Pedagogical purposes of language teachers’ use of technology

Most teachers have decided to use these tools because they firmly believe that they serve pedagogical purposes and they are convinced that their integration into the classroom can enhance language learning, as Sue formulated: “I am constantly trying to search for tools to improve the given teaching and learning process”. Jill considers them so effective in

“boosting language knowledge” that she “could not imagine teaching without them”. Sam is also convinced that these tools are useful, although he admits that they may not be suitable to develop all skills. Pat, Sam and Ian emphasized the need for a purposive selection of the right tool to achieve the right goals. Pat claimed that she did not have a favourite tool because each served a different purpose and her choice depended on what she wanted to achieve. Similarly, Sam demonstrated a pragmatic view on this, since he always considered the goal first and then decided “which tool is most suitable to reach that goal”. As Ian summarized it:

What’s very important is that you don’t just use tools for the tools sake and you’re driven by a technology agenda, which is separate from the pedagogical, and often it is the technology which comes first and the pedagogy comes later and what’s important is that when we use whichever tool we know why we are using them what makes it better to use that and not something else.

129

The view of the three teachers about the importance of the purposive selection of tools reflects the consensus in CALL research that it is the particular uses of technology for particular purposes based on sound pedagogies that can enhance language learning (e.g.

Chapelle, 2010; Frand, 2000; Garrett, 2009; Jones  Shao, 2011; Kern 2006; Margaryan et al., 2011).

Several specific pedagogical purposes were listed by one or more participants, such as fostering group cohesion, collaborative learning and knowledge building, independent and reflective learning, suiting different learning styles, developing life-skills and particular language skills, such as reading, listening, writing, speaking and communication. Six teachers use the ICT tools in different ways to develop group cohesion. As Ian stressed its importance:

Because people very quickly know each other’s names and know each other’s work because they comment on each other’s work so it leads to a much more cohesive classroom and I think we should always pay attention to these things as well.

Similarly, Jill thinks that online tasks can bring together a group easily at the beginning of the term and can be followed up by further tasks during the course: “You don’t need much, just small and simple things, they learn a lot about each other that can be used in class; you can give them tasks to do in class to continue”. Finally, Kate emphasizes the role of forums in fostering group cohesion because they can be used for a lot of different purposes, for example “socializing, uploading the picture of your favourite object and commenting on others’, or some other group building task”.

Although Rob, Kim and Sue also find group cohesion important, in Kim’s opinion online work does not develop cohesion for existing groups, but it can bring together people who join an online class. Sue believes group cohesion is only a part of the most essential attainment of using ICT tools, which is collaborative learning:

I obsessively think that learning in groups is crucial, so it is important that the group can work well together but experiencing that you can add something to what two other

130

people created and then you work on it together or somebody helps you to understand a problem or question is a very good thing.

Collaboration is also very important for Sam, but he regards group cohesion as a less relevant issue in higher education:

I don’t give them tasks just to strengthen relationships; I don’t think the college is about matters like this, when you get new groups every term. But I use them [ICT tools] for collaboration, for example they have to translate a text together or write down the text of a long video extract in groups in a Google document. It does not work in every group, though, and when I see that it is only two students who work on it, I just leave it.

While Rob has always been interested in cooperative learning, which can be realized more easily in a virtual environment than in a traditional classroom, Pat considers the ability of working in groups a life skill that students will need in the future at work and which is not typically practised at university. This is in line with current research on skills for employment, which also emphasizes the importance of team work (BBS Research, 2010; IDC research, 2013; ITL Research, 2011). Wikis and web 2.0 tools are suitable for knowledge building as well, which is a major goal of using technology according to Sue and Rob. Rob is highly enthusiastic about the opportunities the internet provides for knowledge building, which are completely new and which he finds “absolutely fascinating”. Sue believes that collaboration and knowledge building are the two most important pedagogical purposes the use of technology can serve as she considers it essential that “everyone can add what they have and build something together”.

Although the word autonomy has not been used by the participants, independent and active learning can be enhanced through the implementation of ICT tools according to eight teachers. While Rob has always regarded active learning essential, Pat considers this particularly important today as students are not used to working independently:

131

I am using it [technology] because I would like to see that students at university feel responsible for their own learning, I regard them as adults, and expect much greater activity than usual. Quite often they don’t know what to do with it and want me to tell them what to do, and they have to get used to being able to have a say in what they learn and how but I think it is very important.

Besides active and independent learning, Pat emphasizes the importance of reflective and critical learning, which are skills related to web 2.0. Students should be able to “read critically and formulate fair criticism which makes sense in an acceptable way, and to give feedback”. Blogs, which can serve as learning diaries for students, are especially suitable for reflections about learning according to Sue. Ian also finds reflective teaching crucial for teachers so that they can decide which tool to use and for what purpose, and suggests that it should be taught on teacher training courses. In his opinion, the critical use of the internet including the Wikipedia and Facebook should also be practised with the students. Similarly, Kim tries to teach students to use the internet critically and selectively, which is highly difficult if not impossible because “students are used to applying the cut and paste technique, which is a catastrophe”. This reflects the findings of recent research, which emphasizes the role of critical thinking as a key competence (European Council, 2006), as well as a learning objective (European Commission, 2009), especially because students’ information literacy skills including the ability to select and judge information and critical thinking are far from perfect (Lorenzo & Dziuban, 2006).

Sue, Kate and Zoe stress the role of technology in providing opportunities for students with different learning styles and preferences, particularly for shy students, which is upported by previous research (Béres et al., 2009; Broad et al., 2004; Frand, 2000; Kétyi, 2008, 2011;

Pleasance, 2010; Schmidt & Brown, 2004). Kate emphasizes the role of the forum for quiet students who can open up and can produce long texts on a different medium, while they have no opportunities to express their opinion in the classroom. Similarly, Sue and Zoe feel that

132

some students like the forum because they can show their knowledge much better that way.

Ian and Rob like blogs because they offer a platform for peer correction, commenting and assessment. It can “make the quality of the work better if people know that they write not just for the teacher but for somebody else” (Ian). Rob also agrees that writing for an audience can put more pressure on the students to produce a better text and finds it reassuring that there is not only one grade but a much more complex assessment, which might include twenty comments: “someone hates it and someone likes it, so it is not a linear thing of one opinion but it is a lot more complex”.

Another purpose for using technology identified by Ian, Kim and Pat is developing

“life-skills which are important for people or which will be important for people in almost anything that they do in their future lives” (Ian). The life-skills include social skills, “like what style do we use, how we behave, how we react, how polite we are” (Kim), collaboration and team-work (Pat) and writing for an audience (Ian). Table 26 shows the pedagogical purposes of using technology that emerged from the interviews and the teachers who referred to them.

Table 26

A summary of emerging possible pedagogical purposes of using technology Pedagogical purposes Teachers who referred to them to enhance language learning Sue, Jill, Sam, Ian

to enhance group cohesion Sue, Jill, Ian, Kate, Rob, Kim

collaborative learning Sue, Sam, Rob, Pat

knowledge building Sue, Rob

independent learning Rob, Pat

reflective learning Pat

critical reading Pat, Ian, Kim

to suit learning styles and preferences Sue, Kate

peer correction Ian, Rob

to develop life-skills Ian, Kim, Pat