اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 360 |
| تعداد مقالات | 2,962 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 3,779,365 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 2,553,985 |
Investigating Technological Innovation in English Language Teaching: Iranian EFL Instructors in Focus | ||
| Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 11، شماره 1، فروردین 2024، صفحه 53-77 اصل مقاله (1.16 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: research paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30479/jmrels.2023.18165.2155 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Iran Kashanizadeh1؛ Saeed Ketabi* 2؛ Mohsen Shahrokhi3 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English language , Sharheza Branch , Islamic Azad University , Isfahan, Iran | ||
| 2University of Isfahan | ||
| 3Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Shahreza Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 21 آذر 1401، تاریخ بازنگری: 26 اسفند 1401، تاریخ پذیرش: 16 فروردین 1402 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Abstract Technological innovation creates new opportunities for teachers to practice new method of language teaching. During the last twenty years, increasing attention has been devoted to the notion of technology and education .Innovative teachers try to find different new methods for language teaching to improve their quality of teaching. Having sufficient information about the level of teachers' technological innovation is an effective predicator of language learners’ achievements. Therefore, current research sought to assess Iranian English language teachers’ level of technological innovation. The main data were collected from 375 EFL teachers compromising 125 university teachers, 125 high school teachers and 125 institute teachers through a predesigned and validated questionnaire and interview. The results from the MANOVA indicated no significant differences between the high school, language institute and university EFL teachers’ overall means on technological innovation. Findings also revealed that most of the teachers are almost at the same level and have some information about technological innovations and try to apply them in their process of teaching in the classroom. The findings could provide implications for EFL materials developers, policy makers, teachers, and syllabus designers. Keywords: Computer - based Technology, Mobile- based Technology, Multimedia, Technological Innovation, Web- based Technology © xxxx Imam Khomeini International University. All rights reserved. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| Computer - based Technology؛ Mobile- based Technology؛ Multimedia؛ Technological Innovation؛ Web- based Technology | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abraham, L. B. (2007). Second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning with multimedia. Hispania, 90(1), 98–109. Aghajanzadeh Kiasi, G., Maftoon, P., & Birjandi, P. (2016). An investigation of Iranian high school English language teachers’ perceptions of pedagogical competence. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), 1-20. Alharbi, M. A. (2020). Exploring the potential of Google Doc in facilitating innovative teaching and learning practices in an EFL writing course. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14(3), 1-16.
Ali, J., & Bin-Hady, W. (2019). A study of EFL students’ attitudes, motivation, and anxiety towards WhatsApp as a language learning tool. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), Special Issue on CALL, 5(1), 289–298. Bang, E., & Luft, J. A. (2013). Secondary science teachers’ use of technology in the classroom during their first 5 years. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 118-126.
Barrs, K. (2012). Fostering computer-mediated L2 interaction beyond the classroom. Language Learning and Technology, 16(1), 10–25.
Chapelle, C. A. (2013). The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi: 10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0540. Dashtestani, S. R., & Karami, H. (2019). An analysis of Iranian online EFL teachers’ technological, pedagogical, and evaluation skills. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 9(3), 815–830. Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2017). Exploring the impact of online peer-editing using Google Docs on EFL learners’ academic writing skills: a mixed methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(8), 787–815.
Fathi, J., Alipour, F., & Saeedian, A. (2018). Enhancing vocabulary learning and self-regulation via a mobile application: An investigation of the Memrise App. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 5(1), 27-46.
Ghafoori, B., Dastgoshadeh, A., Aminpanah, A., & Ziaei, S. (2016). The effect of CALL on Iranian EFL learners’ grammar of writing. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 12(3), 14-23.
Greenier, V.T. (2018). The 10Cs of project-based learning TESOL curriculum. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14(1), 1- 10. Golshan, N., & Tafazoli, D. (2014). Technology-enhanced language learning tools in Iranian EFL context: Frequencies, attitudes and challenges. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 114-118.
Haghverdi, H. R., &Abdpur, S. (2013). The effect of songs and movies on high school students’ language achievement. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 2(1), 27–38.
Hsu, L. (2020) To CALL or not to CALL: empirical evidence from neuroscience. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 792-815.
Hsu, L. (2012). English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile assisted language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 197–213.
Jafarian, K., Soori, A., & Kafipour, R. (2012). The effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) on EFL high school students’ writing achievement. European Journal of Social Sciences, 27(2), 138–148. Jeong, K. O. (2016). A study on the integration of Google Docs as a webbased collaborative learning platform in EFL writing instruction. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(39), 1–7.
Kaltenbock, G., & Mehlmauer-Larcher, B. (2005). Computer corpora and the language classroom: On the potential and limitations of computer corpora in language teaching. ReCALL, 17(1), 65–84.
Kashanizadeh, I. (2023). Investigating cognitive style, pedagogical competence and innovation in English language teaching: Iranian EFL instructors in focus [Unpublished doctoral’s thesis]. Shahreza Islamic Azad University. Kim, H. Y. (2021). Multimodal input during technology-assisted teacher instruction and English learners’ learning experience. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15(4), 293–305.
Lenders, O. (2008). Electronic glossing – is it worth the effort? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(5), 457–481.
Link, S., Mehrzad, M., & Rahimi, M (2022). Impact of automated writing evaluation on teacher feedback, student revision, and writing improvement. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 605–634. Marashi, H., & Adiban, H. (2017). The effect of using short silent animations on EFL learners’ writing. English Review: Journal of English Education, 5(2), 207–216. Marzban, A. (2011). Improvement of reading comprehension through computer-assisted language learning in Iranian intermediate EFL students. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 3–10. Malikow, M. (2006). Effective teacher study. National Forum of Teacher Education Journal-Electronic, 16(3), 1–9.
Mansooji, H., Mohseni, A., & Ameri, A. (2021). Effects of multimedia-based instruction on promoting reading motivation. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 8(1), 75–95.
Mohammad-Salehi, B., & Vaez-Dalili, M. (2022). Examining EFL teachers’ perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge and Web 2.0 technologies using a structural equation modeling technique. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 9(2), 51–76.
Murray, D. E. (Ed.). (2008). Planning change, changing plans: Innovations in second language teaching. The University of Michigan Press.
Ndesaulwa, A. P., & Kikula.J. (2016). The impact of technology and innovation (Technovation) in developing countries: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 4(1), 7–11. Park, G. P., & Lee, H. W. (2006). The characteristics of effective English teachers as perceived by high school teachers and students in Korea. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(2), 236–248.
Peterson, M. (2010). Computerized games and simulations in computerassisted language learning: A meta-analysis of research. Simulation & Gaming, 41(1), 72–93.
Pun, M. (2013). The use of multimedia technology in English language teaching: A global perspective. Crossing the Border: International Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 1(1), 29–38.
Rahimi, M., & Soleymani, E. (2015). The impact of mobile learning on listening anxiety and listening comprehension. English Language Teaching, 8(10), 152–161. Rafi, F., Pourdana, N., & Ghaemi, F. (2022). Computer-mediated diagnostic assessment of mixed-ability EFL learners’ performance on tiered tasks: Differentiating mediation on Google Meet™. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 9(2), 1–26.
Ranalli, J. (2018). Automated written corrective feedback: How well can students make use of it. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 653–674.
Rostami, S., Akbari, O., & Ghanizadeh, A. (2015). The effect of smart school programs on EFL reading comprehension in an academic context. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology, 4(1), 1–10.
Sharples, M. (2000). The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning. Computers & Education, 34(3), 177–193. Sydorenko, T., Hellermann, J., Thorne, S. L., & Howe, V. (2019). Mobile augmented reality and language‐related episodes. TESOL Quarterly, 53(3), 712–740. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2014). Using multivariate statistics. (6th Ed.). Boston: Pearson Inc.
Thornton, P., & Houser, C. (2005). Using mobile phones in English education in Japan. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3), 217–228.
Wagner, E. (2010). The effect of the use of video texts on ESL listening testtaker performance. Language Testing, 27(4), 493–513.
Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016). Automated essay evaluation software in English Language Arts classrooms: Effects on teacher feedback, student motivation, and writing quality. Computers & Education, 100, 94-109.
Xiao, L. (2019). Application development of modern multimedia technology in English teaching. Francis Press, 2(2), 188–193.
Xu, Q., Dong. X., & Jiang, L. (2017). EFL learners’ perceptions of mobileassisted feedback on oral production. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 408–417. Zapata, G., & Sagarra, N. (2007). CALL on hold: The delayed benefits of an online workbook on L2 vocabulary learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(2), 153–171. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 383 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 188 |
||