Volume 9 February 2018 Research Papers In Language Teaching...

Research Papers In Language Teaching and Learning

Volume 9 February 2018

Editor-in-chief:NicosSifakis,HellenicOpenUniversity

Assistanteditors:

EleniManolopoulou-Sergi,HellenicOpenUniversityChristineCalfoglou,HellenicOpenUniversity

Editorialassistant:

StefaniaKordia,HellenicOpenUniversitySpecialadvisortotheeditors:SophiaPapaefthymiou-Lytra,UniversityofAthens

Advisoryboard:

GeorgeAndroulakis,UniversityofThessalyMichaelBeaumont,Universityof

ManchesterYaseminBayyurt,BoğaziçiUniversityMaggieCharles,UniversityofOxfordBessieDendrinos,UniversityofAthensZoltanDörnyei,UniversityofNottinghamRichardFay,UniversityofManchesterVassiliaHatzinikita,HellenicOpen

UniversityJenniferJenkins,Universityof

SouthamptonEvangeliaKaga,PedagogicalInstitute,

GreeceEvdokiaKaravas,UniversityofAthensAlexisKokkos,HellenicOpenUniversityAntonisLionarakis,HellenicOpen

University

EnricLlurda,UniversityofLleidaMarinaMattheoudaki-Sayegh,Aristotle

UniversityofThessalonikiBessieMitsikopoulou,UniversityofAthensAnastasiaPapaconstantinou,Universityof

AthensSpirosPapageorgiou,EducationalTesting

ServiceAngelikiPsaltou-Joycey,Aristotle

UniversityofThessalonikiBarbaraSeidlhofer,UniversityofViennaAreti-MariaSougari,AristotleUniversityof

ThessalonikiJulia-AthenaSpinthourakis,Universityof

PatrasDinaTsagari,OsloMetropolitanUniversity

Editorialboard:

ThomaiAlexiou,AristotleUniversityofThessaloniki

AnastasiaGeorgountzou,UniversityofAthens

EleniGerali-Roussou,HellenicOpenUniversity

VasileiaKazamia,AristotleUniversityofThessaloniki

KosmasVlachos,UniversityofAthensVasiliosZorbas,UniversityofAthens

2

TableofContentsofVolume9,Issue1,2018

pp.Editorial

4

Exploringteachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsinEFLteachingAnnaTsourapa

6

Integrating Web 2.0 technologies into EFL learning in the Greek state-schoolcontext:Amixed-methodstudyMariaTzotzou

32

The effectiveness of a parallel syllabus that usesWebQuests to enhance theNewLiteraciesof6thgradeprimaryschoolEFLlearnersMariaDoulgeriandLedaAntoniou

56

WebQuests:Cantheycontributetowardstheunderstandingofstories?ChristineOulousidou

77

ExploringtheeffectivenessofEdmodoonGreekEFLB1learners’motivationtowriteMagdaliniTsiakyroudi

96

AdoptingtheESPapproachtoSeniorHighSchool:Generatingstudents’motivationthroughthedevelopmentofwritingskillsAthinaKiose

113

Implementing tutorials within the context of an English for General AcademicPurposescourseattheUniversityofPatras:APreliminarystudyOuraniaKatsara

133

ExploringDifferentiatedInstructioninTESOL:TheTeachers’BeliefsandPracticesinGreeceVenetiaTzanni

149

Flipped classroom integration in Greek state primary schools: An action researchprojectAndriani-ChristinaRigoutsou

166

3

“If I stayhere, Iwill learn the language”: Reflections froma case studyofAfghanrefugeeslearningGreekasaSecondLanguageMarinaMogliandMariaPapadopoulou

181

Explicit collaborative reading strategy instruction: A pilot intervention in the EFLcontextMariaKoukourikou,PolyxeniManoliandEleniGriva

195

Greek EFL teachers’ engagement with and in research and their perceptions ofresearchZoeKantaridouandGlykeriaKaltsiou

211

AllarticlesinthisJournalarepublishedundertheCreativeCommonsLicenseDeed.Attribution3.0Unported(CCBY3.0)

4

EDITORIALTheninthissueofRPLTLexploresawidevarietyofconcerns.Therearefivepapersonissuesinvolvingdifferentaspectsofapplyingonline technology inEnglish language teaching, twopapers on differentiated instruction, two papers on different aspects of specific-purposeteaching and learning, and individual papers on teacher research, reading performancestrategies,andinterculturalissues.Inparticular, theonline technologysectionkicksoffwithTsourapa’spaper,which looksatteachers’ perceptions about 21st century teaching skills and the extent to which theyintegrate Internet-based social communication skills in their teaching. What this paperhighlights is teachers’ willingness to integrate tools such as blogs, wikis,WebQuests, anddigital storytelling,but lackof time,proper trainingandessentialequipmenthinders themfromachieving thisgoal. In the samevein,Tzotzou’spapergauges teachers’awarenessofWeb 2.0 tools and the extent of their digital literacy. While teachers’ perspectives arepositive, this paper also focuses on obstacles such as negative in-bred school-relatedattitudes toward these technologies and the need to make teachers aware of thepedagogicalpotentialofthesetools.The next two papers discussWebQuests as a valuablemeans of exploring and upgradinglearners’ information literacy skills, which, in turn, respond to the growing trend towardviewing foreign language learning as the hub of multiliteracies education. Doulgeri andAntoniou introduce an original curricular intervention in a 6th grade primary school anddiscussitsspecificationsandadvantagesthroughacomprehensivemixedmethodsresearch.Oulousidou’s paper explores the ways in which WebQuests can support the teaching ofreading and reports increased learnermotivation and amore positive inclination towardsreading.ThepaperbyTsiakyroudiinvestigatestheeffectivenessoftheEdmodoeducationalsocialnetworkonGreekJuniorHighSchoolEFLlearners’motivationtowrite.Sheconcludesthattheprojectpositivelyimpactedlearners’motivationtowardswritingandupgradedtheirwritinghabits.Thetwopapersinthe“Engishforspecificpurposes”sectionalsoraiseinterestingissues.Inthe study resented in Kiose’s paper, the ESP approach, which prioritises responding tolearners’ short-term needs, is implemented to design a framework for preparing GreekSeniorHighSchoollearnersfortheWrittenExpressionPanhellenicexam.Kiosereportsthatlearners were actively involved in the construction of a brief additional syllabus thatinformed themabout thegenre-basedapproach towritingandengaged them inactivitiesthatpromptedtheapplicationofspecificgenrepatternsneededfortheparticularfinalhigh-stakes exam. Katsara investigates learners’ perspectives towards their involvement in

Editorial/ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearning1(2010)4-5

5

tutorials in an English forGeneral Academic Purposes (EGAP) context. She concludes thatlearnersfavouramoreactiveengagementintutorialsandseemtolinkthequalitiesoftheirtutorswith the extent towhich the latter promote learner reflection and self-assessmentpractices.Twopapers in this issueexploredifferent aspectsofdifferentiated instruction (DI). Tzannioffers an overall account of the perceptions and practices of Greek teachers working indifferentcontextsaboutDI. It turnsout that teachersarebroadlyawareofDIbutare lessconfident in practising it, especially because of the extensive time that is required inpreparingappropriateDItasks.Then,thepaperbyRigoutsoufocusesonapopularapproachinDI, the FlippedClassroom (FC)model,whichuses classroom time toengage learners inclarifyingandapplyingskillsandknowledgethat theyhadprepared inadvance, fromtheirhome.ThepaperoffersapromisingperspectiveofGreekteachers’practicesvis-à-visFC.Mogli and Papadopoulou investigate the socialization practices of immigrants fromAfghanistan in Greece through their learning of the Greek language. Their researchinstrument, semi-structured interviews, offers an illuminating account of the factorsinfluencingtheirlearning,includingtheirattitudes,worriesandpersonalmotives.ThepaperbyKoukourikou,ManoliandGrivastudiestheroleofmultiple-strategies inboostingGreekEFLsecondaryschoolstudents’ readingperformance.Theauthorsuse interviewsandtheirown journals to reporton teachers’ lackof familiaritywith strategyusage.However, theirresearchunderlinesthepositiveimpactonlearners’readingcomprehensionability.Finally,but innowayof less importance,thepaperbyKantaridouandKaltsiou investigatesGreekEFLteachers’perceptionsaboutactionresearch.Theyconcludethat,despitetheirpositiveinclination,mostof themarenotactively involved in researchprojects, the reasonsbeinglackoftimeandlackoftraininginunderstandingandusingresearchmethods.

NicosC.SifakisEditor-in-Chief

ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearningVol.9,No.1,February2018,6-31ISSN:1792-1244Availableonlineathttp://rpltl.eap.grThisarticleisissuedundertheCreativeCommonsLicenseDeed.Attribution3.0Unported(CCBY3.0)

Exploringteachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsinEFLteaching

Εξερευνώνταςτηστάσητωνκαθηγητώναπέναντιστηνανάπτυξηδεξιοτήτωντου21ουαιώναστη

διδασκαλίατηςΑγγλικήςωςξένηςγλώσσας

AnnaTSOURAPAThepurposeofthispaper istoexploreteachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills inEFLteaching.Theresearchaimsat indicatingwhichskillsteachersconsidernecessary to be developed andwhich tools they think are appropriate in order to developcertain skills.Another issue tobeexplored iswhether teachers informtheir studentsaboutthesocialconventionsofInternet.Thebarriersthatmayrestricteducatorsfromintegratingeducationaltechnologytoolsinteachingandpossiblesolutionsareinvestigated,too.Forthepurposesofthisresearch,aquestionnairewasdesignedandadministeredto121teachersinGreece.Accordingtotheresearch findings, themajorityof teachershavepositiveattitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills.Theresearchshowedthatteacherswouldbewillingtoemployvariouseducationaltechnologytoolsinordertocaterforthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsintheEFLclass,suchasblogs,wikis,socialnetworks,Webquests,DigitalStorytelling, Email, the Word processor and videos. However, lack of time, training ortechnological equipment hinders the use of some of these tools in everyday teaching.Moreover, themajorityof teachersmake their studentsawareof thesocial conventionsoftheInternetandguidethemtocomplywiththedigitalethics.

Οσκοπόςαυτήςτηςεργασίαςείναιναδιερευνήσειτηστάσητωνκαθηγητώναπέναντιστηνανάπτυξη δεξιοτήτων του 21ου αιώνα στη διδασκαλία της αγγλικής ως ξένης γλώσσας. Ηέρευνα στοχεύει να υποδείξει ποιες ικανότητες θεωρούν οι καθηγητές απαραίτητες νααναπτυχθούνκαιποιαεργαλείαπιστεύουνότιείναιαπαραίτηταώστενααναπτυχθούνοισυγκεκριμένες δεξιότητες. Ένα άλλο ζήτημα προς διερεύνηση είναι αν οι καθηγητέςενημερώνουν τους μαθητές τους σχετικά με τις κοινωνικές συμβάσεις του Ίντερνετ.Εξετάζονται, επίσης, τα εμπόδια που μπορεί να εμποδίσουν τους εκπαιδευτικούς ναενσωματώσουν εκπαιδευτικά τεχνολογικά εργαλεία στη διδασκαλία, καθώς και πιθανές

Tsourapa/ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearning9/1(2018)6-31

7

λύσεις. Για τους σκοπούς αυτής της έρευνας σχεδιάστηκε και χορηγήθηκε έναερωτηματολόγιοσε121καθηγητέςτηςΑγγλικήςστηνΕλλάδα.Σύμφωναμεταερευνητικάευρήματα, η πλειοψηφία των καθηγητών έχουν θετική στάση απέναντι στην ανάπτυξηδεξιοτήτωντου21ουαιώναστηδιδασκαλίατηςΑγγλικήςωςξένηςγλώσσας.Ηέρευναέδειξεότι οι καθηγητές θα ήταν πρόθυμοι να εφαρμόσουν διάφορα εκπαιδευτικά τεχνολογικάεργαλεία στην τάξη της διδασκαλίας της Αγγλικής ως ξένης γλώσσας, όπως blogs, wikis,κοινωνικά δίκτυα, Webquests, Digital Storytelling, Email, Word και βίντεο, ώστε ναφροντίσουν για την ανάπτυξη δεξιοτήτων του 21ου αιώνα. Ωστόσο, η έλλειψη χρόνου,εκπαίδευσηςήτεχνολογικούεξοπλισμούεμποδίζειτηχρήσηκάποιωνεργαλείων.Επίσης,ηπλειοψηφίατωνκαθηγητώνενημερώνουντουςμαθητέςτουςγιατιςκοινωνικέςσυμβάσειςτουΊντερνετκαιτουςκαθοδηγούνώστενασυμμορφώνονταιμετιςψηφιακέςηθικέςαξίες.Keywords: teachers’attitudes,21stcenturyskills,new literacies, integrationof ICTs, socialconventionsofInternet,MultipleIntelligences1.IntroductionNew technologies and the Internet have emerged and grown rapidly over the last years,affectingourlifedrastically.Computers,mobilephones,socialmediaandmanyotherdigitaltools have become a prominent andwell-established part of our society. Inevitably, theirincreasedprominencehasinfluencededucationaswell,changingourtraditionalperceptionof it. The Internet, e-books and interactive whiteboards are gradually becoming aprerequisite in the EFL class. Learners are developing new skills and are acquiring NewLiteracies.Theyareborninthisdigitalageandareknownas‘DigitalNatives’(Prensky2001,p.1).However,teacherswhoarecalledtoteachthisgenerationbelongtoamoretraditionalgeneration thatwas familiarizedwith technologyand Internetat some laterpointof theirlives. Therefore, it is worth investigating these educators’ beliefs and whether they arepreparedtomeettheirstudents’needs.SeveralstudieshavebeenconductedonNewLiteraciesandtheinterestintheirpedagogicalvalue keeps increasing (Coiro, 2003; Delizisi, 2014; Labbo, 2007; Leu et al., 2004;Papadopoulou&Vlachos,2014). There is alsoa lotof researchoneducational technologytools (Avgerou&Vlachos,2016;Kontogeorgi,2014;Karkoulia,2016;Popota,2014)andonteachers’ attitudes towards educational technology (Hadjirigas, 2012; Karavas, 2004).However,teachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillshavenotbeeninvestigated in theGreekEFLcontext.Thepresent researchattempts to shed lighton thisinterestingissue.2.21stcenturypedagogy2.1.CollaborationandsocialconstructivismSocial constructivists believe that we learn by social and communal activities, that thebuildingof knowledge isdonewithothers,with the focusbeingon the community ratherthantheindividualitself(Parker&Chao,2007).ComputerMediatedCommunication(CMC)toolsandespeciallyWeb2.0toolsarelikelytodevelopthissenseofcommunityandprovidelearnerswithauthenticcommunicativelanguageinput.Theyadvocatecollaborativelearningsince they give them the chance to collaboratewith their partners for the completion of


8

learningactivities,whilepractisingallskills(Kontogeorgi,2014).Thereisarealpurposeforcommunicationsincetheirpartnersmaybeattheothersideoftheworld.Inthissense,thenew media implement the socio-constructivist principle that language learning is theoutcomeoftheinterplayoflanguage,communicationandinstruction(Papaefthymiou-Lytra,2014).In this vein, Warshauer (2010) argues, CMC tools can be a valuable tool for the socialconstructionofmeaning.Web2.0toolshelpstudentswriteforasocialaudienceand‘hone’theirwords in response to others,while becoming sensitive to both benefits and risks ofexpressing themselves online (Warshauer, 2010, p.4). Wikis, for example, enhanceasynchronous communication and cooperative learning among students and promotecooperationratherthancompetition(DePedroetal.,2006).AsVlachos(2006)states,CMCtools integration in the language classroom creates a less threatening environment incomparison to face-to-face interaction and facilitates collaborative reading and writing.Studentsdonothesitatetocollaborateandsharetheirknowledgewithothers.AsD’Souza(2007,p.27)putsit,evenshystudents‘comeoutoftheirshellsonline’.ThereisalsoalinkbetweenCMC tools and Johnson& Johnson’s (1994) cooperative learning theory; positiveinterdependence, individual and group accountability and interpersonal and small groupskillsinlearningthatthecooperativelearningtheoryadvocatesarequalitiestobefoundinCMCtools(Dodge,2001).2.2.Higher-orderthinkingskillsIntegrating CMC tools in language learning fosters the development of students’ criticalthinking skills (Koufadi, 2014), which are indispensable in their development not only aslearners but also as future adults. Critical thinking skills are linked to Bloom’s (1956)taxonomyofthecognitivedomain.Bloomclassifiesthinkingskillsinlevelsfromlowerorderto higher ones. Knowledge, comprehension and application belong to the lower ones,whereasanalysis,synthesisandevaluationstandinhigher-levelthinking.Harrington(1995)comparesthetaxonomytoa ladderandsupportsthatthehigheryouclimbthe ladderthedeeperlevelofthinkingisrequired.HigherOrderThinking (HOT) involvesthetransformationof informationand ideasthroughsynthesis,generalizationandhypothesistoarriveatsomeconclusionorinterpretationinanattempt to solve a problem, gain understanding or discover new meaning. In order toachieve this, students activate prior schemata of knowledge and combine newly gainedinformation. Thus, learners are led to self-directed and autonomous learning developingcriticalliteracy.Teachingstudentshowtothinkbothcriticallyandcreativelyisapricelessgiftsince it will affect how they will live the rest of their lives and will render them lifelonglearners(Conklin,2012).HOTrequiresthatstudentsbeactivelearnersandthispresupposeshardworkontheirpart,butkeepstheclassroom‘alive’andthe lessonengaging.Studentsact as active learners and co-constructors of meaning through reflection and decision-making (Landow,1992;Shetzer&Warschauer,2000).The first step teachersneed to taketowards HOT is to stop being providers of all the information and let learners makeinferencesandseekknowledgethemselves.HOTcanbeusedwithallstudentsregardlessofageandbeginningearlyisbothpossibleandbeneficialwithindevelopmentallyappropriateactivities(Conklin,2012).Whenreadingandsearchingonthewebforeducationalpurposes,students need to analyse, break into smaller pieces the new information they encounter,classifyit,evaluateitaccordingtotheirneedsandthencombineandintegrateknowledgeinordertoformanewproduct(synthesis).


9

2.3.MultipleIntelligencesAccording toHowardGardner and the Theory ofMultiple Intelligences (MI), developed in1983,notwoofushavethesameblendorcombinationofintelligences,whichaddsmoretothemultiplicityof intelligences.This isachallengefortheeducationalsystem,whichtendsto offer a more standardized form of knowledge and assessment. Intelligences can beanalogized to computers; belief in one and only intelligence implies that humans possessone general-purpose software, which can perform well, average or poorly in everything.Multiple Intelligences theory implies thatwe possess several independent computers andstrengthinonecomputerdoesnotpredictstrengthorweaknessinanother.The educational implications of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences are the principles ofindividuationandpluralization.Individualsshouldbetaughtinwaysthattheycanlearnandmaximize their understanding and assessed in away that they can showwhat they haveunderstood. Moreover, they should be exposed to a plurality of materials, theories andideas, such as multimodal texts, works of art and crafts. Information CommunicationTechnologies (ICTs) offer learners the chance to be exposed to such plurality ofmaterialsandtomakebestuseoftheiruniquestrengthsandweaknesseswhilelearning.Educationaltechnology brings the real world into the classroom and lets students resort to theirfavourite intelligences and follow their preferred ways and means in learning whiledevelopingtheL2(Papaefthymiou-Lytra,2014).Thisallowsfordiversifiedandindividualizedinstruction, which leaves room for more personalized content, process and assessmentaddingflexibilityandcreativitytotheclassroomwiththeaidofICTtools.Palmberg (2011) suggests that teachers identify the MI profile of their learners andcategorizeclassroomactivitiesaccordingtotheirlearners’intelligences.Asaresult,learnersflourish at their own time, space and pace (Papaefthymiou-Lytra, 2014) and the learningpotential ismaximized.Bas(2008)addsthatprojectsallowlearnerstoapplytheirMultipleIntelligencessinceincompletingaprojecttheycanbeproudofinsteadoffeelingfrustratedoruncomfortablewhenforcedtoconformtoamoretraditionalteachingstrategy.‘Assistinglearnersindevelopingalloftheir intelligenceswillmakelearningapartofliving,notjustapreparationforit’(Bas,2008,p.4).3.TheintegrationofICTsinEFLlearning3.1.PedagogicalandlanguagelearningbenefitsofEducationalTechnologytoolsComputerAssisted Language Learning (CALL) couldprepare students for thedigitalworld.According to Kern & Warschauer (2000), CALL has evolved through three differentframeworks since the 1960s, which correspond to the structural, cognitive andsociocognitive perspective to language learning. Themostmodern approach to CALL, thesociocognitive,isdefinedasComputerMediatedCommunication(CMC)andshiftsfromthelearner-computerinteraction(structuralandcognitiveapproaches)totheinteractionamonglearners via the computer (Vlachos, 2006). Educational technology tools are CALLapplications that can serve as valuable pedagogical tools in the hands of 21st centuryeducators.SomeofthemaretheE-mail,theWebquest,DigitalStorytellingandvideo.The advent ofWeb 2.0 technologies, though, or ‘social software’ as it is called,marked aturningpointforthewebsinceitincludedtheactiveparticipationofusersinthegrowthofsocial networks, contrary to its predecessor Web 1.0 which included passive viewing ofmostly text-based software. Web 2.0 tools offer all users the possibility to not only


10

collaborate and interact in a social dialogue, but also build a virtual community and turnfrommereviewers todynamicwebsitedesigners sharingwhat they learnwith theirpeers(Kontogeorgi,2014).TheWebhasbeentransformedfromaWebpagepublishingvenuetoaglobal network community where all users are invited to create content (Yuen & Yuen,2008).Web2.0toolsareuser-friendlyandrequirereducedtechnicalskillsallowinguserstofocusonthe informationexchangeandcollaborativetasksandnottobedistractedbyadifficulttechnological environment. Learners are exposed to authenticmaterial andbecomemoremotivated since they communicate and socializewith a real audience. They also enhancetheir creativity, develop their critical thinking skills and collaborate with each other toconstruct and share real knowledge. The language input/output is increased andcollaborative reading and writing are facilitated rendering language learning meaningfulsince the purpose and themotive for communication are always present (Vlachos, 2006).Themostpopularweb2.0toolsareblogs,wikis,andsocialnetworkingsites.3.2.TheInternetandsocialconventionsAmajordifferencebetweenrealworldandInternetcommunicationisthatwiththeInternetthereisthepossibilityofnon-physicalandanonymouscontacts.Thisanonymitymayintriguepeopletolowertheirinhibitionsandcreatethepotentialforunregulated,abusivebehavior(Reid, 1991). With the dawn of the new technological era, new values and norms forcommunicationhaveemerged.A termthatcouldbestdescribe thisnewethos in thenewmediaworld is ‘netiquette’,ahybridwordcombiningnetworkandetiquette (Chiles,2013;Richards,2012;Sternberg,2000).Netiquetteisanumbrellatermthatcoversissuessuchastheappropriatelanguageandtoneinagivensituation,theguidelinesthatgovernanonlinecommunity, the fair citationof sources, thewayonlineusersportray themselvesandhowtheyapproachtheincreasinglyblurredlinebetweenprivateandpublic(Richards,2012).Web communities’ social norms are interwoven with the communities’ shared goals andtheirusers’ identity(Keeshin,2010).Thereisapleaforrespect,honestyandpoliteness,allthreebeingthebackboneofsocialsitepolicies(ibid.).Thosewhounderminethecommunityvalues or disrupt the community goals are considered cheaters and are prevented fromdoingso(ibid.).AsChiles(2013,p.20)argues,thebasisoftheprinciplesofnetiquetteistheGolden Rule: ‘Treat others the way you want to be treated’. Effective Internetcommunicationencompassesalsotheprinciplesofbrevity,clarityandethics.Havingagreedon these principles, users can acquire ‘Digital Citizenship’, that is commonly held beliefsabouthowtocommunicateontheInternet(ibid.).In the21st centuryEFLclassroom, teacherswhouse Internetasa teaching tool/aidshouldfirst clarify their goals, provide necessary support and not underestimate its complexity(Warschauer & Whittaker (1997). Informing students about the social conventions ofInternet andpreparing them for entering safely the limitless electronicworld is ofutmostimportance.Learnersneedtoknowthattheymustuserespectfulandinoffensivelanguage,never hide their identity, be careful as not to reveal any sensitive personal informationabout themorothers,avoidplagiarism, triangulateandmakecriticaluseof resourcesanduseproperregisterdependingonthesituation.Attachmenttotheironline identityandanaccurate representation of their self is the basis for fair and honest interaction within acommunity.


11

3.3.NewLiteraciesand21stcenturyskillsTheInternethasrevolutionizedhowpeopleread,writeandsearchforinformation.Theydonotonlyreadorwritetextsinprint,nordotheyopenbooksorencyclopediastosearchforinformation. Reading and writing is done on the web and when in need for informationpeople access theunlimited libraryof theworldwideweb. Foundational literacies refer toskill sets that include phonemic awareness, word recognition, decoding knowledge,comprehension, inferential reasoning, spelling and responding to literature (Leu et al.,2004).TheappearanceoftheInternetandnewmediahasdictatedtheneedforencouragingstudents todevelopanumberofnewskills thatwillhelp themuse thenewmedia (ibid.).The traditional literacies have evolved to encompass more skills and abilities which arenecessary for 21st century people in order to make the most of the potentials of newtechnologies(Coiro,2003).NewLiteraciesrefertoskills,strategiesandknowledgestudentsgraduallybuildinordertoadapt to the new learning contexts that are created and to use digital and non-digitalsourcestoenhancecomprehension(Coiro,2003;Leuetal.,2004).Theseliteraciesallowusto interactwith technology in ameaningful way (ibid.). In particular, peoplewho acquireNew Literacies can use search engines to locate, evaluate and synthesize information(InformationLiteracy),canaccess,readandinterpretmediamaterials(MediaLiteracy),cancommunicatewith an ever-expanding community and discuss issues (Digital Literacy), canuse computers and other technology to enhance the learning experience (TechnologyLiteracy),canunderstand,produceandcommunicatethroughvisualimages(VisualLiteracy)andcaninterpretmessagesfromaglobalperspective(GlobalLiteracy)(Robin,2008).Ithasso farbecomequiteclear that it is imperative that language instruction shouldaimat thedevelopment of learners’ New Literacies and that they be integrated in the schoolcurriculum. However, New Literacies cannot possibly be thought of as distinct fromtraditional literacies, since they are considered two sides of the same coin (Labbo, 2007);theyneedtobebuiltonthefoundationofthetraditional literacies iftheyaretohaveanyeffectatall (Leu&Kinzer,2000).Therefore, teachersneedtoorchestrate literacy-learningopportunitiesamong learnerswhobringtotheclassroomknowledgeofdifferent literaciesandenhancetheirpotentialforeffectivecommunication(Leuetal.,2004).According to the frameworkof thePartnership for21st century learning (P21)published in2007,21stcenturyskillsencompassmoreskillsthanNewLiteracies(Figure1).Theelementsrepresentedintherainbowarethe21stcenturystudentoutcomes.ApartfromInformation,MediaandTechnologyLiteracies,21stcenturylearnersneedtodevelopcritical/Higher-OrderThinkingandproblemsolving,creativity,collaborationandcommunication(the4Cs)aswellas life and career skills. The latter include interpersonal skills, productivity, flexibility andself-direction (ibid.). While the graphic represents each element distinctly for descriptivepurposes,thePartnershipviewsallthecomponentsasfullyinterconnectedintheprocessof21st century teaching and learning. Trilling and Fadel (2009) add the use of MultipleIntelligences, effective oral, written or digital communication along with projectmanagementtothelistofthe21stcenturyskills.


12

Figure1:21stCenturySkills(FrameworkofthePartnershipfor21stcenturylearning,2007,p.1)

3.4.Teachers’attitudesandbarriersThedevelopment of 21st century skills and the integrationof new technologies cannot berealizedwithoutconsideringteachers’attitudes.Teachersareimportantchangeagentsandtheyareinfluential infacilitatingor impedingchanges. Inthisrespect,teachers’positiveornegativeattitudescanbeeitheranenablingordisablingfactorthatinfluencesthesuccessfulintegrationof technology inEFL class (Bullock,2004). If teachers’ attitudesandbeliefsareincompatiblewiththetechnologicalinnovations,thenteachersmaytendtointerprettheseinnovations inaway that theywill conformto theirexisting teachingpracticesandbeliefs(Karavas,2004).Moreover, ithasbeenshown thatattitudesguidebehaviors (Player-Koro,2012).Therefore,teacherswithpositiveattitudesaremorelikelytousetechnologicaltoolsandfosterthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills,whereasnegativeattitudesmaylimitsuchpotentials.Prior research has shown thatmost teachers have positive attitudes towards educationaltechnology(Hadjirigas,2012;Spiris,2014)andparticularlyWeb2.0tools(Karkoulia,2016).Morespecifically,Karkoulia(2016)foundthat50.4%oftheteachersstronglyagreethatWeb2.0toolscreateamoreinterestingandfunlearningenvironmentand42.2%agreethatWeb2.0toolspromotesharing,collaboration,interaction,creativity,andsocialization.Accordingto a report based on research conducted on behalf of The Richard W. Riley College ofEducation and Leadership in 2009, teachers who are frequent technology users also putmoreemphasison thedevelopmentof 21st century skills andveteran teachers are just aslikely as newer teachers to use technology to support learning. Nevertheless, a surveycompletedbyK-12teachersinNortheasternUSAshowedthattheteachers’reporteduseoftechnology did not reflect 21st century literacy practices (Lawrence, 2013). The resultsrevealed that teachers are not keeping pace with students’ outside-of-school practice byusing digital tools and technologies to enhance classroom practice (Lawrence, 2013).Therefore, there appears to be a discrepancy between how teachers perceive literacy intoday’s context and what they are doing in the classroom to foster students’ literacydevelopmentas21stcenturycitizens(ibid.).Itseems,however,thateducation,trainingand


13

professional development that facilitates reflective practices can be a mechanism forsupportingteachers’technologyuseasapedagogicalmethodandcanmakeadifferenceintheir emphasis on 21st century skills (Lawrence, 2013; The Richard W. Riley College ofEducationandLeadership,2009).Asithasalreadybeenhighlighted,teachers’negativestancetowardseducationaltechnologylimits its use and potentials. Apart from teachers’ negative attitudes another barrierimpeding technology integration is the lack of school equipment (Hadjirigas, 2012; Jones,2004; Karkoulia, 2016; Kuang- wu Lee, 2000; Spiris, 2014). More specifically, the lack ofcomputers,thelackoforrestrictedInternetaccess,thelackoftechnicalsupportandothertechnicalproblemsareconsideredsignificantproblems(ibid.).Moreover, teachers indicatetimepressureduetocoursebookoverloadandclassroommanagementissuesasrestrictingfactorsaswell(Hadjirigas,2012;Jones,2004;Karkoulia,2016).Twomoresignificantbarriersarethelackoftheoreticalandtechnicalknowledge(Jones,2004;Kuang-wuLee,2000)andthe lack of confidence (Jones, 2004). The combination of these two increases the level ofanxietythatteachersfeelwhenusingtechnologicaltoolsandactsasadiscouragingfactor.4.Researchmethodology4.1.AimsoftheresearchThepurposeoftheresearchistoinvestigateteachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21st century skills. More specifically, the researcher attempts to give answers to thefollowingquestions:

1) Whatareteachers'attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills intheEFLclass?

2) Whatliteracies/skillsdoEFLteachersconsidernecessarytobedevelopedinthe21stcentury?

3) Whichtoolswouldtheyemploytowardsthedevelopmentoftheseskillsandwhichonesdotheyactuallyuse?

4) Whatarethebarriersthatmayrestrictteachersfromtheintegrationofeducationaltechnologytoolsandthepossiblesolutionstoovercomethesebarriers?

5) WhatarethesocialconventionsoftheInternetandhowdoteachersguidelearnersthroughconstructivenavigation?

4.2.TheresearchinstrumentFor the purpose of this research a questionnaire was designed (see Appendix). Theresearcherdesignedthequestionnaireaftertakingintoaccounttheresearchquestionsandthe relevant literature review. In the questionnaire, there is a variety of close-endedquestions, such as multiple-choice items, checklists and Likert scales, which allow theresearcher to collect specific information and structured data, suitable for quantitative,statisticalanalysis (Cohenetal.,2007;Dornyei,2003).Theoptionofadifferentanswerorclarificationwasprovided,too.Thequestionnaireisdividedintosixsectionsandconsistsoffactual,behavioralandattitudinalquestions(Dornyei,2003)andwaspilot-testedonasmallnumber of EFL teachers (5 teachers) before taking its final form. Piloting increases thereliabilityandvalidityofthequestionnaire(Dornyei,2003;Cohenetal.,2007). Inmycase,pilotinghelpedmechangethewordingofsomequestionsandpreventsomedeficiencies.


14

4.3.Sampleselection,questionnaireadministrationandstatisticalanalysisAs regards thesampleselection, the researcheropted foranon-probability sample,whichdeliberately avoids representing the wider population (Cohen et al., 2007). Thequestionnaire link along with a cover letter was posted on various groups on FacebookconcerningEFLteachersinGreece.Totally121EFLteachers(115femalesand6males)fromdifferentworkingenvironmentsparticipatedintheresearch.Thedatawereanalyzedusingthe Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). It was important to estimate thereliabilityofeachLikert scalequestionconcerning teachers’attitudes. Internal consistencyreliability was measured by the Cronbach Alpha coefficient (Dornyei, 2003, p. 112). Thedegreeofcontributionofeachquestiontothecoefficientwasestimated,too.Thevalueofthecoefficientrangesbetween0and1andthereliabilitylevelisacceptedifitisabove0.70(ibid.).Theitemsofquestion10hadhighinternalconsistencysincetheCronbachAlphawas0.883.Theresultsaresummarizedandpresentedinthefollowingsection.5.Presentationanddiscussionofresearchfindings5.1.Whatareteachers'attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsintheEFLclass?According to the findings, the majority of teachers have positive attitudes towards thedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills.Thisfindingsupportspriorresearch,too(Hadjirigas,2012;Karkoulia,2016;Spiris,2014).Thevastmajorityof teachersbelievethat it is important forstudents of the 21st century to know how to use search engines to locate information(71.9%),toselectinformationaccordingtotheirneedsandpurposes(77%)andknowhowtoevaluate critically the information accessed and gathered (75.2%). The interpretation ofmultimodal texts, such as images, graphemes and presentations, is considered essential(46.2%),too,aswellastheselectionofgraphicsandphotosthatillustratethemeaningtheywanttoconvey(45.5%).TheyalsoviewthateffectiveuseoftheWordprocessorisneededinorder to produce grammatically and syntactically well-formed texts (31.4%). It is alsosupported thatmulti-platformsore-learning systems shouldbeused for synchronousandasynchronous communication with other students (39.7%) and that computer-mediatedcommunication should be applied effectively (33%). Moreover, teachers agree that 21stcentury studentsmust know how to access online learning resources such as dictionariesand thesauri (56.2%) and participate in online discussions and bulletin boards (38%).Furthermore, they firmly believe that students should collaborate during the learningprocessandcompletionofaproject(66.9%)andmustrespectthesocialconventionsoftheInternetwhileusingit(60.3%).Undoubtedly, it is a positive sign that teachers have favorable attitudes towards thedevelopment of 21st century skills. Attitudes guide behaviors (Player- Koro, 2012) and asBullock (2004) argues, teachers’ positive attitudes can act as an enabling factor thatinfluencesthesuccessfulintegrationoftechnologyintheEFLclass.Therefore,teacherswithpositiveattitudesaremore likelytousetechnological toolsandfosterthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills,asalreadydiscussed.


15

5.2. What literacies/skillsdoEFL teachers considernecessary tobedeveloped inthe21stcentury?Theteacherswhoparticipatedintheresearchagreedthataplethoraofskillsisnecessarytobe acquired and developed by students in order to cope with the demands of the 21stcenturyeducation(seeFigure2).Thevastmajorityofteachersarguethatit isessentialforstudents to communicate effectively, to collaborate with their peers and learn throughteamwork,tobecreative,todeveloptheircriticalthinking,aswellaslifelonglearningskills.Moreover,accordingtothefindings,teachersfirmlybelievethatstudentsneedtodevelopNewLiteraciesaswell.Itisvitalthattheyknowhowtousecomputersandothertechnologyto enhance learning (Technology Literacy) and that they can find, evaluate and synthesizeinformation (Information Literacy). Teachers also believe that students must be able tocommunicatewith an ever-expanding community to discuss issues, gather information orseek help (Digital Literacy) and know how to read, interpret and contextualize messagesfromaglobalperspective(GlobalLiteracy).

Figure2:21stcenturyskillsconsiderednecessarytobedevelopedHowever,theabilitytounderstand,produceandcommunicatethoughvisualimages(VisualLiteracy)andtheabilitytorecognize,evaluateandapplythepersuasivetechniquesofmedia(MediaLiteracy)donotseemtobeofutmost importanceforteachers,sincelessthanhalfagreedtoit(44%and41%respectively).ThedevelopmentofMultipleIntelligencesisviewedas important,whereastheabilitytocompleteprojectsdoesnotseemtobeapriority.Thecompletionofprojectsrequirescollaboration,communicationandcareerskills.Thefactthatteachers do not consider the completion of projects as a very significant skill shows thatmaybetheyrarelydoprojectsinclassoriftheydo,theymayseeitassomethingsuperficialanddonot dealwith it in depth.However, they shouldpromote thedevelopmentof thisskill,becauseitissomethingthatwillprovetobenecessaryforfutureemployees.


16

5.3. Whichtoolswouldteachersemploytowardsthedevelopmentof theseskillsandwhichonesdotheyactuallyuse?The research showed that teacherswould employ various educational technology tools inordertocaterforthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsintheEFLclass(seeFigure3).Web2.0tools,suchasblogs,wikisandsocialnetworksrankhighamongteachers’preferences.Asithasbeendiscussed,Web2.0toolsareuser-friendlyandallowlearnerstointeractinalessthreateningenvironmentandbuildavirtualcommunity(D’Souza,2007;Kontogeorgi,2014).Asrecentresearchhasshown,Web2.0toolsenhancemotivationandcollaboration,providea purpose for authentic communication, develop creativity and higher-order thinking andpavethewaytotheautonomyoflearners,whilefosteringthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills (Godwin-Jones, 2003; Karkoulia, 2016; Kontogeorgi, 2014; Koufadi, 2014; Parker &Chao, 2007; Yang, 2009). Apart from Web 2.0 tools, many teachers believe that videos,WebquestsandtheEmailpromotethedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills,too,whereastheWordprocessorandDigitalStorytellingarelesspopular.

Figure3:Suitabletoolsforthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills

However, teachers’everydaypractice is incompatiblewith theirbeliefsandattitudessincethemajorityofthemusemainlyvideos(Youtube)(seeFigure4).Thisfindingsupportspriorresearch (Karkoulia,2016;Spiris,2014).Possible reasons for thispreferencemightbe thatvideos on Youtube are easy to find, are free and are very popular among students. Thesecondmostusedtool istheWordprocessorandthirdcomestheEmail,whichprovidesacontextforreal-worldcommunication.Considerablyfeweraretheteacherswhouseblogs,wikis,socialnetworks,DigitalStorytellingandWebquests.Previousresearchhasshownthata significant number of teachers use blogs and wikis and that they are aware of theirpedagogicalbenefits(Karkoulia,2016).


17

Theconclusionsthatcanbedrawnarethateitherteacherswhoparticipatedinthepresentstudymaynothavebeenpersuadedforthebenefitsofthesetools in languagelearningortheyneedfurthertraining,whichisoneofthebarriersimpedingintegrationofeducationaltechnologytools(see5.4below).Thetrainingtheymayhavereceivedmighthavebeenonlearning how to use these tools, which is something they may already know, since the‘Digital Natives’ of the previous decade are becoming the teachers of today, so they arefamiliarwith a lot of tools and applications. For example, the fact thatmost teachers usevideos, even those who have not received any training shows that they have becomefamiliarwiththeuseofvideo,simplybyexperimentingandusingiteverydayformanyyearsalready. However,what teachers need to be trained on is how to exploit tools likewikis,blogs,DigitalStorytellingandWebquestsintheclassroomandmakethemostofthem.Concerning the frequency with which teachers use technology, themajority claimed thattheyuseeducationaltechnologytoolsonceortwiceaweek.Veryfewteachersrespondedtouse them in everyday lesson indicating that still normalization is not reached (Bax, 2003;Spiris,2014).

Figure4:Toolsusedineverydayteaching5.4. What are the barriers that may restrict teachers from the integration ofeducational technology tools and the possible solutions to overcome thesebarriers?The integrationofeducationaltechnologytools isacomplexprocessanddoesnotdependonly on teachers’ attitudes. Various barriers may impede integration (see Figure 5). Therespondents of this research identified time pressure as the most important factor thathinders integration of educational technology tools. Teachers may feel that coursebook


18

material overload overwhelms them and does not leave time for extra activities, such asworkingonablogorawiki.Theymayviewallthesetoolsastime-consumingandnotaidingthesyllabus.LackofschoolequipmentandnoInternetaccesswerealsoreportedasmajorbarriers.Inaddition,someteachersrespondedthattheydonotfeelfreetouseeducationaltechnologytoolsduetotheschool’spolicyorduetoseveralclassroommanagementissues.Finally,afewteachersclaimedthattheyhesitatetousesuchtoolsbecausetheydonotfeelconfident enough or they lack relevant knowledge. These impediments to integration ofeducational technology tools are similar to those revealed in previous studies concerningeducationaltechnology(Hadjirigas,2012;Karkoulia,2016;Spiris,2014).

Figure5:Constraints/problemsthathinder

theintegrationofeducationaltechnologytoolsinEFLclassConsidering the above-mentioned barriers, the participants suggested several possiblesolutions (seeFigure6).Mostof thesesolutionshavebeen identified inpriorresearchtoo(Karkoulia,2016;Spiris,2014).First, teachersarguethattheuseofeducationaltechnologytoolsshouldbepartofthesyllabusandshouldnotbeviewedonlyassupplementary.Sofar,theyhavenotbeenableto linktheirusetotheireverydayteachingpracticeasan integralpart of the syllabus. In addition, teachers expressed the need to receive more trainingregardingthesetoolsandareeagertoattendrelatedseminars.Althoughthevastmajorityresponded that they have attended such seminars, it seems that more are required.Teachers also stated that itwouldbe a good idea for students tobe assignedhomework,which would require them to use such tools at home, and should work on such tools incomputerlabs(ifexistent)atschoolatleastonceaweek.Finally,teachinghoursshouldbeincreasedsothatthereisenoughtimetointegratesuchtoolsinthelesson.


19

Figure6:Suggestions/possiblesolutions5.5. Whatare the social conventionsof the Internetandhowdo teachersguidelearnersthroughconstructivenavigation?Thevastmajorityof teachers (82%) responded that theydomake their studentsawareofthe social conventions of the Internet. More specifically, as most teachers stated, theyadvise their students to be careful not to reveal any sensitive personal information (seeFigure 7). They also argued that their students are guided to use respectful, inoffensivelanguage and proper register depending on the person they are addressing. Moreover,teachersencouragetheirstudentstoparaphraseandavoidplagiarismwhenusinganonlinesource. Triangulating the resources is viewed as less important, however. Finally, fewteachers advise their students not to hide their identity by using fake profiles. Studentsshould be strongly advised not to hide their identity, because honesty is one of themostbasic social policies (Keeshin, 2010). Anonymity may intrigue people to lower theirinhibitionsandcreatethepotentialforunregulated,abusivebehavior(Reid,1991).


20

Figure7:WaystoabidebythesocialconventionsoftheInternet

6.StudylimitationsandsuggestionsforfurtherresearchTheresearchhasrevealedsomeinterestingfindings,whichprovideusefulinsightsregardingtheattitudesofteachersofEnglishinGreecetowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsand the use of educational technology tools. However, there are certain limitations thatshould be taken into account and may lead to ideas for future research. A small-scaleresearch could not target thewhole population. Therefore, a non-probability samplewasselected that did not allow the researcher to make generalizations. Furthermore,questionnaires havemany advantages but also some downsides that limit the depth andreliability of the investigation. For instance, some respondents may have completed thequestionnaire hastily, giving superficial answers or misinterpreting some questions.Moreover,sometimesrespondentsdeviatefromthetruthintentionally,reportingwhattheyaresupposedtobelieve,ratherthanwhattheyactuallybelieve(Dornyei,2003).Othersmaytendtoovergeneralizewhentheiroverall impressiononthetopic ispositive(‘Haloeffect’)ortendtoagreewithstatementswhentheyarenotsureorambivalent(‘Acquiescencebias’)(Dornyei, 2003, p. 13). The researcher could have counteracted these drawbacks by usingobservation as their research tool to establish whether their responses correspond withtheir actions in everyday practice. Instead, the researcher attempted to verify theconsistencyof the responsesbywordingquestions to examine the same issuedifferently.Theresultsrevealednoinconsistency.Bearing inmind the aforementioned limitations of the particular research, the need for alarger scale and a longer time-span research is undeniable. Amuch larger scale researchcoveringallareasinGreecewouldcertainlybemoreusefulandenlightening.Inaddition,anissue thatneeds further investigationhas todowith the reasons thatdeter teachers fromthe use of educational technology tools despite the fact that they have received relevanttraining. They hesitate to use blogs, wikis, Webquests, social networks and DigitalStorytelling and tend to use “safer” and more “traditional” tools, such as videos, WordProcessorandEmail.Furtherresearchcouldemployalternativeresearchinstruments,suchas interviews. Thus, the combined use of quantitative and qualitative research and


21

observationofteacherpracticewouldfacilitatetriangulation,addingclaimsofreliabilityandvaliditytotheresultsoftheresearch(Cohenetal.,2007).7.Concludingremarks:lookingtothefutureThe research has indicated that the vast majority of teachers in Greece have positiveattitudes towards thedevelopmentof 21st century skills.Undoubtedly, it is apositive signthat teachers have favorable attitudes towards the development of 21st century skills,becauseteacherswithpositiveattitudesaremorelikelytousetechnologicaltoolsandfosterthe development of 21st century skills.More specifically, teachers indicated collaboration,effective communication, creativity and critical thinking as indispensable skills to bedevelopedinthe21stcenturyEFLclass.Thesearesomeoftheprinciplesthatunderpin21stcenturypedagogyandarepromotedwhenusingseveraleducationaltechnologytools.Thedevelopment of Multiple Intelligences and New Literacies is also viewed as important.Moreover,teacherswouldemployvariouseducationaltechnologytoolsinordertocaterforthe development of 21st century skills in the EFL class, such as blogs, wikis and socialnetworks,whichrankhighamongteachers’preferences.However, itwasshownthat theyusemainlyvideosintheireverydayteaching.As far as the Internet and social conventionsare concerned, thevastmajorityof teachersmake their students aware of the social conventions of the Internet. They guide theirstudents to use respectful, inoffensive language and proper register depending on theperson they are addressing and they encourage their students to paraphrase and avoidplagiarismwhenusinganonlinesource.Inthenearfuture,anincreasednumberofdigitaltoolswillappearandanewgenerationofteacherswillemerge.Bothteachersandstudentswillbe‘DigitalNatives’sincetheywillhavebeenborninthenewdigitalera,andwillsharehightechnologicalcompetence.Teacherswillhave receivedmore training andwill have all the necessary technical skills to use awiderangeofdigital tools.Withoutadoubt,a stateof ‘normalization’willbe reached inwhichICTswillbesuccessfullyintegratedinEFLteachingandviewedasanormalpartofteachingpractice.Aimingatthisgoal,teachereducationeventsdesignedeffectivelyforthispurposeshould be organised and teachers should cater for their continuous personal andprofessionaldevelopment.Asfarastheschoolequipmentisconcerned,theresearchindicatedthatmanyclassroomsorschools in Greece lack the necessary technological equipment. Hopefully, in the next fewyears, the burdenof the cost of such equipmentwill be lighter and itwill be possible forschools to provide their students with all the required facilities. Besides, education isexpected to expand beyond the limits of the classroom with the advance of ICTs. Theteacher’s role in suchcasewill continue tobe thatof the facilitatorandguide throughouttheprocess.Takingintoaccountwhathasbeendiscussedsofar,thedevelopmentof21stcenturyskills,whichdependsonthesuccessfulintegrationofeducationaltechnologytoolsintheEFLclass,is a complex process. However, it is hoped that teachers’ favourable attitudes combinedwithaseriesofmeasuresthatwillfacilitatetheuseofthesetoolswillleadtotheirsuccessfulintegration. In this way, 21st century educators will have all the potentials to equip theirstudents with the necessary skills in order to cope with the demands of the constantlyevolvingdigitalworld.


22

ReferencesAvgerou,E.&Vlachos,K.(2016).‘Theblogasaninnovativetoolforthedevelopmentofthe

writingskillintheGreekEFLclass.’ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearning,7/1: 212-231, at http://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2016/07-01-212-Avgerou__Vlachos.pdf,accessed21March2016.

Bas,G. (2008). ‘Implementationofmultiple intelligences,supportedproject-based learningin EFL/ESL classrooms’. Karatli Sehit Sahin Yilmaz Secondary School, Nigde, Turkey, athttp://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503870.pdf,accessed28November2015.

Bax,S.(2003).‘CALL-past,presentandfuture.’System,31/1:13-28.Bloom,B.S.(1956).Taxonomyofeducationalobjectives,HandbookI:Thecognitivedomain.

NewYork:DavidMcKayCoInc.Bullock, D. (2004). ‘Moving from theory to practice: an examination of the factors that

preservice teachers encounter as they attempt to gain experience teaching withtechnology during field placement experiences.’ Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation,12/2:211–237.

Chiles,D.(2013).ThePrinciplesofNetiquette,athttp://netiquette.xyz/,accessed20January2018.

Cohen, L. Manion. L. & Morrison, K., (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.).London:Routlege.

Coiro,J.(2003).‘ExploringliteracyontheInternet.’TheReadingTeacher,56/5:458-464.Conklin,W.(2012).Strategiesfordevelopinghigher-orderthinkingskills.HuntingtonBeach,

CA:ShellEducation.DePedro,X.,Rieradevall,M., López,P., Sant,D.,Piñol, J.,Núñez, L.,etal. (2006). ‘Writing

documents collaboratively in Higher education (I): Qualitative results from a 2-yearproject study.’ Congreso Internacional de Docencia Universitaria e Innovación(International Congress of University Teaching and Innovation), Barcelona, athttp://www.academia.edu/575958/Writing_documents_collaboratively_in_Higher_education_using_Traditional_vs._Wiki_methodology_I_Qualitative_results_from_a_2-year_project_study,accessed14November2015.

Delizisi,S.(2014).‘DevelopingNewLiteraciesandBlendedLearningthroughtheintegrationof new technologies in project work: a case study.’ Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation.Patras:HellenicOpenUniversity.

DodgeB.(2001).‘FOCUS:fiverulesforwritingagreatWebQuest’.LearningandLeadingwithTechnology,28/8:6-9,58.

Dornyei,Z.(2003).Questionnairesinsecondlanguageresearch.London:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

D’Souza, Q. (2007). Web 2.0 ideas for educators. A guide to RSS and more, atwww.teachinghacks.com/audio/100ideasWeb2educators.pdf,accessed16October2015.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames ofmind: The theory ofmultiple intelligences. New York: BasicBooks.

Godwin-Jones,B.(2003).‘Emergingtechnologies:Blogsandwikis:Environmentsforon-linecollaboration’.LanguageLearning&Technology.7/2:12–16.

Hadjirigas, D. (2012). ‘Investigating Greek EFL public school teachers’ attitudes towardseducational technology and its uses in foreign language teaching.’ Unpublished M.Ed.dissertation.Patras:HellenicOpenUniversity.

Harrington, H. L. (1995). ‘Fostering reasoned decisions: Case-based pedagogy and theprofessionaldevelopmentofteachers.’TeachingandTeacherEducation,11:203-214.

Johnson D. & Johnson R. (1994). Leading the Cooperative School (2nd ed). Edina, MN:InteractionBookCompany.


23

Jones, A. (2004). ‘A review of the research literature on barriers to the uptake of ICT byteachers,’ at http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1603/1/becta_2004_barrierstouptake_litrev.pdf,accessed29January2016.

Karavas, K. (2004). ‘Models of curriculum development’. In Ayakli, C., Karavas, K.,Manolopoulou-Sergi,E.&Spinthourakis,J.A.(Eds),CourseDesignandEvaluation,Volume1.Patras:HellenicOpenUniversity,127-132.

Karkoulia,K.C. (2016). ‘Teachers’attitudes towards the integrationofWeb2.0 tools inEFLteaching’. Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 7/1: 46-74, athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2016/07-01-046-Karkoulia.pdf,accessed3March2016.

Keeshin,J.(2010).‘SocialnormsontheWeb:Howtocreateproductivedigitalcommunities’,athttp://thekeesh.com/docs/norms.pdf,accessed26January,2016.

Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. (2000). ‘Introduction: Theory and practice of network-basedlanguage teaching’. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based languageteaching:Conceptsandpractice.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1-19.

Kontogeorgi,M. (2014). ‘Exploring theuseofWikis indevelopingstudents’writingskills intheEFLclassroom.’ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearning,5/1:123-152,athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-123-Kontogeorgi.pdf,accessed20January2016.

Koufadi, E. (2014). ‘Integrating Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and OnlineNetworking in the teaching of English as a foreign language in high school’. ResearchPapers in Language Teaching and Learning, 5/1: 199-222, athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-199-Koufadi.pdf,accessed16January2016.

Labbo,L.D.(2007).‘Livinginthepromisedland…orcanoldandNewLiteracieslivehappilyeverafterintheclassroom?’CollegeReadingAssociationYearbook,28:20-30.

Lawrence,A.S. (2013). ‘Exploringteachers’perceptionsof literacyanduseoftechnology inclassroom practice: analysis of self-reported practice in one school district’. Journal ofLiteracy and Technology, 14/1: 51-71 (March), athttp://www.literacyandtechnology.org/uploads/1/3/6/8/136889/jlt_v14_1_lawrence_calhoun.pdf,accessed8February2016.

Lee, K. (2000). ‘English teachers' barriers to the use of Computer-assisted LanguageLearning.’The Internet TESL Journal, VI/12 (December), at http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html,accessed9February2016.

Leu, D.J. & Kinzer, C. K. (2000). ‘The convergence of literacy instruction with networkedtechnologiesfor informationandcommunication.’ReadingResearchQuarterly,35:108-127.

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D.W. (2004). ‘Toward a theory of newliteracies emerging from the Internet and other information and communicationtechnologies.’Theoreticalmodelsandprocessesofreading,5/1:1570-1613.

Palmberg, R. (2011). Multiple Intelligences revisited (E-book), atwww.englishclub.com/download/PDF/EnglishClub-Multiple-Intelligences-Revisited.pdf,accessed25November2015.

Papadopoulou,S.&Vlachos,K.(2014).‘Usingdigitalstorytellingtodevelopfoundationalandnew literacies.’ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning 5/1: 235-258, athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-235-Papadopoulou-Vlachos.pdf, accessed 22January2016.

Papaefthymiou-Lytra, S. (2014). ‘L2 lifelong learning /use and new media pedagogies’.Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning 5/1: 16-33, athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-016-Papaefthymiou-Lytra.pdf, accessed 14November2015.

Parker, K. R. & Chao, J. T. (2007). ‘Wiki as a teaching tool.’ Interdisciplinary Journal ofKnowledgeandLearningObjects,7:57-72.


24

Partnership for 21st century learning (2007). ‘Framework for 21st century learning’, athttp://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework,accessed29January2016.

Player-Koro, C. (2012). ‘Factors influencing teachers’ Use of ICT in education.’ EducationInquiry, 3/1: 93-108, at http://www.lh.umu.se/digitalAssets/92/92221_inquiry_player-koro.pdf,accessed29January2016.

Popota, C. (2014). ‘Designing and implementing a Webquest in an EFL young learnerscontext.’ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 5/1: 278-306, athttp://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-278-Popota.pdf,accessed14November2015.

Prensky,M.(2001).‘Digitalnatives,digitalimmigrants.’OntheHorizon,9/5:1-6.Reid, E.M. (1991). ‘Electropolis: Communication and community on Internet Relay Chat.’

Unpublished Senior Honours Thesis. Melbourne: University of Melbourne, atwww.irchelp.org/irchelp/communication-research/academic/academic-reid-e-electropolis-1991.html,accessed26January2016.

Richards, D. (2012). ‘Digital ethics’, at http://writingcommons.org/open-text/new-media/digital-ethics,accessed29January2016.

Robin, B. R. (2008). ‘Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st centuryclassroom.’Theoryintopractice,47/3:220-228.

Spiris, S. (2014). ‘Investigating normalisation: Do teachers of English in Greece integratetechnology in theireveryday teachingpractice?’ResearchPapers in LanguageTeachingand Learning, 5/1: 351-373, at http://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-351-Spiris.pdf,accessed29January2016.

Sternberg,J.(2000).‘Virtualmisbehavior:Breakingrulesofconductinonlineenvironments’.Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, 1: 53-60, at http://www.media-ecology.org/publications/MEA_proceedings/v1/sternberg01.pdf, accessed 26 January2016.

The RichardW. Riley College of Education and Leadership (2009). ‘Educators, Technologyand21st Century Skills.Dispelling FiveMyths’ (report summary),WaldenUniversity, athttps://www.waldenu.edu/~/media/Files/WAL/report-summary-dispelling-five-myths.pdf?v1,accessed29January2016.

Trilling,B.,&Fadel,C.(2009).21stCenturyskills:Learningforlifeinourtimes.SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.

Vlachos,K. (2006). ‘OnlinenetworkingandtheteachingofEnglishasaforeign languagetoyounglearners:Amethodologicalframework.’HUSSEPapers,ProceedingsoftheseventhbiennialConference.VolumeII,p.618-62:VeszpremHungary.

Warschauer, M. (2010). ‘Invited commentary: New tools for teaching writing.’ LanguageLearning&Technology,14/1:3-8.

Warschauer,M.&Whittaker,P.F.(1997). ‘TheInternetforEnglishTeaching:GuidelinesforTeachers.’ The Internet TESL Journal, 3/10 (October), athttp://iteslj.org/Articles/Warschauer-Internet.html,accessed26January2016.

Yang, S. H. (2009). ‘Using blogs to enhance critical reflection and community of practice.’JournalofEducationalTechnology&Society,12/2:11-21.

Yuen,S.C.Y.&Yuen,P.(2008).‘Web2.0inEducation.’InK.McFerrinetal.(Eds),Proceedingsof Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference2008.Chesapeake,VA:AACE,3227-3228.


25

Appendix

TheQuestionnaireCoverletterDearcolleague,My name is Anna Tsourapa and I have beenworking as an EFL teacher since 2008. I amcurrentlyworking onmydissertation for theMaster’sDegree in Education (TESOL) at theHellenicOpenUniversity.ThetitleofmydissertationisExploringteachers’attitudestowardsthedevelopmentof21stcenturyskillsinEFLteaching.Thepurposeofmy research is to explore teachers’ attitudes towards thedevelopmentof21st century skills in the EFL context. In particular, I intend to explorewhatpractices theyconsidergoodonestofollowinthefieldofnewliteraciesandwhichskillstheythinkshouldbedeveloped.AnotherissuetobeexplorediswhichtoolsEFLteachersconsiderappropriateand useful in order to develop certain skills. The research also aims to show whetherteachersactuallyfollowthepracticestheyarguefor intheireverydayteachingpractice,ornot. If not, they will be asked to mention the constraints of their teaching context thatpreventthemfromdoingso.Finally,teacherswillbemorethanwelcometocontributetheirownsuggestionstoovercomesuchconstraints.For thepurposeof this researchaquestionnairehasbeendesigned thataddressesall EFLteachersinGreece.Iwouldbeindebtedtoallofyouifyoucouldfollowthelinkbelowandcomplete the questionnaire. It will not take you more than 10 minutes. I would like toemphasize thatyour responsesarevaluable tome.Thereareno rightandwronganswersandtheinformationprovidedisstrictlyconfidential.Please,donothesitatetocontactmeforanyquestionsorifyouwishtobeinformedaboutthefindings.Thankyouinadvanceforyourcooperation.Bestregards,AnnaTsourapaEmailaddress:[email protected]:https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ZGyVU87qC04TrrRp4tY4aH2jCojUAWsGZCq_6TYzLL4/viewform


26


27


28


29


30


31

AnnaTsourapa([email protected])holdsaB.A.inEnglishLanguageandLiteraturefromtheAristotleUniversityofThessalonikiandanM.Ed.inTeachingEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguagesfromtheHellenicOpenUniversity.She

worksasateacherofEnglishinforeignlanguageinstitutes.HerresearchinterestfocusesonEducationalTechnology.

ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearningVol.9,No.1,February2018,32-55ISSN:1792-1244Availableonlineathttp://rpltl.eap.grThisarticleisissuedundertheCreativeCommonsLicenseDeed.Attribution3.0Unported(CCBY3.0)

IntegratingWeb2.0technologiesintoEFLlearningintheGreekstate-schoolcontext:Amixed-methodstudy

MariaTZOTZOUThe purpose of this study is to survey the integration of Web 2.0 technologies into EFLlearning in theGreekstate-schoolcontext includingbothprimaryandsecondaryschools. ItexploresstateEFLteachers’awarenessofWeb2.0technologies,theuseofWeb2.0toolsonthebasisofunderlyingpedagogicaltheoriesandteachingmethods,teachers’digitalliteracyand training needs as well as state-school barriers and possible solutions. To this end, amixed-methodresearchwasselectedtogatherandprocessdata.Theresearchtoolswereaquestionnaire addressed to 149 in-service state EFL teachers regarding the quantitativeanalysisandane-mailinterviewaddressedto7in-serviceschooladvisorsforthequalitativeresearch.MergingofquantitativeandqualitativefindingsyieldedvaluableimplicationsandsuggestionsforWeb2.0implementationintheGreekstateschool.Thepresentstudyrevealsstate EFL teachers’ positive attitude towards Web 2.0 technologies, the need for apedagogical‘link’betweentechnologyandteachingmethodologyaswellasthestate-schoolbarriersagainstWeb2.0integration.ItalsoprovidessuggestionsforfurtherresearchandforfutureactiontowardsWeb2.0pedagogysustainingpolicies.Keywords:Web2.0,EFL,pedagogy,mixed-method 1.IntroductionWeb2.0integrationwhichreferstotheeffectivepedagogicaluseoftechnology(thatis,howeffectively it is used to support teaching and learning) is not an easy process. Limitedtechnology-relatedskills,teachers’negativeorindifferentattitudestowardstechnology,lackofappropriatepedagogicalguidanceaswellasinadequatetechnologicalequipmentseemtobemajorbarriersagainst theeffectiveWeb2.0 integrationaccording toprevious researchcarriedoutinUSAandRussiainthefieldofEnglishlanguagelearningaswellasinteachingand learning ingeneral (Light&Polin,2010;Shishkovskaya&Sokolova,2015).AsDooly&Masats (2010) argue, it is crucial for teachers to be able to choose themost appropriateWeb 2.0 material, methodology and activities in order to reinforce positive learning andreachone’steachingobjectives.

Tzotzou/ResearchPapersinLanguageTeachingandLearning9/1(2018)32-55

33

In Greece, previous studies (Karkoulia, 2016; Katerini, 2013; Kontogeorgi, 2014; Paroussi,2014; Spiris, 2014) have explored Web 2.0 implementation but without focusing on thestate-schoolcontextandwithout investigating theWeb2.0actualpedagogical integration.Thesestudieswereonlyquantitativeand involvedEFL teachersworkingboth inpubicandprivate schools or institutions in Greece whereas the present study is mixed-methodaddressing not only the state-school teachers (quantitative research) but also the state-school advisors (qualitative research) in order to reach more ‘holistic’ research findingsfocusingonWeb2.0pedagogyaswell.Inparticular,thepresentstudyaimstofillaresearch‘gap’byexploringWeb2.0integrationintotheGreekstate-schoolclassroom.ItisworthexploringtowhatextentstateEnglishasaforeignlanguage(EFL)teachersareawareofWeb2.0tools,iftheyknowhowtoplanaWeb2.0-based lesson on the basis of modern pedagogical theories and methods, what theyconsider to be the major barriers against Web 2.0 integration as well as their ownsuggestionstoallowtechnologytakeitsmosteffectiveplaceinthestate-schoolclassroom.To this end, this study reviews theGreek state-school context to identify factors affectingWeb2.0integrationintoEFLlearningeitherpositivelyornegatively.Itexaminesthepositionoftechnologyinthecurrentcurriculaandthe‘NewSchool’settingaswellastheeducationalmaterial currently available in schools highlighting the attempts made by theMinistry ofEducation toprovide technical support tostateEFL teachers throughdigitalplatformsandnetworks.Pedagogical support isalsodiscussedwithspecific referenceto InformationandCommunicationTechnology(ICT)trainingforstate-schoolteachersaswellastotheschooladvisors’role.2.Theoreticalandpedagogicalbackground2.1.Web2.0pedagogicalbenefitsIntheWeb2.0context,thewebfunctionsasaplatformwhereuserscollaborate,exchange,process and construct data dynamically. In education,Web2.0 technologies create onlineeducational communities, which Shishkovskaya & Sokolova (2015) call educational‘webcieties’,allowingtwo-waycommunicationbetweenthesiteandusers,contributing totheauthorshipofthecontentandprovidingthepossibilitytoupdatethecontentbymultipleauthorspromoting interactivity,creativityandsociality inthe learningprocess. In languageeducation, themost commonly investigatedWeb 2.0 technologies are blogs, wikis, socialnetworks (SNSs) and Google Docs which afford great interactive learning opportunitiesthrough genuine communication and social interaction in the target language (Campbell,2003;Lund,2008;Luo,2013).Morespecifically,regardingWeb2.0pedagogicalbenefits,previousresearch(Al-Ali&Gunn,2013;Crooketal.,2008;Stockwell,2010)hasrevealedthatWeb2.0technologiescanoffergreatflexibilityandvarietyinEFLlearningintermsofschedulingclasses,pacingofindividuallearners, authenticity of tasks, selectionof content andnew learningopportunities.OtherstudieshavealsoindicatedthatWeb2.0technologiesofferEFLlearnersthepotentialforacollaboration-oriented and community-based learning environment (Antenos-Conforti,2009;Dippold, 2009; Sun,2010; Yang,2009). In the samevein,WangandVasquez (2012)argue that Web 2.0 tools help to create learning communities that are comfortable,individualized and collaboration-oriented enhancing engagement in the language learningprocess.


34

For instance, Illés (2012)andNoytim (2010)pointout thatblogscancreateconditions forthedevelopmentoflearners’autonomyintermsofbothlearningandlanguageusethrougha learner-centred approach by encouraging them to read and write for communicativepurposesandreinforcingEFL learning incontextswhere learnershave limitedexposure tothe target language. In a similar way, wikis can transform a traditional class into acommunityoflearnersbywhichtheycommunicatemeaningfullyinrealcontextsandpublishtheir materials fostering their creativity, autonomy and responsibility in their ownconstructionofknowledge(Godwin-Jones,2003;Kessler,2009).Inthelightoftheabove,implementingWeb2.0toolsinlanguagepedagogyresultsinhigherlevelsofmotivation,confidenceanddispositionwhicharecrucialfactorsincommunicativelanguagelearning(Pop,2010).Web2.0toolsengagelearnersinprocesseswhichmakethemmorestrategicandcompetentEFLuserscontributingeffectivelytotheirskillsdevelopment(Kessler,2009;Lee,2010).However,tothisend,theteacherhasakeyroletoplayandneedstoacquiretheso-calledWeb2.0strategy inordertousetechnologyfor learningpurposeseffectively(Zhao,Hueyshan&Mishra,2001).Therefore, it isworth exploring towhat extent state EFL teachers inGreece are aware ofWeb2.0toolsandtheirbenefitsaswellasiftheyknowhowtoplanaweb-basedlessononthe basis of modern pedagogical theories and methods towards maximizing the above-mentionedWeb2.0pedagogicalbenefits.2.2.TowardsaWeb2.0pedagogyWeb2.0technologiesrelyonlearner-centeredmethods,suchastheProject-BasedLearning(PBL) which is a methodological approach based on contextualized cooperative learning(Sharan,1999)andTask-BasedLearning(TBL)whichemphasizestheauthentic,creativeandspontaneous use of the target language through meaningful and problem solving taskslinkingFLusetoreal-worldactivities(Ellis,2003;Nunan,2004).Bothmethodsarerelatedto‘situatedlearning’,‘socio-cognitive’and‘constructivist’learningtheories (Dooly&Masats,2010;Ellis,2003).Constructivismoffersanewparadigmfor thisnewWeb2.0ageas it isnownotonlypossiblefor learnersto“accesstonsof informationalmost instantly, but it is also possible for them to be in control of their own learning”(Oluwafisayo, 2010, p.19). Salmon (2011) suggests that social cognitivism can be updatedandredefinedas‘e-socialconstructivism’takingintoaccounttheelectroniccommunicationfacilitated byWeb 2.0 technologies developing a community of learning as, by their verynature, Web 2.0 tools encourage active participation in a shared endeavour with peersemphasizing the social context of learning (Linn, 1992; Rogoff, 1994). Situated learning isanother theory that helpsmake sense out of the newWeb 2.0 reality given that it viewslearning as a product of a meaning-making process that cannot be separated from thecontextofitsuse(Brownetal.,1989).Connectivism1isanalternativepedagogywithadirectlinktoWeb2.0technologiesfosteringanindividual’sabilityforsocialnetworkingthrougharangeofnetworks,connectionsandtools(Hall,2010).Anothertheorythatmeetstheneedsof the newWeb 2.0 landscape is the so-called activity theory2 based on learner-centred

1Connectivismprovidesinsightintolearningskillsandtasksneededforlearnerstoflourishinadigitalera.Thistheorystressestheideathatknowledgecreationistheaggregationoftheactivitiesofmanyindividualsthatcreatesknowledgeandplacesknowledgewithinthenetworkitself(Siemens,2005).2 Activity theorists understand learning as phenomena generated in a complex, evolving activitysystemwhereactors(subjects),objectives,andtoolsinteractiteratively(Jonassen&Rohrer-Murphy,1999).Members(learners),objectives(learningobjectives)andtools(learningtools)ofthatparticular


35

learningenvironmentswhichsupportindividualeffortsinordertonegotiatemeaningwhileengaginginauthenticactivities(Land&Hannafin,2000).2.3.PlanningaWeb2.0-basedlessonIntegratingeffectivelytheWeb2.0toolsintotheclassroomisachallengingandcoreissuetoevery21st century teacher.Given that these toolscanbeused indifferentwaysandmorethanonetoolcanbeappropriateforanygivensituation,itisimportanttoconsiderhowtheycanenhanceEFLlearning.LianandBonk(2009)suggestfivepracticalstepswhileplanningaweb-basedlesson:a.settingcourseobjectives,b.formulatingthetechniquesandstrategies,c.selectingthetools,d.organizingtheactivitiesandtechnologiesande.providingfeedback.Whenplanning aWeb2.0-based lesson, it is also helpful to bear inmindBloom’s reviseddigital taxonomy3 (Churches, 2009; see Figure 1) and to determine which level of thistaxonomy the teacher is aiming for inorder toa.define the specific learninggoals andb.selectthemostappropriateWeb2.0toolwhichfitsspecificlearningneeds.

Figure1:Bloom’sDigitalTaxonomy(Churches,2009:5)

Fromapedagogicalpointofview,whileplanningaWeb2.0-based lesson,teachersshouldalsotakeintoaccounttheirlearners’interestsandlevelsofdigitalliteracy.AsThomas(2009)argues,itisnotwisetoassumethatalllearnersaredigitalnativeswhocanautomaticallyfitthemselves intoadigital learningenvironmentandremainhighlyengaged.Furthermore,awell-designedWeb2.0-basedlessonshouldensuredynamicsincollaborationbreakingdownthe larger class into more defined and precise learning groups (Arnold et al., 2012). Theextenttowhichstate-schoolEFLteachersneedtolearnhowtoharnesstheWeb2.0powerfollowing specific lesson planning strategies is one of themain research questions of thepresentstudy.

system are co-dependent and reconstitute each other continuously engendering learning that ismeaningfultolearners(Heo&Lee,2013).3 Due to the dramatic changes in technology and education over the last two decades, there is arevised model of Bloom's Taxonomy which provides an even more powerful tool to fit today’steachers’needs.ThestructureoftheRevisedTaxonomyTablematrix“providesaclear,concisevisualrepresentation” (Krathwohl, 2002) of the alignment between standards and educational goals,objectives,products,andactivities.


36

3.TheGreekstate-schoolcontext3.1.CurriculaThecurrentEFLcurricula,theCross-thematicCurriculum (2003)andtheUnifiedCurriculumfor Foreign Languages (2011), seem to encourage the use of ICTs to achieve specificeducational goals. They aim at a multimodal approach to EFL learning that Jewitt (2006)describesasacreativecombinationoftext,audioandimageinordertoproducemeaningaswellasenhance interactionand learning in theclassroom.Theyalsoencouragetheuseoftechnological aids which can increase motivation engaging learners in realisticcommunication contexts (Crabbe, 2007). In particular, the cross-thematic curriculumencourages teachers to develop learners’ EFL literacy andmultilingualism/multiculturalismaround a cross-thematic framework where technology is exploited as a pedagogical tool.Similarly,accordingtotheunifiedcurriculumforforeignlanguages,theteacherisexpectedto utilizemultimedia applications combining text, sound, graphics, pictures and animationthusaddingmotivationandinteractivitytoEFLteachingandlearning.3.2.The‘NewSchool’ProjectThe‘NewSchool’project4startedintheschoolyear2011-2012inordertoformthebasisofstate-schooleducationintheforthcomingyears.‘NewSchool’aimstoimprovethelearningoutcomes by promoting the digital, innovative andmultilingual/multicultural education inordertocovertheneweducationalneedsandchallengesofthe21stcentury. ICTsseemtobe the cornerstone with the aim to incorporate new technologies fully into the newcurriculum and the actual state-school practice. ‘New School’ suggests that ICTs have thepotentialtochangetheteachers’roleregardingthemethodsofinstructionandassessment.ICTs form the basis of modern pedagogical theories and methodologies creating a moreflexible learningenvironment thatpromotesexperiential andexploratory learning throughlearners’activeparticipationinthelearningprocess.Tothisend,highpriorityisgiventothedevelopmentofbothteachers’andlearners’digitalliteraciesthroughICTswhichhavebeenalreadyintegratedintoprimaryandsecondaryschoolsasaseparatecourse.3.3.EducationalmaterialTheschooltextbooksthataretaughtinpublicprimaryandsecondaryschoolsinGreecearenowinteractiveandcanbefoundonline.TheinteractivebooksprogramwasdevelopedbytheComputerTechnologyInstituteandPress‘Diophantus’thatisaresearchandtechnologyorganizationfocusingonresearchanddevelopmentinICTs.Inparticular,therehasbeenanattempt to ‘digitalize’ theschool textbooksbyofferingall the textbookmaterialonscreenand /or supplementing it with extra audiovisual aids and software. The Ministry ofEducation,ResearchandReligiousAffairshasdevelopededucationalsoftwareforallschoolsubjects both in primary and secondary education since the beginning of the 2000s.Software and multimedia material for EFL purposes is available at the official WebEducationalGateoftheMinistryofEducation5withtheaimoffamiliarizinglearnerswithEFLformsandfunctionsinseveralcommunicativecontextsfosteringatthesametimelearners’target-cultureawareness.Extradigitaleducational content isalsoavailable in theNationalAggregatorofEducationalContent6(‘Photodentro’)tosupplementthetextbookmaterial.

4http://1dim-aei-thess.thess.sch.gr/neo%20sxoleio.pdf5http://e-yliko.minedu.gov.gr 6http://photodentro.edu.gr/


37

3.4.TechnicalsupportThe Greek School Network (GSN- http://www.sch.gr/) is the official network and servicesprovider for all public primary and secondary schools since 2000. It is the largest publicnetwork in Greece regarding the number of users it serves by interconnecting and alsoconnecting to the internetmore than 15.000 schools, a community of 1.350.000 learnersandabout160.000teachers.Itprovidesaccesstostandardcommunicationtoolslikee-mailandinternet,aswellasdiscussionforumsandmoreadvancedinformaticsserviceslikeweb-casting,teleconferencingandVideoonDemandcoveringtheeducationalneedsofthenewWeb 2.0 era by allowing users to benefit from e-learning systems. Moreover, the GSNprovides teachers, learners and parents with useful information to ensure safe internetaccess following the guidelines of the Ministry of Education which promotes the ‘SaferInternet’program(saferinternet.gr) incollaborationwiththeGreekCentreofSafeInternetandtheEuropeanCommission.3.5.PedagogicalsupportPedagogicalguidanceistypicallyprovidedbytheschooladvisorswhoareteacherswithhighacademicandprofessionalqualificationsofficiallyselectedandappointedbytheMinistryofEducation.SchooladvisorsareexpectedtobefamiliarwiththetargetteachingsituationandtheEFLpractice/routineoftheirtraineesintheGreekschoolcontextinordertotakeactionwhenever and wherever needed. In particular, school advisors should help EFL teachersdevelop flexibility in selecting innovative teaching techniques, tools and materials,familiarize themselves with issues of educational technology, develop awareness andpositiveattitudetowardsnewtechnologiesaswellasbeabletodesignmotivatingcourseswithWeb2.0toolsinapedagogicallyefficientway7.Itisworth-noticing,however,thatstateEFLteachershaveneverbeeninvolvedinICT-LevelB8 trainingseminars (howtouse ICTs in theeducationalprocess)although theseseminarshave been systematically organized by the Ministry of Education for other state-schoolteachersthelastdecade.Inotherwords,thereisatraining‘gap’tobefilledinordertocoverstateEFLteachers’professionalneedtobecomeawareofnewtechnologiesandusethemeffectivelyintheclassroom.4.Researchmethodology4.1.Amixed-methodapproachThemethodology selected is the ‘mixedmethod’ research combining both a quantitativeandqualitativeapproachtodatagatheringinordertocorroboratefindings.Thequantitativestudy includedaquestionnaireadministeredto in-servicestateEFLteachersvia internet inorder to investigate themain researchquestions. Thequantitativedatawereanalyzedvia

7 School advisors’ main responsibilities include teachers’ in-service training, monitoring theeducationalprocess,schoolteachers’counsellingandpedagogicalguidanceaswellasremedialworkontheirpossibledeficiencies(PresidentialDecree1340/16-10-02).8 ICT-LevelBtrainingaddressestoall in-serviceprimaryandsecondaryschoolteachers inGreece. Itaims to train state-school teachers in thepedagogicaluseof ICTs in the fieldof their specializationfocusingonplanningtechnology-baseddidacticscenarios.Thereisalsoformalassessmentoftrainees’specialised ICT skills after receiving their training. It is worth-mentioning, however, that foreignlanguageteachershavenotbeenincludedinICT-LevelBtrainingsofar.


38

SPSS in order to achieve both descriptive statistics to measure frequencies (raw data,percentagesandtables)aswellascorrelationsbetweenvariablesthroughcross-tabulationsandthechi-squaretest. InternalconsistencyreliabilitywasalsomeasuredbytheCronbachAlphacoefficientsoastoensurethereliabilityandvalidityofthedata(formoredetailsseethe sub-section 5.1 and the Appendix). The quantitative survey was combined with thequalitative study which involved in-service school advisors as a ‘focus group’ and wasconductedthroughe-mail interviewstocollectopen-endeddata,that isdataderivedfromopen-endedquestions,withtheprimaryintentofdevelopingthemesrelatedtotheresearchpurpose. Qualitative analysis of interview data included data reduction to make themmanageable, anddata codingbasedon the researchquestionsby identifying, categorizingand synthesizing the emerging themes through conceptualization (Creswell, 2009). Theresearcher followed a ‘concurrent’ procedure by converging quantitative and qualitativedata in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of the research problem by collectingbothformsofdataatthesametimeduringthestudyandthenintegratingtheinformationintheinterpretationoftheoverallresults(Johnson&Christensen,2004).4.2.AimandresearchquestionsThemainaimwastoexploretheextenttowhichWeb2.0technologiesareintegratedintotheEFLclassroomof theGreekstateschoolgiventhatpreviousstudies inGreecehadnotfocusedonthestate-schoolcontext.ByaskingbothstateEFLteachersandschooladvisorsitwas aimed to find out whether Web 2.0 technologies are used as an integral and/or asmallerpartofthelessonaswellaswhetherstateEFLteachersareadequatelytrainedandconfidenttoexploitpedagogicallytheWeb2.0toolsandthedigitalmaterialprovidedbytheMinistryofEducation.Theresearchquestionswerethefollowing:

1) TowhatextentarestateEFLteachersawareofWeb2.0technologiesandusethemintheirclassroom?

2) To what extent are teachers aware of the pedagogical theories and teachingmethodsunderlyingWeb2.0tools?

3) To what extent are teachers trained and/or do they feel confident to implementWeb2.0tools?

4) TowhatextentdoestheGreekstate-schoolcontextfavorWeb2.0implementation?5) Whichstate-schoolfactorsarebarriersagainstWeb2.0integration?6) WhatsolutionsaretobeputforwardtowardstheeffectiveWeb2.0integration?

4.3.Researchtools4.3.1.QuestionnaireThequestionnairewas constructedusingGoogle Forms9; itwasdevelopedupon themainaim and the research questions and administered online. It was first piloted to three EFLteachers and then administered through the internet forwarding the questionnaire linkalongwitha cover letter to in-service state-schoolEFL teachersbye-mail. Themajorityofquestions were stated according to the Likert-type scaling mainly to measure levels ofimportance,frequencyandawareness. 9Questionnairelink:https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1SDfcM2REqMRaUtqk9jsUe1hxttHVY8t5pI8afKM1Wi4/viewform?ts=56b058c4&edit_requested=true


39

4.3.2.E-mailinterviewThequalitativedatawerecollectedthroughe-mailinterviews.Theaimwastogainadeeperinsightintothemainresearchquestionsandtheitemsinthequestionnaire.Sixopen-endedinterview questions triggered an exploratory ‘in-depth conversation’ with the schooladvisorsinalignmentwiththeresearchquestionsofthepresentstudy.Theschooladvisorswere invited toexpress theirownperceptionsandviewsabout theactualuseofWeb2.0technologiesintheEFLclassroombasedontheirpersonalexperiencefromtheGreekstate-schoolcontextaswellastheirnotablepedagogicalandacademicbackground.4.4.SamplingTheresearcheroptedforanon-probabilitypurposivesampleusingtwosamplingtechniques:conveniencesamplingandsnowballing.Concerningthequantitativesurvey,membersofthetargetpopulation(in-servicestateEFLteachersinGreece)wereselectedtakingintoaccountthegeographicalproximity,availability,easyaccessibilityaswellaspersonalacquaintances.Subsequently, someof theparticipants forwarded thequestionnaire tomoreEFL teachersand a ‘chain’ reaction followed (Cohenet al., 2007;Dornyei, 2003). Regarding the samplesize,theresearcherattemptedtoachieveaconsiderablesamplesizetoallowforstatisticallysignificantresults.Eventually149in-servicestate-schoolEFLteachersfromdifferentregionsparticipated in the research. In a similarway, the researcher selected the sample for thequalitativesurveywhicheventuallyengaged7schooladvisors.5.Researchfindings:Discussionandimplications5.1.Statisticallysignificantresults-Cronbach’sAlphaStatisticalanalysis revealsanumberof correlationswith statistical significanceafter cross-tabulatingthefindingsusingthechi-squaretest10.To begin with, education analysis indicates that the majority of respondents who hold aMaster’s degree aremoderately/extremely aware ofWeb 2.0 technologies, know how toplanaWeb2.0-basedlessonandfeelconfidenttodoso(seeAppendix;Crosstabs1,2,3)11.Onthecontrary,mostteachersholdingonlyaBachelor’sdegreearenotatall/slightlyawareofWeb2.0toolsand,consequently,theydonotknow/feelconfidenthowtoplanaWeb2.0- 10 Cross-tabulation provides information about the relationship between the variables and the chi-squaretestisusedfortestingthestatisticalsignificanceofthecross-tabulationtable.Inotherwords,chi-squaretestswhetherornottwovariablesareindependent.Ifthevariablesarerelated,thentheresults of the statistical test will be ‘statistically significant’ and we ‘are able to reject the nullhypothesis’,whichmeansthatwecanstatethatthereissomerelationshipbetweenthevariables.Ifthevariablesarerelated(i.e.theobservedtablerelationshipswouldoccurwithverylowprobability,say only 5%) thenwe say that the results are ‘stati

Volume 9 February 2018 Research Papers In Language Teaching...

Documents

Transcript of Volume 9 February 2018 Research Papers In Language Teaching...