Journal of Asian and African Social Science and Humanities, Vol. 5, No. 2 2019, Pages 1-8

THE INTEGRATION OF TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM: A HOLISTIC REVIEW

Yassine Benhadj^{*1 ,}Mohammed El Messaoudi , Abdelhamid³ NFISSI

¹ Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University , Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences Fes – Sais, 30000, Morocco.Email: Yassine150@gmail.com

² Moulay Ismail University, Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences Meknes, Morocco.

³Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University , Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences
Fes –Sais, Morocco.

ABSTRACT

Keywords:

Integration; Technological; Resources; Classroom;

By large, recent evidence suggests that modern technologies, and their extensions, have found their way to the heart of people from all walks of life around the globe. Being all the rage now, the widespread, and even rampant at times, use of Information Communication Technologies have changed the face of countless domains. The purpose of this paper is to review recent research on the necessary characteristics that facilitate integrating technology resources in their classrooms as a meaningful pedagogical tool and purports the demand to inculcate a technology-friendly organizational culture in schools worldwide

INTRODUCTION

Undoubtdly, modern technologies have amazingly succeeded in invading every nook and cranny of our daily life. Being all the rage now, the widespread, and even rampant at times, use of Information Communication Technologies have changed the face of countless domains. They, absolutely, have broken the mould of education, pushing the teaching-learning process to the next level. Notwithstanding, research has consistently shown that technology is still underused in the field of education. A set of characteristics, in a sense, or factors in another sense, organized around the nature of the school organizational culture, multimedia culture at schools, teacher’s personality, self-esteem, self-concept, computer self-eﬃcacy, attitudes, teachers’ prior experience, teacher training needs, and teacher efficacy in relation to target disciplines, are often cited, on the current literature, as the main variables that affect the route and rate of modern technologies integration in education. The purpose of this paper is to review recent research on the necessary characteristics that enable teachers to integrate technology resources in their classrooms as a meaningful pedagogical tool.

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the introduction of modern technologies into numerous schools across the globe. With a view to getting teachers incorporate modern technologies such as computers, internet, multimedia, and communication technologies in daily practice, schools have has been investing a lot of efforts and money. Indisputably, integrating technology into instruction guarantees the implementation of high-quality instruction and the the quick responsiveness to emerging issues in education. Although various technologies have been used so widely in many fields, the main concern remains how to incorporate modern technologies successfully in classrooms. Thus, countless are the studies conducted in a way or another to prove that education systems drive development and financial growth of countries. Joining the debate, Schultz (1981) argues that the most important funds of a country are the individuals in that country. With reference to Hackbarth (1996), the technologies that are designed for instructional purposes often whet students’ learning in many ways. They encourage them to study, they help connect the new information with the old knowledge, they associate the lesson subject with the real-life experiences of the student, they allow students to reach and evaluate the necessary information, they meet the expectations and needs of the society, they help students describe the world in the way they observe, they help summarize the information to facilitate comprehension, and they increase individual learning.

In his book, The educational technology handbook: a comprehensive guide: process and products for learning, Hackbarth concluded that it is mandatory to give support to technology use at schools, and initiate information technology laboratories, reminding us that devices such as projectors and smart whiteboards if are well placed in classrooms, they will make wonders. In line with hackbarth, “schools successful in integrating technology into their curricula generally work on comprehensive plans for technology use”, Ritcchie (2002). He concludes that rather than acting just as a road map, these plans explain the philosophy of technology use as well as the way of developing teaching-learning activities.

ICT POTENTIAL AT SCHOOLS

A number of Studies (Chen & Chang, 2006; Dexter & Riedel, 2003; O„Connor, Higgins, & Russell, 2003; Simmons, 2011) have found that technology use at schools has not yet gained its expected potential to develop students’ knowledge and skills. Russel, Bebel, O‟Dwyer and O‟Conner (2003), in their study, came to the conclusion that teachers use technology mostly in the phase of preparation for lessons. However, one striking point in American schools is the employment of technology experts in schools to support teachers during the phase of technology application. They have argued that teachers need these technology experts, who are representatives of change in American public schools, in classroom practice. However, technology experts are not always available for help when needed (Simmons, 2011; Ausband, 2006; Chen & Chang, 2006; Johnson, 2006; Ma, Andersson & Streith, 2005; Dexter & Riedel, 2003) [6]. .

TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES

Recent studies have unraveled some of the mysteries surrounding the integration of ICT in education, namely teachers’ attitudes towards modern technologies. Recent developments in the field have confirmed that teachers’ attitudes impact the use or misuse, or underuse of these technologies at schools. Interestingly, a large and growing body of literature has put forward that certain individual factors related to the teacher’s personality . A number of authors (Benson, 2004; Hsioung, 2002; Roussos, 2002) have found characteristics such as computer self-eﬃcacy, self-concept, motivation, needs, etc., appear to determine the extent to which modern technologies are integrated or not in educational practice. Arguably, previous research (Compeau & Higgins, 1995; Khorrami-Arani, 2001) has reported that attitudes towards information technology are interrelated with computer self-eﬃcacy since they are deemed to be a signiﬁcant factor in the interpretation of the frequency and success with which individuals use computers.

TEACHERS’ COMPUTER SELF-EFFICACY

Several studies (Bandura, 1997; Hoy & Miskel, 2001) have attempted to define self-efficacy. According to these studies, self-eﬃcacy is deﬁned as the personal judgement about one’s capability to adopt certain behaviours and actions in order to accomplish certain objectives and expected outcomes. Koliadis (1997) asserts that the degree of self-eﬃcacy which individuals assign to themselves constitutes a valid predictor of the expected behaviour that the individuals will demonstrate in performing a task. In turn, Compeau and Higgins (1995) deﬁned computer self-eﬃcacy as ‘‘judgment of one’s capability to use a computer’’. It is fair to say that recent research draws our attention that computer self-eﬃcacy is conditional on a strong sense of self-eﬃcacy. Swimming in the same lake, Karsten & Roth, (1998) hold that a strong sense of self-eﬃcacy enriches human achievement and personal life in many ways. In their major study, Looney, Valacich, and Akbulut (2004) noted that general self-eﬃcacy reﬂects considerable positive inﬂuence regarding computer self-eﬃcacy. Undoubtedly, teachers with a greater sense of computer self-eﬃcacy tend to prefer technologies based on the worldwide web as a vehicle for instruction delivery, whereas teachers with lower computer self-eﬃcacy prefer more traditional methods such as chalk & talk, or traditional lectures. Research shows that computer self-eﬃcacy inﬂuences expectations (Compeau & Higgins, 1995) and emotional reactions regarding the eﬀective use of modern technologies (Looney et al., 2004). The bottom line is that teachers who do not deem themselves as proficient computer users are less likely to use them in class practice. Ashton & Webb (1986) corroborates that beliefs regarding teacher self-eﬃcacy are interconnected to teaching practices. It necessarily follows that if, and only if, teachers are to integrate technology into their teaching practice, they have to conceive themselves to be self-eﬃcacious at its use (Ropp, 1999). Albion (1999) holds the view that a positive attitude towards computers and a strong sense of computer self-eﬃcacy are basic preconditions for positive self-eﬃcacy in computer-aided teaching. According to recent reports by numerous scholars (Pajares & Schunk, 2001; Sommerfelf & Watson, 2000), evidence tells that self-eﬃcacy is tied with achievement in different pedagogical settings.

SELF-ESTEEM

Deemed as a critical factor, Self-esteem refers to how much a person “values, approves of, appreciates, prizes, or likes him or herself” (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1991). Baya’a & Daher (2013) have reported that teachers' feelings of self-esteem and control in the existence of ICT increase their Motivation to actually integrate ICT in their classroom teaching activities. Similarly, (Fransson, Holmberg, Lindberg, & Olofsson, 2019) assured that teachers with a high self-esteem are more likely to demonstrate a higher inclination towards developing digital skills to sophisticatedly reshape their teaching and learning practices and to incorporate digital technologies in their working environment. More importantly, out of conviction that digital industry constantly changes they, most of the time, feel the need to work harder to continuesly and fluidly adjust to the technological developments, and correspondingly retain their self-esteem and self-image.

SELF-CONCEPT

The link between self-concept and achievement in education is very idiosyncratic in nature. In this respect, Huitt (1998) reminds us that the more global the self-concept under examination is, the less it correlates with achievement in a speciﬁc domain. Reaching the same results, Skaalvik (2003) reports that ‘‘generalized self-concept diminishes the ability to explain behavior, but we must examine self-concept as a more multidimensional concept in speciﬁc domains’’. In line with this, Marsh (Pajares & Schunk, 2001) warned that: ‘‘research clearly proves that self-concept and its relationship with other variables cannot be suﬃciently understood if we ignore its multidimensional domain-speciﬁc nature’’. As a concluding remark, it is not surprising to say that self-concept is related to background, previous experience and impacted by teachers’ perception and school situation. In essence, self-concept mirrors years of experience and self-evaluation by reﬂected appraisals of signiﬁcant others, via realistic expectations in the behaviour or academic capabilities. In a nutshell, the scrutinizing self-concept components in speciﬁc domains regarding teachers’ academic role is a crucial factor in order to integrate modern technologies as pedagogical tool in assorted educational practices.

TEACHERS’ PRIOR EXPERIENCE

A key characteristic that can influence an individual’s computer self-eﬃcacy is prior experience in their use. Ropp ( 1999) confirms that prior experience is interpreted according to the amount of time an individual has spent working with computers and the diﬀerent applications they have learnt to use. It has been suggested that teachers’ emotional attitudes to technology determine the workload nature and the time scope regarding computer use in class. Indeed, teachers’ prior experience in the use of technology inﬂuences their view of their own eﬃcacy, that is their self-eﬃcacy. Hsioung (2002) notes that this experience in turn greatly aﬀects teachers’ self-conﬁdence concerning the integration of technology in the teaching process. Holding the same view, Slough and Chamblee report that teachers with positive prior experience in the use of technology as an aid to teaching tend to use it in the classroom (Hsioung, 2002). In a report by Software and Information Industry Association (2000), which sums up research into educational technology over the last 20 years, it is explicitly stated that teachers are more eﬀective after receiving extensive training for integrating technology into the school curriculum. In the same publication, it is also reported that teachers who have successfully used communication technologies such as e-mail, newsgroups and mailing lists in order to exchange ideas on educational matters, demonstrate greater progress in self-eﬃcacy and conﬁdence in their teaching abilities compared to teachers lacking access to such tools. A major study by Gist, Schwoerer, & Rosen (1989) voiced out the beneﬁts of educational tutorials constitute a signiﬁcant means for the increase of computer self-eﬃcacy. Providing further evidence, a recent study conducted by Wallace (1999 quoted in Khor- rami-Arani, 2001) on education and computer students (subject-speciﬁc), investigated the correlation between the computer self-eﬃcacy of a 3-item measure (basic, advanced skills and ﬁle-software) with main factors such as computer anxiety, computer conﬁdence and computer knowledge, in order to describe the inﬂuence and the development of computer self-eﬃcacy. Interestingly, comparisons affirmed that computer students expressed low levels of computer anxiety, and higher levels of computer knowledge and computer conﬁdence in comparison with those who have less contact with compter technologies (Khorrami-Arani, 2001).

CONCLUSION

How to integrate technology in education has been a constant worry for schools around the globe. Based on evidence from an avalanche of studies, to guarantee successful ICT integration in teaching practice, schools should carefully consider the aforementioned characteristics. Teacher training in technology as an educational tool should be the starting point. This very first step is said to be empowering enough. It disruptively changes teachers’ attitudes pendulum in favour of modern technologies incorporation and raises teachers’ conﬁdence towards technology use as well. Teacher training in education provides them with the necessary skills that they need to upgrade most of , if not all, their current teaching practices. As stated before, teachers’ prior experience with modern technologies facilitates incorporating these technologies in future teaching-learning experiences. Revolving in the same orbit, teachers need to have speciﬁc subject needs during their technology learning/training. By the same token, the curriculum should stress the importance of technological practices. Teachers should grow on the job, updating the previously gained skills (prior experience), so that they would teach their students the way they want to learn.

REFERENCES

Albion, P. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-eﬃcacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)http://www.usq.edu.au/users/albion/papers/site01.

Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a diﬀerence: Teachers’ sense of eﬃcacy and student achievement. New York: Longman. Bandura, A. (1995). Self-eﬃcacy beliefs in human functioning. In Social foundations of thought and action, 1986. http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-eﬃcacy. In Harvard Mental Health Letter, 13(9), 4–5.

Baya’a, N. F., & Daher, W. M. (2013). Mathematics Teachers’ Readiness to Integrate ICT in the Classroom: The Case of Elementary and Middle School Arab Teachers in Israel. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 8(1), 46–52.

Benson, S. (2004). Computer anxiety: Impediment to technology integration? http://pt3.nmsu.edu/research/Benson.html.

Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (Vol. I). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Compeau, D., & Higgins, C. (1995). Computer self-eﬃcacy: Development of a measure and initial test. http://www.misq.org.

Fransson, G., Holmberg, J., Lindberg, O. J., & Olofsson, A. D. (2019). Digitalise and capitalise? Teachers’ self-understanding in 21st-century teaching contexts. Oxford Review of Education, 45(1), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2018.1500357

Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C., & Rosen, B. (1989). Eﬀects of alternative training methods on self-eﬃcacy and performance in computer software training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(6), 884–891.

Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration. Theory, research and practice (6th ed.). New York: Mc Graw-Hill.

Hsioung, Yu-Lu. (2002). Preservice teacher preparation to integrate technology and mathematics. Review of Literature.

Huitt, W. (1998). Self-concept and self-esteem. http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/ﬁles/selfconc.html.

Islam, Z., & Rahman, M. (2015). Corporal punishment: the case of a child abuse by a Malaysian couple in Sweden. Advances in Environmental Biology, 9(17 S3), 9-12.

Karsten, R., & Roth, R. (1998). Computer self-eﬃcacy: A practical indicator of student computer competency in introductory IS courses. Informing Science, 3.

Khorrami-Arani, O. (2001). Researching computer self-eﬃcacy. International Education Journal, 2(4). Educational research conference 2001 Special Issue. http://www.ﬂinders.edu.au/education/iej.

Koliadis, E. (1997). Learning Theories and Educational Act. Volumes B and C. Athens.

Looney, C., Valacich, J., & Akbulut, A. (2004). Online investment self-eﬃcacy: Development and initial test of an instrument to assess perceived online investing abilities. In Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. http:// csdl2.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2004/2056/07/205670184b.pdf.

Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., & Owen, S. V. (1989). Development and validation of the computer self-eﬃcacy scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 893–899.

Phillips, B. (1997). A critical analysis of recent studies of computers in education. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/8314/ 5p92qual.htm.

Rayner (Eds.), Perception (pp. 239–266). London: JAI presshttp://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/.

Rogers, A. (1999). Adult education. Metechmio Publications, in Greek.

Ropp, M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402–424http://www.educ.mcu.edu/homepages/ropp/Dissertation.

Rosenberg (1965). Self-esteem scale. http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/grad/socpsy_rosenberg.html.

Roussos, P. (2002). Computer attitude correlates: Do they tell us anything new? http://psychology.uindy.gr/ICTE_paper_Roussos.pdf. Scholl, R., Beauvais, L. & Leonard, N. (1995). A self concept-based model of work motivation, 1995 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. http://www.cba.uri.edu/Scholl/Papers/Self_Concept_Motivation.html.

Schwarzer, R. & Jerusalem, M. (1993). The general self-eﬃcacy scale (GSE) in http://userpage.fuberlin.de/~health/engscal.htm.

Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (2000). Generalized self-eﬃcacy scale. http://www.fu-berlin.de/gesund/skalen/procop_engl.htm. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher eﬃcacy: Its Meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.

Software and Information Industry Association, (2000). Research report on the eﬀectiveness of technology in schools.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher eﬃcacy: Capturing an elusive construct. In Teaching and teacher education,17, 783–805.

United States Congress Oﬃce of Technology Assessment, OTA, 1988, 1995 and the U.S. Department of Education’s Oﬃce of Educational Research and Improvement, OERI, 1993.