EFL teachers’ perceptions of the challenges of technology-based professional
development
Guanbing
Zhou (corresponding author)
College
of Education, Zhongyuan Institute of Science and
Technology, China
Zohreh
R. Eslami
Texas
A&M University, The USA
Received:
17/4/2023 / Accepted: 29/10/2023
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi2023c.29627
ISSN
paper edition: 1697-7467, ISSN digital edition: 2695-8244
Abstract: Pre-service teacher professional
development could assume an urgent part in raising teaching quality and
learning outcomes. Evolving technologies allow for new and different forms of
professional development. However, teacher professional development opportunities
are limited and outcomes are controversial. In this
study, to capture the challenges of a technology-based professional
development, the researchers examined teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to
technology integration and instructional practices. Three hundred participants
were recruited through an online survey- Technology-Based Professional
Development Questionnaire. Through employing Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM), the researchers analysed the data. The results
of the study indicated that the gap between information and the use of
technology-based apparatuses was viewed as related with the difficulties
confronting teachers with technology-based directions. Technology-literate
teachers knew how to integrate their insight into their commonsense instructing
and had higher students’ commitment and inspiration. In any case,
technology-illiterate teachers had mechanical troubles that reduced their
education. A few ramifications can be drawn from the review, for example, the
requirement for teacher instruction projects to further develop teacher
consciousness of new educational innovative learning strategies, and the
significance of giving chances to get computerized proficiency. Our findings
have both theoretical and practical implications for pre-and in-service teacher
training programs. Based on these discoveries, suggestions for the plan of
online professional development and gaps for future examinations are discussed.
Keywords: teachers’ beliefs, teachers’
perceptions, teacher professional developments, technology-based instruction,
teacher education programs, learners’ engagement and
motivation.
Las percepciones de los profesores de EFL sobre los desafíos del desarrollo profesional basado en la tecnología
Resumen: El desarrollo profesional de los profesores de pre-servicio podría asumir un papel urgente en el aumento de la calidad de la enseñanza y los resultados del aprendizaje. La evolución de las tecnologías permite nuevas y diferentes formas de desarrollo profesional. Sin embargo, las oportunidades de desarrollo profesional de los docentes son limitadas y los resultados son polémicos. En este estudio, para capturar los desafíos de un desarrollo profesional basado en la tecnología, los investigadores examinaron las percepciones de los profesores de las barreras a la integración de la tecnología y las prácticas instruccionales. Trescientos participantes fueron reclutados a través de una encuesta en línea - cuestionario de desarrollo profesional basado en la tecnología. Mediante el empleo de modelos de ecuaciones estructurales (SEM), los investigadores analizaron los datos. Los resultados del estudio indicaron que la brecha entre la información y el uso de aparatos basados en la tecnología estaba relacionada con las dificultades que enfrentan los profesores con las direcciones basadas en la tecnología. Los maestros alfabetizen tecnología sabían cómo integrar su percepción en su sentido común de la instrucción y tenían un mayor compromiso e inspiración de los estudiantes. En cualquier caso, los profesores analfabetos en tecnología tenían problemas mecánicos que reducían su educación. Se pueden extraer algunas ramificaciones de la revisión, por ejemplo, el requisito de los proyectos de instrucción de los maestros para desarrollar aún más la conciencia de los maestros de las nuevas estrategias educativas innovadoras de aprendizaje, y la importancia de dar oportunidades para obtener dominio computarizado. Nuestros hallazgos tienen implicaciones tanto teóricas como prácticas para los programas de capacitación de maestros antes y durante el servicio. Sobre la base de estos descubrimientos, las sugerencias para el plan de desarrollo profesional en línea y las lagunas para los exámenes futuros se eliminan.
Palabras clave: Creencias de los profesores, percepciones de los profesores, desarrollo profesional de los profesores, instrucción basada en tecnología, programas de educación de profesores, compromiso y motivación de los estudiantes
Today, almost all those who
seek development and reform everywhere in the world start with education (Ansyari et al., 2022). The approaches emerging from the new
era of communication and technologies in education and training, including the
perspective of how to learn (metacognition), process-oriented and independent
learning, have caused a gradual movement in redefining the basic concepts of
education and training (Yin et al., 2023). Science, teaching, teacher, student,
curriculum, and educational environment are getting new definitions (Berg et
al., 2023; Wang, Derakhshan, & Azari Noughabi,
2022). The emergence of technologies disappeared the traditional boundaries of
education and technologies. For instance, the vanishing of the boundary between
the public culture and its constituent subcultures, among school and
neighborhood local area, among home and school, among training and work,
between the universe of work and learning foundations, among formal and casual
training, between the educational program of pre-organized and individuals
decisions, among understudies and teachers, and among guardians and their
youngsters have caused significant difficulties in instruction (Chaipidech et al., 2022; Gondwe, 2021; Kong et al., 2023; Sivaci & AltaŞ, 2023; Woodcock et al., 2022; Yin et
al., 2023). In order to deal with them and adapt to
the changes, educational planners and trainers should take immediate and bold
steps to renew the educational organization in all aspects and dimensions. It
is obvious that neglecting this task means disclaiming responsibility for the
benefit of the technology and the flow of its custodian (Choi, 2023; Wang,
Derakhshan, & Rahimpour, 2022).
From the study of the
current situation in the education of most countries, it can
be seen that during the past years, no successful efforts have been made
to identify these challenges and deal with them (Alavi et al., 2022; de Vries
et al., 2022; Dunst & Bruder, 2014; Feryok, 2009;
George et al., 2018; Yuan, 2020). The challenges of technology in education in
the 21st century can be seen as a result of different
approaches, the capabilities of these technologies, and new issues in education
(Finch et al., 2023; Holzberger & Prestele,
2021). Topics have attracted the attention of researchers and education
thinkers at the level of universities and research centers. New topics and
approaches originate from scientific developments and new technologies,
especially IT and ITC (Menon & Sadler, 2016; Şen & Yildiz Durak, 2022;
Wang et al., 2021). In fact, these developments have paved the way for the
emergence of new perspectives. Likewise, they raise them beyond the national
borders, in a global framework (Symes et al., 2023). In addition, it has taken
them out of the scope of society’s intellectuals and presented them as a social
approach, and they put new responsibilities and challenges beyond the
educational systems of different countries (Mellati
et al., 2022; Wettstein et al., 2021).
What are the
characteristics of good language teachers in such a situation? What skills
should they have to perform their duties correctly? What programs do managers
and planners have for updating the knowledge and skills of teachers and based
on what model do they take steps to develop their skills? The answer to such
questions can be found in the concept of professional development. The success
of educational departments in educating students is significantly influenced by
the accessibility of EFL (English as a Foreign
Language) teachers and their participation in quality development activities.
Teachers’ professional
development has a vital role in school reform activities (Chang et al., 2022).
It is also necessary for the success of the efforts made in the field of
education improvement, professional development and increasing the knowledge and
skills of EFL teachers - technology literacy (Dunst
& Bruder, 2014; Gondwe, 2021). The importance and necessity of the
development of EFL teachers’ professions are due to
the intensification of the upcoming challenges in the teaching profession and
the increase of students’ expectations of the quality of education (Holzberger
& Prestele, 2021; Mellati
& Khademi, 2018). Especially, despite many efforts, organizations and
educational centers still suffer from low quality in many ways and have major
problems in improving it (Ansyari et al., 2022;
Gondwe, 2021; Kong et al., 2023; Metsala & Harkins, 2020; Senler, 2016). In the way of solving this problem,
attention should be focused on the basic and influential elements, and among
these elements, the role of teachers is the most important (Kwon et al., 2019).
EFL teachers are not only one of the variables that
need to be changed in order to improve educational
systems, but they are also considered the most important factor that creates
change (Michos et al., 2022).
The results of various
pieces of research show that many EFL teachers do not
have a desirable technology literacy in the fields of professional knowledge,
educational, teaching, scientific, behavioral, personality, social,
intellectual, managerial, practical, ethical, professional, and lifelong learning and educational technology (Schwarzenthal
et al., 2023). Sivaci and AltaŞ (2023) consider
content, fields, and process factors to be effective in the development of
effective writing. When EFL teachers encounter new
knowledge and skills, they realize that the foundation of any effort for their
development must be based on content. According to Wray et al. (2022) the
content is the literacy, knowledge, and perceptions that teachers need to
perform their educational duties. The content of professional development
should prepare EFL teachers to create a healthy, orderly and supportive learning environment and maintain
high level expectations for students’ academic success. On the other hand, with
the improvement of learning standards at the global level, societies need to
acquire new knowledge and skills in different fields in order
to achieve success (Johnson, 2022; Mellati
& Khademi, 2020). In such conditions, EFL
teachers should be able to improve their technology literacy in line with
scientific developments and in accordance with the needs of society and provide
diverse learning situations for students to acquire lifelong learning habits
and skills. Acquiring this ability is important for the students because what
the students gain can affect their life in the community and in the future
under the influence of the experiences during their education. It is obvious
that the realization of this matter depends to a large extent
on how to prepare teachers and develop their literacy (Lazarides et al., 2023;
Oppermann & Lazarides, 2021).
In
relation to the development of EFL teachers’ perceptions, many studies
have been done and different models and factors have been presented; components
of knowledge and beliefs and design strategies (Holzberger & Prestele,
2021), cooperative learning and knowledge sharing by teachers (Michos et al.,
2022), focus on content (Ryan & Mathews, 2022), collective learning (Symes
et al., 2023), active learning (Woodcock et al., 2022), subject teaching method
for EFL teachers (Mellati
et al., 2018; Xu & Jia, 2022) have been found to be effective in promoting
the professional development of teachers. For instance, Vidergor
(2023) developed the knowledge and skills of teachers in designing materials
and issues related to the curriculum and improved the overall quality of
education and the positive attitude of teachers towards the professional
development program. In another study, Schwarzenthal
et al. (2023) focused on content knowledge, the opportunity for active learning
and consistency with other learning activities to increase knowledge, skills,
and change in the way effective teachers know the classroom. Similarly,
Hallinger and Hosseingholizadeh (2020) focused on
teaching and learning strategies from the implementation strategies of the
professional development model. In contrast, Meesong
and Jaroongkhongdach (2016) EFL
teachers’ learning and their perceptions were found to
be effective in the development of classroom skills.
The implementation of the
professional development program causes enthusiasm for the subject, especially
in terms of content and improving the performance of EFL
teachers, increasing the number of argumentative discussions among students and improving the communication behavior of
teachers, improving the career path, improving the ways of using information
and communication technology as a tool. For example, Cui et al. (2022) found
that there is a positive relationship between classroom management, creative
and innovative skills, communication skills, familiarity with information
technology and professional development of teachers. They introduced the EFL teacher’s sincere behavior and the manager’s supportive
behavior as predictors of teachers’ professional development. In contrast, Lee
and Drajati (2020) sated that improving job security
and perceptions is one of the necessary prerequisites for the creation of
professional development. Individual, collaborative
and educational professional development strategies, duration and focus on
content, reflect the professional development process of teachers (Pérez-Escoda
et al., 2019).
Despite
the fact that
professional development and technology training are vital for all EFL teachers and trainers, published statistics show that
teachers do not have the necessary information regarding inclusive education
and the use of technology in classrooms during literacy (Choi, 2023; Hooper,
2022; Oppermann & Lazarides, 2021; Pereira & Tay, 2023). Research
findings have mentioned lack of motivation, lack of interest and lack of a
positive perceptions towards lessons among students due to teachers not being
up-to-date and their inattention to the new needs of educational environments
and students. The results of the research showed that the low technology
literacy level is among the factors affecting the classrooms. Therefore, in
this article, an attempt has been made to determine the impact of technology on
education. Also, explain the major challenges that teachers and consequently
the education system will face for the professional development of teachers.
Finally, the necessary educational strategies to deal with these challenges
have also been presented.
1) How much variance in the
EFL teachers’ challenges of technology-based
professional development can be predicted by their perceptions of technology
integration?
2) How much variance in the
EFL teachers’ challenges of technology-based
professional development can be predicted by their technology literacy?
Through convenience
sampling, the authors distributed a reliable questionnaire among EFL teachers from different provinces. Of 302 received questionnaires,
300 questionnaires were valid. The gender of the participants was as follows:
the men 176, accounted for 58.28%; women 126, accounted for 41.72%. The
participants’ age ranged in 23 to 48 (mean = 32. 41, SD = 5.098). Teachers’
education structure: high school teachers were 1.32%, 11.26% undergraduate,
master’s doctoral 46.69% 40.73%. The data was collected in English. The data
collection procedure lasted for a week. Participants were aware of all of their rights, and the researchers in the study had
told participants that the information they fill in will be completely
confidential and only be used for research purposes. There was no previous
contact or conflict of interest between researchers and participants.
The researchers used the
following instruments in their work.
This researchers-made
survey has 56 items. The purpose of this survey is to determine challenges of
integrating technology into their classroom teaching. It has two subscales:
perceptions of technology integration (30 items) and technology literacy (20 items).
For each statement of the questionnaire, teachers indicate the strength of
their agreement on a five-item-Likert scale. The first form of the
questionnaire had 75 items. The items were subjected to expert and face
validities. Then, the second version was subjected to Principal component
analysis (PCA). The third version or the last version
of the questionnaire consisting of 56 items was steered by 50 members of a
similar populace. Utilizing the Cronbach Alpha coefficient, it showed a
reliability file of .91 (r = .91). These items determine teachers’ planning,
executing, assessing, and practicing in technology-integrated teaching
environments, their beliefs about challenges of employing technology-supported
materials in language classrooms, and their attitudes towards appropriate
classroom activities in technology integrated learning environments.
The Technology Integration
Questionnaire was employed to identify the patterns of language learners’
present worries about an innovation that refers to the integration of
instructional technologies in language teaching classrooms. The items of this
27-item questionnaire were written in the form of statements about personal
feelings or attitudes in a Likert-scale format that starts from Strongly
Agree (SD) and ends to Strongly Disagree (SD) (Strongly Agree
(SA), Agree (A), Neutral (N), Disagree (D), and Strongly Disagree (SD)). It
focuses on five factors: planning, excute,
assessment, profesional use, and knowledge (language
teachers’ technology literacy). The participants show their attitudes towards
each item and the concept of under question as well. To verify the reliability
index of the preliminary form of the questionnaire, the researcher piloted its
first edition with 50 language teachers of a similar context. The researcher
used the Cronbach Alpha coefficient, the results of this analysis showed the reliability
index of .81 (r = .81).
At first,the researchers distributed the
questionnaires in an online format among 400 EFL
teachers from several universities in China. The questionnaire contained a
consent form. Those who accept to participate in the study received the
questionnaire link. Among them, only 300 valid filled questionnaires were
received. They were educated about the purpose of the study
and they were permitted to leave the study at any phase of the study. The
questionnaires were attributed in the online format.
To answer the research
questions, the researchers used SPSS software (version 27) and AMOS (version
24). Through employing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and functions such as
reliability, correlation, and Multiple Linear Regression, the researchers analyzed
the obtained data.
The results of SEM analyses
are presented in the following figures and tables.
Figure1 . The Research Models in the Standardized
Estimation Mode for the First Research Question
The
values in the research model show that the hypothesis is rejected and there was
a significant difference among technology integration and their teacher
development in technology-integrated environments ( Chi-square = 125.091, Degrees of
freedom = 26, Probability level = .000).
Table 1.CMIN
|
Model |
NPAR |
CMIN |
DF |
P |
CMIN/DF |
|
Default model |
28 |
125.091 |
26 |
.000 |
4.811 |
|
Saturated model |
54 |
.000 |
0 |
||
|
Independence model |
18 |
4457.674 |
36 |
.000 |
123.824 |
The
results of Table 1 reveal that the CMIN value is near
3, so the model is fitted, and there are significant associations between the
variables.
Table 2. Baseline Comparisons
|
Model |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
TLI |
CFI |
|
Default model |
.972 |
.961 |
.978 |
.969 |
.978 |
|
Saturated model |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
||
|
Independence model |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
Table 3. RMSEA
|
Model |
RMSEA |
LO 90 |
HI 90 |
PCLOSE |
|
Default model |
.094 |
.093 |
.133 |
.000 |
|
Independence model |
.641 |
.625 |
.657 |
.000 |
Employing a SEM approach,
technology integration was all altogether connected with teacher development
(0.50 to 0.90, p < 0.001). The model sufficiently fits the
information, RMSEA = 0.094; CFI = 0.978; CMIN = 4.811.
The results of Tables 2 and 3 show that the CFI value is more than .9 and RMSEA is between .05 and .09 that demonstrate that strong
association between the variables.
Table 4. Standardized Regression Weights:
(Group number 1 - Default model)
|
Estimate |
|||
|
Professional developmental programs |
<--- |
Techno Integ |
.966 |
|
Professional use |
<--- |
Techno Integ |
.967 |
|
Assessment |
<--- |
Techno Integ |
.937 |
|
Executing |
<--- |
Techno Integ |
.988 |
|
Planning |
<--- |
Techno Integ |
.925 |
The results of Table 4 present
the standardized regression weights for the variables of the study. The results
reveal that there is a strong association between technology integration and
teachers’ professional developmental programs. In other words, more than 96
percent of modifications in teachers’ professional developmental programs can
be predicted by technology integration. Likewise, the outcomes showed a strong
association between subcategories of technology integration and their
professional developmental programs. It means that teachers’ professional
development is different based on their technology integration procedures. The
values indicate that 96 percent of changes in teachers’ professional
development can be predicted by their professional use and 93 percent of changes
can be predicted by their assessment activities. Moreover, among the four
subfactors of the teachers’ technology integration executingwith
more than 98 percent attribution had a strong prediction power. This value
emphasized the importance of practical aspect of technology in teachers’
professional development. These results highlighted the role of teachers’
technology use in the process of their professional development.
The following tables show
the results of SEM analyses for the second research question.
Figure2 . The Research Models in the Standardized
Estimation Mode for the Second Research Question
The values in the research
model show that the hypothesis is rejected and there was a significant
difference between technology-literate and illiterate EFL
teachers and their teacher development in technology-integrated environments
(Chi-square = 123.597, Degrees of freedom = 31, Probability level = .000).
Table 5. CMIN
|
Model |
NPAR |
CMIN |
DF |
P |
CMIN/DF |
|
Default model |
34 |
123.597 |
31 |
.000 |
3.987 |
|
Saturated model |
65 |
.000 |
0 |
||
|
Independence model |
20 |
4470.753 |
45 |
.000 |
99.350 |
The results of Table 5
reveal that the CMIN value is near 3, so the model is
fitted, and there are significant associations between the variables.
Table 6. Baseline Comparisons
|
Model |
NFI |
RFI |
IFI |
TLI |
CFI |
|
Default model |
.972 |
.960 |
.979 |
.970 |
.979 |
|
Saturated model |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
||
|
Independence model |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
Table 7. RMSEA
|
Model |
RMSEA |
LO 90 |
HI 90 |
PCLOSE |
|
Default model |
.090 |
.082 |
.119 |
.000 |
|
Independence model |
.574 |
.559 |
.588 |
.000 |
Employing a SEM approach, teachers’
technology literacy was all altogether connected with teacher development (0.50
to 0.90, p < 0.001). The model sufficiently fits the information, RMSEA = 0.090; CFI = 0.979; CMIN = 3.987.
The results of Tables 6 and 7 show that the CFI value is more than .9 and RMSEA is between .05 and .09 that demonstrate that strong
association between the variables.
Table 8. Standardized Regression Weights:
(Group number 1 - Default model)
|
Estimate |
|||
|
<--- |
Techno litera |
.921 |
|
|
Executing |
<--- |
Techno litera |
.989 |
|
Assessment |
<--- |
Techno litera |
.934 |
|
Professional use |
<--- |
Techno litera |
.968 |
|
Professional development programs (PDPs) |
<--- |
Planning |
.190 |
|
PDPs |
<--- |
Executing |
.530 |
|
PDPs |
<--- |
Assessment |
.170 |
|
PDPs |
<--- |
Professional use |
.099 |
|
Literacy |
<--- |
Technology literacy |
.753 |
|
Literacy |
<--- |
PDPs |
.917 |
|
Beliefs |
<--- |
PDPs |
.864 |
|
Learners’ motivation |
<--- |
PDPs |
.936 |
|
Learners’ engagement |
<--- |
PDPs |
.961 |
|
Access to technology |
<--- |
PDPs |
.894 |
The results of Table 8
present the standardized regression weights for the variables of the study. The
results reveal that there is a strong association between teachers’ technology
literacy and teachers’ professional developmental programs. In other words,
more than 75 percent of modifications in teachers’ professional developmental
programs can be predicted by teachers’ technology literacy. It means that
teachers’ professional development is different based on teachers’ knowledge
how to use different technologies in their classrooms. This value emphasized
the importance of technology literacy in teachers’ professional development.
According to the above
content, the use of technology in classrooms is highly dependent on
technological knowledge and access to technology. Therefore, acquiring
knowledge alone is not enough. Therefore, the role of the educational system is
to prepare learners to receive knowledge from the cultural contexts and
different fields of knowledge (Chang et al., 2022). In other words, the speed
of new technologies is such that educational environments are no longer
sufficient to prepare students. The applicability of new technologies, its instability and its specific context, emphasize that every
educational environment must prepare itself for lifelong learning in order to
participate in this new space (Finch et al., 2023).
Therefore, the speed of new
technologies dictates that every educational environment becomes a learning
environment. In a learning climate, every student ought to be self-propelled
and make a pattern of self-learning and self-assessment. Students, teachers,
and guardians are an organization that frames the classroom for learning.
Therefore, the role of teachers is to expand the attitudes and individual
abilities of learners. Similarly, Gröschner (2023)
believes that technology will bring closer educational environments in terms of
cultural exchanges, and as a result, it will cause cooperation and competition
in scientific and cultural fields.
Another form of technology
can be in the form of joining an international education system in which
universities of different countries of the world can have a coordinated
educational program. These findings confirm what Oppermann and Lazarides (2021)
found in their studies. In order to better explain the
issue, first some challenges of educational environments are examined and then
the performance of educational systems is examined in order to face these
challenges. Technological knowledge is one of the subjects that has increased
the need for education. Advanced countries have tried to bring these educations
to families, schools and classrooms with timely
planning. These topics should be introduced in a new way in educational
programs and even family education and these learning opportunities should be
provided to students. Learning opportunities that make students objectively familiar
with these issues. So that a mother can pass these teachings on to her
children.
Another debate that is
raised in this field is the discussion of the participation of teachers and
students in technological environments. Participation in these environments
requires necessary knowledge, special skills, and constructive attitudes. Participation
is learned and we must learn and practice it from the same classroom and
family. Educational systems have a special role in teaching and practicing this
participation among students. The utilization of correspondence technology in
training implies that we ought to carry this technology to the classroom and
use it in the growing experience so the two teachers
and students have a productive disposition toward this technology.
On the other hand, the
dangers that the introduction of computers to education may have include: isolating students from society, damaging the
relationship between teacher and student, endangering the education of human
values, and becoming overly stereotyped. The development of communication
technologies, the variety of products and methods and educational texts have
led to the fact that many educational environments have faced the problem and
the phenomenon of heterogeneous education , as a result of which some of the
students, while they are studying in a single formal education system, due to
access to new facilities (especially the Internet), they benefit from other
trainings informally. Since these trainings are not the same as formal
training, they can cause irreparable damage to educational systems.
The lack of ‘association of
mentalities’ with ‘objectives’ as well as the lack of contact between
theoretical teachings, experiences, and realities have no results other than
alienating students from the diverse and active world outside (Finch et al., 2023).
In other words, educational systems do not engage students with social
processes, so students born from this type of educational system will suffer
intellectual deviations when facing the wave of global culture. The world today
is made up of many different countries, each of which has a different culture
and language due to its own history, and this diversity sometimes makes it
difficult for people to live together. Because language also expresses the
method of knowledge transfer (Kong et al., 2023). In addition, the transfer of
a concept from one culture to another always requires the challenge of changing
from one intellectual system to another, and these incomparable intellectual
systems can be a mutual source of lack of understanding, misunderstanding, and
even contempt and disregard for each other (Kwon et al., 2019).
The current study
investigated the challenges of technology-based professional developments and
found that teachers’ technology literacy and access to the new technologies
play a key role in determining different aspects of any educational system. In
this review, to catch the challenges of technology-based professional
development, the scientists analyzed teachers’ impression of the hindrances to
technology coordination and educational practices. The gap among information
and use of technology-based apparatuses was viewed as related with the
challenges confronting teachers with technology-based guidelines.
Technology-literate teachers knew how to integrate their insight into their
down to earth instructing and had higher students' commitment and inspiration.
Nonetheless, technology-illiterate teachers had innovative challenges that
decreased their educating.
As mentioned earlier, the development
of technology as a main paradigm in the current era has changed all aspects of
human life. What is certain is that the introduction of these technologies into
educational environments has affected the performance of teachers and students.
One of the most important challenges that teachers face is technological
knowledge and access to new technologies. These deficiencies can affect all
aspects of educational environments. These two factors can have a direct impact
on the planning, use, and participation of teachers in technology-based
classes. These factors can also have tremendous effects on students’
motivation, their academic engagement, teachers’ and
students’ beliefs, and finally, students’ academic performance.
Therefore, according to the
findings of the research and according to the extent of the effects of
technological growth, approaches and suggestions are presented for policy
makers and educational planners. In determining the strategy of the movement of
educational systems, one should look for ways to create participation-oriented
executive structures so that everyone can use all the capabilities and
facilities of educational environments. As long as the
policies and plans are not based on systematic evaluation and evaluation, and
the plans are not revised quickly and the quality of the plans is not
controlled, it will not only lead to progress, but it will resist scientific
and technical innovations and new beliefs. Considering the
effective role of teachers in education, it should be said that the lack
of correct criteria in choosing useful technologies and the existence of
outdated methods have played a significant role in creating unfavorable
conditions in the structure of education. Teachers should be familiar with the
development stages of students, that is, the necessary training should be
formed at the right time. In addition, access to technology should be easy
everywhere, whether at home, through the Internet, mass media, and classrooms.
Future studies can investigate the effects of technology literacy on students’
motivation, their academic engagement, teachers’ and
students’ beliefs, and finally, students’ academic performance.
Alavi, S. M., Dashtestani, R., & Mellati,
M. (2022). Crisis and changes in learning behaviours:
Technology-enhanced assessment in language learning contexts. Journal of
Further and Higher Education,46(4), 461-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1985977
Ansyari, M. F., Groot, W., & De Witte,
K. (2022). Teachers’ preferences for online professional development: Evidence
from a discrete choice experiment. Teaching and Teacher Education,119,
103870. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103870
Berg, D. A. G., Skaalvik, E. M., Asil, M., Hill, M. F., Uthus, M., Tangen,
T. N., & Smith, J. K. (2023). Teacher self-efficacy and reasons for
choosing initial teacher education programmes in
Norway and New Zealand. Teaching and Teacher Education,125,
104041. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104041
Chaipidech, P., Srisawasdi,
N., Kajornmanee, T., & Chaipah,
K. (2022). A personalized learning system-supported professional training model
for teachers' TPACK development. Computers and
Education: Artificial Intelligence ,3, 100064. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100064
Chang, C.-F., Hall, N. C.,
Lee, S. Y., & Wang, H. (2022). Teachers' social goals and classroom
engagement: The mediating role of teachers' self-efficacy. International
Journal of Educational Research,113, 101952. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101952
Choi, K. (2023). Conceptualising the multifaceted impacts of a Global Englishes-oriented teacher development programme.
System,113, 103005. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103005
Cui, Y., Liu, Y., Yu, H.,
& Gao, Y. (2022). Developing English teachers' language assessment literacy
in an EAP reform context through test design: A case study. System,109,
102866. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102866
de Vries, J. A., Dimosthenous, A., Schildkamp, K.,
& Visscher, A. J. (2022). The impact on student achievement of an
assessment for learning teacher professional development program. Studies
in Educational Evaluation ,74, 101184. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101184
Dunst, C. J., & Bruder,
M. B. (2014). Preservice Professional Preparation and Teachers’ Self-Efficacy
Appraisals of Natural Environment and Inclusion Practices. Teacher
Education and Special Education,37(2), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406413505873
Feryok, A. (2009). Activity theory, imitation and their role in teacher development. Language
Teaching Research,13(3), 279-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809104699
Finch, J. E., Akhavein, K., Patwardhan, I., & Clark, C. A. C. (2023).
Teachers' self-efficacy and perceptions of school climate are uniquely
associated with students' externalizing and internalizing behavior problems. Journal
of Applied Developmental Psychology,85, 101512. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2023.101512
George, S. V., Richardson,
P. W., & Watt, H. M. (2018). Early career teachers’ self-efficacy: A
longitudinal study from Australia. Australian Journal of Education ,62(2),
217-233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944118779601
Gondwe, F. (2021).
Technology professional development for teacher educators: A literature review
and proposal for further research. SN Social Sciences ,1(8),
200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00184-9
Gröschner, A. (2023). Promoting video-based
research in teacher education and professional development: A commentary on
ontological, methodological and epistemological
advances. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction ,39,
100701. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100701
Hallinger, P., & Hosseingholizadeh, R. (2020). Exploring instructional
leadership in Iran: A mixed methods study of high- and low-performing
principals. Educational Management Administration & Leadership ,48(4),
595-616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143219836684
Holzberger, D., & Prestele, E. (2021). Teacher self-efficacy and
self-reported cognitive activation and classroom management: A multilevel
perspective on the role of school characteristics. Learning and Instruction
,76, 101513. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2021.101513
Hooper, D. (2022). Action
logs as mediational means for teacher development. Language Teaching
Research,26(5), 1034-1046. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820918362
Johnson, J. L. (2022).
Teacher self-efficacy and teacher work engagement for expats at international
K12 schools in China: A correlation analysis. International Journal of
Educational Research Open,3, 100176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100176
Kong, S.-C., Lai, M., &
Li, Y. (2023). Scaling up a teacher development programme
for sustainable computational thinking education: TPACK
surveys, concept tests and primary school visits. Computers & Education,194,
104707. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104707
Kwon, K.,
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sari, A. R., Khlaif, Z.,
Zhu, M., Nadir, H., & Gok, F. (2019). Teachers’ Self-efficacy Matters:
Exploring the Integration of Mobile Computing Device in Middle Schools. TechTrends ,63(6), 682-692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00402-5
Lazarides, R., Watt, H. M.
G., & Richardson, P. W. (2023). Does school context moderate longitudinal
relations between teacher-reported self-efficacy and value for student
engagement and teacher-student relationships from early until midcareer? Contemporary
Educational Psychology ,72, 102136. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102136
Lee, J. S., & Drajati, N. A. (2020). Willingness to communicate in
digital and non-digital EFL contexts: scale
development and psychometric testing. Computer Assisted Language Learning,33(7),
688-707. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1588330
Meesong, P. K., & Jaroongkhongdach,
W. (2016). Autonomous language learning: Thai undergraduate students’
behaviors. Thai TESOL Journal ,29(2), 156-186.
Mellati, M., Alavi, S. M., & Dashtestani, R. (2022). Reduction of errors in writing
assignments: A comparison of the impact of peer, teacher, and mixed feedback Iranian
Journal of English for Academic Purposes ,10(4), 152-166. http://journalscmu.sinaweb.net/article_143927_1bff08fc039cf2b5ca201dd1eab1df74.pdf
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2018).
Exploring teachers’ assessment literacy: Impact on learners’ writing
achievements and implications for teacher development [Research Article]. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education (Online) ,43(6), 1-18. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.689580391330186
Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2020). MOOC-based
educational program and interaction in distance education: long life mode of
teaching. Interactive Learning Environments ,28(8),
1022-1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1553188
Mellati, M., Khademi, M., &
Abolhassani, M. (2018). Creative interaction in social networks:
Multi-synchronous language learning environments. Education and Information
Technologies,23(5), 2053-2071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9703-9
Menon, D., & Sadler, T.
D. (2016). Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Science Self-Efficacy Beliefs and
Science Content Knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education ,27(6),
649-673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9479-y
Metsala, J. L., &
Harkins, M. J. (2020). An Examination of Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and
Beliefs About Inclusive Education. Teacher Education and Special Education ,43(2),
178-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406419873060
Michos, K., Cantieni, A., Schmid, R., Müller, L., & Petko, D.
(2022). Examining the relationship between internship experiences, teaching
enthusiasm, and teacher self-efficacy when using a mobile portfolio app. Teaching
and Teacher Education,109, 103570. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103570
Oppermann, E., &
Lazarides, R. (2021). Elementary school teachers' self-efficacy,
student-perceived support and students’ mathematics
interest. Teaching and Teacher Education,103, 103351. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103351
Pereira, A. J., & Tay, L. Y. (2023). Governmental neoliberal teacher
professionalism: The constrained freedom of choice for teachers’ professional
development. Teaching and Teacher Education,125, 104045. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104045
Pérez-Escoda, A., García-Ruiz, R., & Aguaded,
I. (2019). Dimensions of
digital literacy based on five models
of development / Dimensiones
de la alfabetización digital a partir de cinco modelos de desarrollo. Culture and Education ,31(2), 232-266. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2019.1603274
Ryan, A., & Mathews, E.
S. (2022). Examining the highs and lows of teacher self-efficacy for special
class teachers working with learners with Autism/Autism Spectrum Disorder. Research
in Autism Spectrum Disorders ,94, 101952. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2022.101952
Schwarzenthal, M., Daumiller,
M., & Civitillo, S. (2023). Investigating the sources of teacher
intercultural self-efficacy: A three-level study using TALIS 2018. Teaching
and Teacher Education,126, 104070. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104070
Şen, N., & Yildiz Durak,
H. (2022). Examining the
Relationships Between English Teachers’ Lifelong Learning Tendencies with
Professional Competencies and Technology Integrating Self-Efficacy. Education
and Information Technologies ,27(5), 5953-5988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10867-8
Senler, B. (2016). Pre-service science
teachers’ self-efficacy: The role of attitude, anxiety
and locus of control. Australian Journal of Education ,60(1),
26-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116629807
Sivaci, S., & AltaŞ, B. (2023). The
effect of critical thinking dispositions and democratic values of pre-service EFL teachers on their multicultural self-efficacy: A
structural equation modeling approach. Thinking Skills and Creativity ,47,
101221. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101221
Symes, W., Lazarides, R.,
& Hußner, I. (2023). The development of student
teachers’ teacher self-efficacy before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teaching
and Teacher Education,122, 103941. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103941
Vidergor, H. E. (2023). The effect of teachers'
self- innovativeness on accountability, distance learning self-efficacy, and
teaching practices. Computers & Education,199, 104777. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104777
Wang, Y., Derakhshan, A.,
& Azari Noughabi, M. (2022). The interplay of EFL teachers’ immunity, work engagement, and psychological
well-being: Evidence from four Asian countries. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development ,
1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2092625
Wang, Y., Derakhshan, A.,
& Rahimpour, H. (2022). Developing resilience among Chinese and Iranian EFL teachers: A multi-dimensional cross-cultural study. Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2042540
Wang, Y., Derakhshan, A.,
& Zhang, L. J. (2021). Researching and Practicing Positive Psychology in
Second/Foreign Language Learning and Teaching: The Past, Current Status and
Future Directions [Conceptual Analysis]. Frontiers in Psychology,12.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731721
Wettstein, A., Ramseier,
E., & Scherzinger, M. (2021). Class- and subject teachers’ self-efficacy
and emotional stability and students’ perceptions of the teacher–student
relationship, classroom management, and classroom disruptions. BMC
Psychology,9(1), 103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00606-6
Woodcock, S., Sharma, U.,
Subban, P., & Hitches, E. (2022). Teacher self-efficacy and inclusive
education practices: Rethinking teachers’ engagement with inclusive practices. Teaching
and Teacher Education ,117, 103802. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103802
Wray, E., Sharma, U., &
Subban, P. (2022). Factors influencing teacher self-efficacy for inclusive
education: A systematic literature review. Teaching and Teacher Education ,117,
103800. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103800
Xu, R., & Jia, X.
(2022). An Investigation Into Chinese EFL Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Stress as Predictors of
Engagement and Emotional Exhaustion. SAGE Open,12(2),
21582440221093342. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221093342
Yin, H., Tam, W. W. Y.,
& Lau, E. (2023). Happy teachers are efficacious and committed, but not
vice versa: Unraveling the longitudinal relationships between Hong Kong
kindergarten teachers’ psychological well-being, self-efficacy, and commitment.
Teaching and Teacher Education ,123, 103997. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103997
Yuan, R. (2020). Promoting EMI Teacher Development in EFL Higher Education Contexts: A Teacher Educator’s Reflections. Relc Journal,51(2), 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688219878886