely, Teacher 10 was frustrated by
administrators' misconceptions about ESL teaching - `if you tell them ... that we
need computers, he would be shocked, ESL, learning English, why would you [need
computers]' - while Teacher 8 disliked the fact that his administrators `will support
you morally, but they don't really support it.'
According to the other seven participants, their administrators were open and willing
to have technology in the classroom, but that did not appear to influence their
decisions to use technology. Three of these participants did not choose to use
computers, despite the open support of the administration. In fact, in the case of
Teacher 5, the department openly encouraged its teachers to use technology by
creating a computer centre for the department, but she admitted (quite honestly!)
that she had never set foot inside. This finding suggests that the use of technology is
largely a personal decision, irrespective of administra-tive support, although for
some teachers the level of support may be a factor.
Language level
Two participants found the language level of videos and cassettes to be a problem:
`technology can sometimes be daunting for them [the students] to understand
because you have very authentic language' (Teacher 2). Teacher 6 received
complaints from students about the cassettes for the textbook: `they didn't
understand the questions, they [people on the tape] were speaking too quickly.'
However, this did not stop either of them from using technology: they merely
learned how to compensate for the level of difficulty in their instruction.
Time
Time was cited as a factor not in terms of learning how to use technology, but in
terms of searching for appropriate materials: `the only limitation is to spend more
time in order to search for more' (Teacher 7). Teacher 1 mentioned the large
amounts of time he spent on finding materials `and not necessarily the material you
find would be what's required.'
Attitudes of the parents
One participant (of the three who taught children or adolescents) cited the attitudes
of the parents as an influencing factor. The parents saw technology as `a way to the
future ... so they want them to have the basic skills, even by grade 7, so they're
really pushing [the use of technology]' (Teacher 3).
Other possible factors influencing computer use
The following factors - which deal specifically with computer use, since no variation
was observed in the use of cassette tapes and videos - were not explicitly stated by
the participants but, rather, were gleaned from various pieces of information that
may have had an effect on their decision to use computers.
Age may have an influence on the use of computers. Four of the five participants
who did use computers were between the ages of 25 and 35, while three of the five
participants who did not use computers were between the ages of 35 and 50. The
age of the teachers' students may also be a factor: both the elementary and the
middle school teachers used computers to teach language although it was not
mandated by the curriculum, while among the teachers of adult learners, computer
use was more variable.
The number of years of teaching experience does not appear to be a factor. Two
participants with less than five years of experience did use computers, but two did
not; one participant with 15 or more years of experience did not use computers,
while two did. Gender does not appear to be a factor either: exactly half the male
teachers (two of four) and half the female teachers (three of six) did use computers,
while the other half did not.
No conclusions can be drawn about the influence of the language taught (for
example, English being taught more with computers than French or Spanish)
because the sample size was too small. Nor can any connection be made between
possessing a teaching certificate and using computers, since I did not delve into the
nature of the participants' pre-service training. Having taken a general computer
course does not appear to be a factor either: three of the five participants who used
computers had never taken such a course, while two of the five participants who did
not use computers had taken one. The level of education does not seem to have an
influence, since there were both computer users and computer non-users among
participants with the same academic degree. Findings on the effect of past
experiences as a language student are inconclusive as well. Two participants had
been exposed to computers, but only one of them used computers in language
teaching.
These links between factors are mentioned only as possible relationships. Since the
purpose of this study was not correlational, the data did not lend themselves to
quantitative analysis. Moreover, some of the participants were not currently
teaching, so I had a mix of current information from their background profile and
past information from the interview. It was thus impossible to draw correlations
between the use of computers in teaching and factors such as personal use of
computers or comfort level with technology, since the situation might have changed
since the participants last taught. In fact, two participants mentioned that as a result
of their current graduate work, their views on computers in language teaching had
changed considerably: because they had had to use the computer more often, they
were more aware of possible pedagogical uses than before.
Discussion of results
The results of this study confirm several factors that had already been identified in
prior research. Like the teachers in previous studies, the participants used
technology because it motivated students and because it offered a different mode of
presentation, while they were also hindered by a lack of access to equipment, a lack
of professional support, and a lack of confidence in their computer skills. However,
this study also brought out other factors that may be more specific to L2 teachers,
such as the opportunities for authentic use of the target language and the level of
linguistic difficulty of the materials, two factors that are very important to consider
when dealing with L2 learners. Moreover, this study revealed the inability of several
teachers to see the connection between computers and language teaching, a
perspective that would not likely occur in other subjects such as math or science.
However, the background of the teacher did not turn out to be as important in
determining the use of technology as prior studies would suggest. The number of
years of teaching experience, prior technological training, gender, and even age did
not appear to have a major impact on determining whether or not a teacher would
use computers in language teaching. In addition, this study goes one step further
than prior ones by examining L2 teachers' perceptions of technology and technologybased language teaching. The teachers saw technology as a tool, as a means to
enhance teaching and promote learning, not as an end in itself. They also tended to
associate the term `technology' with computers, which would perhaps explain why
so many of the prior studies focused solely on computers.
The main reasons for the teachers' decisions regarding technology seemed to depend
on whether the teacher was personally convinced of the benefits of using technology
for L2 instruction, a factor that is underemphasized in previous studies. Most of the
reasons cited by the participants for using technology deal with how it can help their
students learn the target language better, such as offering a variety of input and
motivating students, while two of the four reasons given for not using computers
reflect a lack of confidence in the advantages of computer-assisted instruction for
students. Although time was cited as a factor, it was not in terms of the time needed
to learn how to use technology, but rather in terms of the time required for selecting
materials, suggesting that teachers would be willing to use technology more if they
felt it were beneficial. Likewise, the availability of professional development
opportunities and the attitudes of administrators did not necessarily play a role in
influencing decisions, implying that personal beliefs were still the major factor.
In fact, Anderson (1989) found that intrinsic factors such as personality or
philosophical beliefs might be determining the levels of use of film and video among
his participants, rather than extrinsic factors such as equipment or media services.
Research on teacher decision making indicates how important teacher beliefs are in
determining what they do in the classroom (Burns, 1996; Richards & Lockhart, 1994;
Smith 1996). After all, `teaching is realized only in teachers'; it is not something to
be memorized and regurgitated (Richards, 1998, p. 81). The critical role played by
teacher beliefs perhaps explains why, in the present study, there were cases of older
teachers who were using computers and younger teachers who were not using them,
as well as why previous correlational studies have been unable to come to any
definitive conclusions.
The results of this study indicate that it is unfair to brand teachers as
`technophobic'; they suggest that teachers' decisions regarding technology use are
based not on fear but on personal convictions. The teachers who did not use
computers in their teaching never cited fear of computers as a reason for not using
them; two of the participants spoke of a lack of confidence in their computer skills,
but not of `technophobia' or of a complete resistance to computers. It is likely that if
these participants were to learn more about using computers and about integrating
them into their teaching, they would be perfectly willing to use them. Similarly, the
reasons given for using computers and other technologies reflected the teachers'
beliefs in the benefits of these technologies for students, rather than an adoration of
all things technological. No one felt that language teaching could not take place
without technology, even among those who believed that their teaching should
reflect the technology-based society we live in. It is not a love-hate situation,
therefore, but one based on practical concerns and personal convictions.
Implications of the study
The results of this study indicate that merely providing teachers with the equipment
is not enough; rather, it is necessary to convince them of the benefits of using it in
the classroom. A case in point is the teacher who had full access to a computer lab
within her own department, yet never once went inside. Conversely, a number of
teachers had little or no support for using technology, yet they still took the initiative
to learn about it themselves because they saw its usefulness to their students.
Moreover, training cannot be limited to the simple `how-to' of technology; several
teachers expressed a desire to learn not so much how the equipment works as how it
can be effectively integrated into the curriculum.
One way to persuade teachers of the benefits of technology in language teaching
would be involve them in the implementation process. In a study of the degree of
correspondence between the views of educational technologists and those of
teachers about instructional technology, Lowther and Sullivan (1994) found that
there was a great difference in perceptions in some areas, suggesting that
educational technologists and administrators must show greater sensitivity to
teachers' point of view if educational technology is to gain credibility among
teachers. Connor (1984) saw a problem when teachers are forced, either by society
or by educational administrators, to `create the need' for the technology (p. 63). As
long as teachers feel alienated from technology, they will not see its benefits for
language teaching. Understanding what factors influence teachers' decisions on using
technology is an important step in ensuring that institutions are not wasting already
limited funds on equipment that no one uses.
Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research
The most obvious limitation is the lack of representativeness of the sample, since
this is a preliminary study. In addition to the fact that there were no secondary
school teachers in my sample, all the participants were graduate students who were
interested in improving their teaching. As a result, this sample is one of teachers
who, by choosing to `go back to school,' have demonstrated that they are open to
new ideas while casting a critical eye on issues. In fact, when participants were
asked in interviews about their attitudes towards changes or innovations in teaching,
their general reaction was that they were all willing to consider or to try new things,
but with a degree of scepticism. This attitude may or may not be representative of
the teaching population as a whole.
Another limitation is the lack of focus on the relation of the technologies to each of
the language skills, which would have helped to shed more light on issues unique to
L2 teaching. It would also have been interesting to include teachers of less
commonly taught languages, who would have considerably less access to materials
than English, French, and Spanish teachers do. Another group worth consulting are
teachers in developing countries: all the participants in this sample had taught or
were teaching in Western Europe, North America, or Southeast Asia, in areas where
technology is more common than in less developed regions. It would be worthwhile
to obtain the point of view of an L2 teacher in a society where VCRs are not common
and computers are an object of curiosity.
This study sought to identify the range of factors influencing teachers' use of
technology in teaching. Since the factors were not predetermined, it was impossible
to compare the factors or correlate them. Future studies may wish to be more
comparative in order to the determine which factors are the most influential in
teacher decisions regarding technology. Triangulation of data may yield factors not
mentioned by teachers, since the decision to use technology is a complex and
multifaceted one. Extrinsic factors such as administrative attitudes or professional
development opportunities could be dealt with more objectively than in this study,
which relied on the teachers' interpretation. It would also be interesting to determine
whether a correspondence exists between the beliefs that teachers express about the
use of technology in their teaching and their actual behaviour with it in their
classrooms.
Conclusion
As technology becomes more and more dominant in our everyday lives, it will
continue to exert a constant pressure on education. Under this increasing pressure, it
becomes even more necessary for all parties involved to step back and examine their
motivations. At the moment, the general opinion seems to be focused negatively on
teachers, who are considered `technophobic' and unwilling to change, while no one
has thought to criticize educational institutions for their attempts to win the
`technological power game.' This study has sought to show that the `technophobia'
of teachers is a misconception and that their decisions regarding technology use are
not based on a resistance to or an adoration of technology, but rather on their beliefs
about the benefits of the technology for their students. If teachers choose not to use
the technology provided to them, it is not because they fear technology but, rather,
because they are not convinced of its usefulness. This conclusion suggests that when
technology is not used, it is not simply the fault of the teacher, as we tend to
believe, but also the fault of the institutions who are overly hasty in purchasing the
latest technological innovations without considering the needs of both teachers and
students.
Yvonne Lam is currently a PhD student in Hispanic linguistics in the Department of
Spanish and Portuguese at the University of Toronto. Her research interests include
applied Spanish linguistics, the use of the Web and other multimedia technology in
second-language teaching, and Spanish syntax.
References
Akins, K. (1992). Revolution or Rhetoric: Factors affecting teachers' decisions about
computers in classrooms. Masters' Abstracts International, 32, 795.
Albaugh, P.R. (1997). The role of skepticism in preparing teachers for the use of
technology. Paper presented at Education for Community: A Town and Gown Panel
Discussion, Westerville, Ohio, January 1997. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 406 339)
Al-Juhani, S. (1991). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching
English as a foreign language in Saudi secondary schools. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 52(07), 2383A.
Anderson, J. (1989). Film and video utilization by elementary classroom teachers.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(09), 2781A.
Baltova, I. (1999). Multi-sensory language teaching in a multidimensional
curriculum: The use of authentic bimodal video in core French. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 56, 32-48.
Bradford, C. (1984). An analysis of the relationships between computer literacy,
attitude and the utilization of microcomputers in public school settings. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 45(07), 2070A.
Burke, M. (1986). The effects of in-service microcomputer training on teachers'
attitudes toward educational computing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(06),
2026A.
Burnett, J. (1997). The social construction of technologizing French 103: Case
studies of teachers and computers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58(05),
1687A.
Burns, A. (1996). Starting all over again: From teaching adults to teaching
beginners. In D. Freeman & J. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching
(pp. 154-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clerc, R. (1985). Acceptance of technological change in the public schools.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(06), 1452A.
Connor, S. (1984). Language teachers and technophobia. In P. Westphal (Ed.),
Strategies for foreign language teaching (pp. 59-67). Lincolnwood, IL: National
Textbook Company.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since
1920. New York: Teachers College Press.
Danard, S. (1999, March 7). UVic takes fresh path. Times Colonist, pp. C1, C2.
Dunkel, P. (1987). Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and computer-assisted
language learning (CALL): Past dilemmas and future prospects for audible CALL.
Modern Language Journal, 71, 250-260.
Forgette-Giroux, R. (1990). L'ordinateur à l'école: attitudes des élèves, des
enseignantes and des enseignants. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.
George, G., & Camarata, M.R. (1996). Managing instructor cyberanxiety: The role of
self-efficacy in decreasing resistance to change. Educational Technology, 36(4), 4954.
González-Bueno, M. (1998). The effects of electronic mail on Spanish L2 discourse.
Language Learning and Technology [On-line serial], 1(2). Available WWW:
polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/ vol1num2/article3/default.html
Gratton, W. (1998). The development of computer technology in ELT. In J. Kahny &
M. James (Eds.), Perspectives on secondary school EFL education (pp. 44-49).
Odawara, Japan: Language Institute of Japan.
Gray, C. (1996). Will your NQT use IT? Language Learning Journal, 13, 58-61.
Harvey, T.E. (1987). Second-language composition instruction, computers and firstlanguage pedagogy: A descriptive survey. Foreign Language Annals, 20, 171-180.
Hopwood, T. (1989). The use of the word-processor in the teaching of English as a
foreign language. Cambridge, UK: Bell Educational Trust. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 312 892)
Kellenberger, D. (1994). Preservice teacher beliefs related to educational computer
use. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 58(07), 2643A.
Kennedy, C., & Kennedy, J. (1996). Teacher attitudes and change implementation.
System, 24, 351-360.
Lamerand, R., & Tracy, P. (1975). Acceptance by the classroom teacher of television
technology for second language instruction. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education.
Leh, A. (1995). The reformation in foreign language instruction. In Proceedings of
the 1995 Annual National Convention of the Association for Education
Communications and Technology (pp. 333-342). (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 383 320)
Librero, F. (1981). A descriptive analysis of audiovisual media utilization by the
faculty of the School of Education at Indiana University. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 42(07), 2984A.
Lowther, D., & Sullivan, H. (1994). Teacher and technologist beliefs about
educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4),
73-87.
Marcinkiewicz, H.R. (1993). Computers and teachers: Factors influencing computer
use in the classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 220-237.
McFarlane, T., Green, K., & Hoffman, E. (1997, March). Teachers' attitudes toward
technology: Psychometric evaluation of the technology attitude survey. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421 279) Mohammed, M.
(1994). Media utilization by faculty at the University of Qatar. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 108-119.
Moore, Z., Morales, B., & Carel, S. (1998). Technology and teaching culture: results
of a state survey of foreign language teachers. CALICO Journal, 15, 109-128.
Nutta, J. (1998). Is computer-based grammar instruction as effective as teacherdirected grammar instruction for teaching L2 structures? CALICO Journal, 14, 53-75.
Osuna, M., & Meskill, C. (1998). Using the World Wide Web to integrate Spanish
language and culture: A pilot study. Language Learning and Technology [On-line],
1(2). Available WWW: polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/vol1num2/article4/default.html
Payne, S. (1951). The art of asking questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Pickard, V., Chan, K., & Tibbetts, J. (1994). Concordancing for schools: Problems and
potential. Paper presented at the Annual International Language in Education
Conference, Hong Kong, 1993. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386
056)
Richards, J. (1998). Beyond training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language
classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shneiderman, B., Borkowski, E. Alavi, M., & Norman, K. (1998). Emergent patterns
of teaching/learning in electronic classrooms. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 46(4), 23-42.
Smith, D. (1996). Teacher decision making in the adult ESL classroom. In D.
Freeman & J. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 197-216).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sofranova, N.V. (1993). Teachers' attitudes towards the use of new information
technologies. Russian Education and Society, 37(2), 5-8.
Stenzel, L. (1982). Teacher attitudes toward computer literacy. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 44(01), 145A.
Taylor, C. (1986). Teacher opinions of instructional computing in selected public
elementary schools in Michigan. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(01), 81A.
Terrell, S.R., Dringus, L., & Rendulic, P. (1995). A transitional model for the
introduction of technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 171)
Tutunis, B. (1991). The integration of computers into the teaching of English to
speakers of other languages. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(05), 1671A.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An
overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and
student empowerment. System, 24, 1-14.
Winnans, C., & Sardo Brown, D. (1992). Some factors affecting elementary teachers'
use of the computer. Computers and Education, 18, 301-309.
Zammit, S. (1992). Factors facilitating or hindering the use of computers in schools.
Educational Research, 34, 57-66.
Appendix A
Background questionnaire
Date:
Name:
1. Age: o 20-30 o 31-35 o 36-40 o 41-45 o 46-50 o 50+
2. Gender: o M o F
Teaching background
3. Years of teaching experience:
4. Age group(s) taught:
o under age 6 (preschool)
o elementary (6-11) - o public school o private school
o extra-curricular program
o intermediate (11-13) - o public school o private school
o extra-curricular program
o high school (14-18) - o OAC
o public school o private school
o extra-curricular program
o adult learners (19+) - o college/university degree program
o continuing education
o private language school
o other
language level(s): o beginner o low intermediate o high intermediate
o advanced o other
o currently teaching - age group & place
language level:
# of students:
length of class:
5. Countries taught in:
6. Language taught: o ESL o EFL o ESP o French immersion
o core French o FL
o other
Educational background
7. Degree: o none o teaching certificate o other
o university degree(s) o B.A. in
o B.Ed. in
o M.A. in
o M.Ed. in
o Ed.D in
o Ph.D. in
from where (country)
8. took a course in educational tech? o yes o never
which one(s)
in computers? o yes o never
which one(s)
9. have you ever learned another language?
o yes - which one(s) o no
any tech used in teaching you? o yes o no
10. attend conferences on L2 teaching? o yes o no
read journals on L2 teaching? o yes o no
belong to any professional teacher associations? o yes o no
Personal use of technology
11. do you have: o TV o VCR o cassette player o CD player
o DVD player o electronic organizer o cell phone
o computer - o at home o at work
o Internet access - via o phone o cable
12. (if have computer) primary use(s)? o word processing o e-mail
o newsgroups o games o personal finance o surf Internet
o Web publishing o chat rooms oother
how often? o less than once/wk o 1-2 times/wk o 3-4 times/wk
o 5 or more times/wk
Appendix B
Question guideline for the oral interview
Technology in general
1. If I were an alien from the planet Zorktan and I had never heard of the word
`technology', how would you explain it to me?
2. How comfortable do you feel with technology?
3. Would you buy things over the Internet? Would you buy a video phone? Would
you buy a palm-top computer?
Technology-based language teaching
4. How do you feel a second language should be taught? How would you describe the
way you teach a second language?
5. What does the term `technology-based language teaching' mean to you? Can you
give me examples?
6. Have you ever experienced technology-based language teaching? How did you
find it?
7. Have you ever used technology in your language teaching? In what ways?
8. Why did you use/didn't use technology in your language teaching?
If no: If circumstances were different/more favourable, would you use technology in
your classroom?
9. Have you experienced any difficulties using technology in language teaching? Has
that affected your use of technology in any way?
10. Has using technology influenced your teaching in any way?
11. How important do you feel it is to use technology in language
teaching?
12. What role do you think technology plays in language teaching?
13. At the institution where you teach, is there any support for teachers wishing to
use technology in language teaching? What type of support? What type of support
would you like to see made available?
14. What are the attitudes of the principal/director/chair towards technology in
teaching? What about the other teachers? The students? (The parents?)
15. How did you start using technology in your language teaching? Has anyone ever
talked to you about it or have you read something about it?
16. As a teacher, do you feel threatened by advancements in educational technology,
or do you welcome it?
Attitudes to innovation in teaching
17. How do you feel about new things in teaching, such as the new `methods' or
`approaches' or the new materials and resources that are published every year? Do
you think they're worth looking at or do you think it's not really worthwhile?
The language classroom in a technology-based society
18. In a recent article, someone posed the question of whether we should be asking
`What is the role of informational technology in the language classroom?' or whether
we should ask `What is the role of the language classroom in the information
technology society?' Which question do you tend to agree with more and why?
© 2000 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues
vivantes,
56, 3 (March/mars)