Iranian EFL Learners’ Stance towards Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning (TEPLL) for Developing Productive Skills: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective
Subject Areas :
Fatemeh Moazami Godarzi
1
,
Hossein Heidari Tabrizi
2
,
Azizeh Chalak
3
1 -
2 -
3 -
Keywords: Keywords: Self-determination Theory (SDT), Stance, Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning (TEPLL),
Abstract :
Abstract
This study was intended to explore the Iranian EFL learners’ stance towards Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning (TEPLL) and how it influences language development. Specifically, this study investigated the relationships among learners’ stances towards TEPLL, relating to effectiveness, integration into daily life, autonomy, engagement, and satisfaction, with L2 speaking and writing motivation. It also examined how learners’ stances to the instruction of TEPLL were related to their progress in developing productive skills both in speaking and writing. In addition, instructional facets promoting and inhibiting learners’ progress were highlighted. With 120 EFL Iranian learners from five language institutes in Isfahan, Iran, the present project assigned participants to experimental and control groups with 60 persons each, according to the proficiency levels: pre-intermediate, intermediate, and advanced. Data were collected via a Learning Experience Questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The experimental group received instruction in TEPLL through Speechling for speaking practice and through Moodle for writing practice. The results generally indicated a positive stance towards TEPLL; the learners reported high scores regarding perceived effectiveness, ease of integration, autonomy, engagement, and satisfaction. They also demonstrated more motivation concerning the development of L2 speaking and writing. On the other hand, it established the challenges of technical problems, inadequate content, and poor preparation. Interviews with students showed that TEPLL is an excellent tool for practicing speaking and pronunciation but also brought to the surface the demand for better audio-visual quality, more content volume, and individual support. The findings suggest that while potentially very effective in bettering the language learning of Iranian EFL learners, TEPLL has to be administered with caution, and its administration kept under constant review to reduce the potential challenges.
Keywords: Self-determination Theory (SDT), Stance, Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning (TEPLL)
References
Adhami, N., & Taghizadeh, M. (2022). Integrating inquiry-based learning and computer supported collaborative learning into flipped classroom: Effects on academic writing performance and stances of students of railway engineering. Computer Assisted Language Learning 37(1), 1-37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2046107
Al-Badia, A., Khan, A., & Alotaibi, E. (2022). Stances of learners and instructors towards artificial intelligence in personalized learning. Procedia Computer Science, 201, 445–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.03.058
Bärenfänger, O. (2005). Teacher Self-Concept and the Quality of Instruction: The Importance of Belief Systems for Instructional Practices. Waxmann.
Blake, R. J. (2013). The rise of multimedia and interactive multimedia language learning software. Routledge.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge University Press.
Chrysafiadi, K., & Virvou, M. (2013). eLearning and adaptive educational environments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 450-457.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.080
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1978). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation. American Psychologist.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Fernet, C., & Austin, S. (2014). The role of self-determination in educational contexts: Theory, research, and applications. Academic Press.
Forschungsgemeinschaft, D. (2000). Proposals for the Further Development of the German Science System. Wiley-VCH.
Hajmohammadi, E., & Aghayani, B. (2022). A study on motivation and locus of control among male and female EFL learners. MEXTESOL Journal, 46(2), 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.61871/mj.v46n2-13
Hart, L. (1983). Human brain and human learning. Longman.
Heirati, J., & Alashti, L. A. (2015). Stances toward using the Internet for language learning: A case of Iranian English teachers and learners. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology, 4(1), 63-78.
https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrset.2015.1266
Jalili, M. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Flipped Learning on Iranian EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Knowledge and Motivation. Journal of Language and Education, 9(2), 128–141.
Khan, M. S., Khan, I., & Al-Khanjari, Z. A. (2016). Stances of Students about the Effectiveness of Using Technology in Learning English as a Foreign Language in Oman. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 11(10), 19.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported collaboration and interaction. ReCALL, 20(3), 271-289.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344008000335
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford University Press.
Liton, H. A. (2015). Examining students’ stance & efficacy of using technology in teaching English. International Journal of Education and Information Technology, 1(1), 11-19.
Lian, A.-P., & Sangarun, P. (2017). The evolution of personalized learning and its impact on language education. TechTrends, 61(1), 25-31.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0115-8
Lu, J., Hallinger, P., & Showanasai, P. (2018). A systematic review of the relationship between personalized learning and self-regulated learning. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 11(1), 22-40.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-04-2017-0007
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Morgan, G. (2008). Teacher education and globalization: The global-local encounter. Routledge.
Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2019). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 49(1), 57-85.
O’Dwyer, L. M., Russell, M., Bebell, D., & Seeley, K. (2005). Examining the relationship between students’ technology use and standardized test performance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(4), 329–348.
Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37(2), 163–178.
Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 183–203). University of Rochester Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.
Saeedi, M., & Farnia, M. (2017). The relationship between anxiety and writing performance in EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(1), 1-8.
Schwartz, B. I., & Ryan, R. M. (2019). The role of self-determination in educational contexts: Theory, research, and applications. Academic Press.
Sari, D. R., Stout, D. W., & others. (2017). The impact of anxiety on working memory and academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(3), 309-320.
Stickler, U., & Shi, L. (2019). Technology in language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 52(1), 71–84.
Thomas, G., & Swamy, R. (2024). The impact of Brain-Based Learning on students’ academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(1), 45-58.
UNESCO. (1998). World education report 1998: Teachers and teaching in a changing world. UNESCO Publishing.
US Department of Education. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan update. U.S. Department of Education.
https://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2017
Vavougios, D. (2022). The role of relaxed alertness in reducing L2 writing anxiety. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 18(2), 123-135.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia language teaching (pp. 3-20). Logos International.
Warschauer, M., & Meskill, C. (2013). Technology and second language teaching. In J. Cummings & C. D. Davison (Eds.), Handbook of English language teaching (Vol. 15, pp. 123-134). Springer.
Webb, M., & Doman, E. (2018). Impacts of flipped classrooms on learner stances towards technology-enhanced language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5), 595-612. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1557692
Wu, et al. (2014). Ubiquitous personalized English reading system based on RFID technology. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 43(2), 165-182.
Yang, D. (2019). Learning differences and personalized learning in classroom settings: A review of educational psychology research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(2), 206-222.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000291
Zhan, H., & Yang, D. (2020). The impact of personalized learning on student engagement and achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 1-23.
