Research Article

Exploring Thai EFL pre-service teachers’ technology integration based on SAMR model

Atipat Boonmoh 1 , Intrira Kulavichian 2 *
More Detail
1 School of Liberal Arts, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok, THAILAND2 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University, Nakhon Pathom, THAILAND* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), October 2023, ep457, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13567
Published Online: 11 August 2023, Published: 01 October 2023
OPEN ACCESS   1987 Views   1469 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study investigated how Thai EFL pre-service teachers (PSTs) use technology in their classrooms and the level of substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition (SAMR) they implement. Seven English education majors enrolled in the course “teaching internship 2” in their fourth year at a Thai university participated in the study. Due to COVID-19, the participants were trained to teach online, but during their teaching practicum, they were required to teach in a traditional on-site setting. Because of this novel arrangement, it was essential to investigate how these PSTs incorporate technology into the classroom. For the purpose of analyzing the process of educational technology integration, this study employed SAMR model. Observations and semi-structured interviews were used as data collection methods. Throughout the semester, observations were conducted twice. SAMR observation form was used to investigate how PSTs used technology in their teaching. Participants were asked to participate in an interview after each observation. The interviews included open-ended questions based on the conceptual framework of SAMR. Observation results show that technological tools were used to engage students, check comprehension, create teaching content, and evaluate students’ understanding. For the study, the participants were divided into three groups based on the extent of technological tools used. One participant was deemed to be in the substitution stage, five participants in the augmentation stage, and only one participant in the modification stage. The results of the interviews indicated that teacher motivation and the availability of ICT equipment, as well as familiarity with technological tools, played a significant role in PSTs’ integration of technology into the classroom. The study’s conclusions are helpful in developing PSTs’ technology integration in EFL classrooms. SAMR model should be introduced to PSTs to let them critically reflect on and develop their own technology integration.
Keywords: EFL, pre-service teachers, SAMR model, Thai students, technology integration

CITATION (APA)

Boonmoh, A., & Kulavichian, I. (2023). Exploring Thai EFL pre-service teachers’ technology integration based on SAMR model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep457. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13567

REFERENCES

  1. Abbott, C. (2001). ICT: Changing education. Psychology Press.
  2. Akayoglu, S., Satar, H. M., Dikilitas, K., Cirit, N. C., & Korkmazgil, S. (2020). Digital literacy practices of Turkish pre-service EFL teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4711
  3. Akcil, U., Uzunboylu, H., & Kinik, E. (2021). Integration of technology to learning-teaching processes and google workspace tools: A literature review. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(9) 5018. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095018
  4. Al-Khalidi, I., & Nizwa, O. (2021). Examining teachers’ beliefs on developing a digital pedagogical framework based on SAMR model for undergraduate English language learning. International Journal of English Language Education, 9(1), 106-125. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijele.v9i1.18306
  5. Almalki, A. (2020). Integration of technology among Saudi EFL teachers. English Language Teaching, 13(8), 160-167. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n8p160
  6. Alonso, R. R., Plaza, I. R., & Orfali, C. H. (2019). Barriers in teacher perception about the use of technology for evaluation in higher education. Digital Education Review, 35, 170-185. https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2019.35.170-185
  7. Balbay, S., & Kilis, S. (2017). Students’ perceptions of the use of a YouTube channel specifically designed for an academic speaking skills course. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 235-251. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.461003
  8. Baytak, A., Tarman, B., & Ayas, C. (2011). Experiencing technology integration in education: Children’s perceptions. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 3(2), 139-151.
  9. Boonmoh, A., Jumpakate, T., & Karpklon, S. (2022a). A close look at the use of technology by Thai teachers in secondary EFL classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal (CALL-EJ), 23(1), 78-107. http://callej.org/journal/23-1/Boonmoh-Jumpakate-Karpklon2022.pdf
  10. Boonmoh, A., Jumpakate, T., Saengmanee, S., & Rungkaew, T. (2022b). Integration of Technology During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experience, Challenges and Needs of Thai EFL Teachers. REFLections, 29(2), 251-277. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/reflections/article/view/259346
  11. Buasuwan, P. (2018). Rethinking Thai higher education for Thailand 4.0. Asian Education and Development Studies, 7(2), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-07-2017-0072
  12. Budiman, A., Rahmawati, R., & Ulfa, R. A. (2018). EFL teacher’s belief and practice on integrating ICT in the classroom: A case study on the implementation of SAMR Model in teaching reading descriptive text at MA Assalam, Sukoharjo. Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora [Journal of Humanities Research], 19(2), 39-51. https://doi.org/10.23917/humaniora.v19i2.6809
  13. Canbay, F. (2020). EFL teachers’ views about technology integration in English language teaching: A case study. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 10(2), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.10.2.16425
  14. Carlos, J. (2021). Elementary school teachers’ implementation of the substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition model in their instruction [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University].
  15. Cepeda-Moya, V. E., & Argudo-Serrano, J. C. (2022). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions on introducing SAMR model into their classroom. Revista Arbitrada Interdisciplinaria Koinonía [Interdisciplinary Arbitrated Journal Koinonia], 7(1), 65-94. https://doi.org/10.35381/r.k.v7i1.1679
  16. Chaaban, Y., & Ellili-Cherif, M. (2017). Technology integration in EFL classrooms: A study of Qatari independent schools. Education and Information Technologies, 22(5), 2433-2454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9552-3
  17. Ciampa, K., & Gallagher, T. L. (2013). Getting in touch: Use of mobile devices in the elementary classroom. Computers in the Schools, 30(4), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.846716
  18. Creighton, T. B. (2018). Digital natives, digital immigrants, digital learners–An international empirical integrative review of the literature. ICPEL Education Leadership Review, 19(1), 132-140.
  19. Ertmer, P. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53(4), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683
  20. Geer, R., White, B., Zeegers, Y., Au, W., & Barnes, A. (2015). Emerging pedagogies for the use of iPads in schools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12381
  21. Gilakjani, A. (2013). Factors contributing to teachers’ use of computer technology in the classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(3), 262-267. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2013.010317
  22. Goodman, J. (2017). Unpacking the narrative of educational failure: Thailand in the standardized testing era. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Thai Studies: Globalized Thailand? Connectivity, Conflict, and Conundrums of Thai Studies (pp. 15-18).
  23. Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433-441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y
  24. Howard, B., McGee, S., Schwartz, N., & Purcell, S. (2000). The experience of constructivism: Transforming teacher epistemology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(4), 455-462. https://doi.org/10.1080/08886504.2000.10782291
  25. Howlett, G., & Zainee, W. (2019). 21st century learning skills and autonomy: Students’ perceptions of mobile devices in the Thai EFL context. Teaching English with Technology, 19(1), 72-85.
  26. Idowu, S. O., & Gbadebo, A. D. (2017). Extent of utilization of information and communication technology tools by English language teachers in Ijebu-Ode and Odogbolu local government areas of Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 9(4), 589-596.
  27. Jose, J., & Abidin, Z. (2015). Application of information and communication technology tools for English language teaching in an Omani context. Arab World English Journal, 6(2), 51-67.
  28. Kannan, J., & Munday, P. (2018). New trends in second language learning and teaching through the lens of ICT, networked learning, and artificial intelligence. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación [Circle of Applied Communication Linguistics], 76, 13-30. https://doi.org/10.5209/CLAC.62495
  29. Khamprem, K., & Boonmoh, A. (2019). Teachers’ stated needs and their actual use of technology. Human Behavior, Development and Society, 20(4), 41-51. https://so01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/hbds/article/view/193626/154899
  30. Khatoony, S., & Nezhadmehr, M. (2020). EFL teachers’ challenges in the integration of technology for online classrooms during coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in Iran. AJELP: Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, 8(2), 89-104.
  31. Lamb, M., & Arisandy, F. E. (2020). The impact of online use of English on motivation to learn. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(1-2), 85-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1545670
  32. Leu Jr, D. J., & Kinzer, C. K. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with Networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(1), 108-127. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.35.1.8
  33. Liu, H., Lin, C. H., Zhang, D., & Zheng, B. (2018). Chinese language teachers’ perception of technology and instructional use of technology: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(3), 396-414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117708313
  34. Martin, T. J. (2020). The effect of teacher perceptions and self-efficacy for technology with the use of SAMR model [Doctoral dissertation, Wingate University].
  35. McGarr, O., & Gallchóir, C. Ó. (2020). Exploring pre-service teachers’ justifications for one to-one technology use in schools: implications for initial teacher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 29(4), 477-490. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2020.1784261
  36. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
  37. Mirzajani, H., Rosnaini, M., Ayub, A. F. M., & Wong, S. L. (2016). Teachers’ acceptance of ICT and its integration in the classroom. Quality Assurance in Education, 24(1), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-06-2014-0025
  38. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  39. Mundy, M. A., Kupczynski, L., & Kee, R. (2012). Teacher’s perceptions of technology use in the schools. Sage Open, 2(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012440813
  40. Muslimin, A. I., Mukminatien, N., & Ivone, F. M. (2023). TPACK-SAMR digital literacy competence, technostress, and teaching performance: Correlational study among EFL lecturers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2), ep409. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12921
  41. Mustafa, C., & Sinan, A. (2021). Self-efficacy beliefs of pre-service teachers on technology integration. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.961820
  42. Office of the Teacher Civil Service and Educational Personnel Commission. (2011). Circular letter of OTEPC. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.961820
  43. Ondrashek, N. (2019). 21st century learning [Master’s thesis, Northwestern College].
  44. Park, M., & Son, J.-B. (2020). Pre-service EFL teachers’ readiness in computer-assisted language learning and teaching. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 42(2) 320-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1815649
  45. Petersen, K. & Sachs, R. (2016). 1. The language classroom in the age of networked learning. In R. Leow, L. Cerezo, & M. Baralt (Ed.), A psycholinguistic approach to technology and language learning (pp. 3-22). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614513674-004
  46. Puentedura, R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/
  47. Puentedura, R. (2014). Building transformation: An introduction to SAMR model. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/08/22/BuildingTransformation_AnIntroductionToSAMR.pdf
  48. Puentedura, R. (2014). Learning, technology, and SAMR model: Goals, processes, and practice. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/06/29/LearningTechnologySAMRModel.pdf
  49. Ranellucci, J., Rosenberg, J. M., & Poitras, E. G. (2020). Exploring pre‐service teachers’ use of technology: The technology acceptance model and expectancy-value theory. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(6), 810-824. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12459
  50. Sabti, A. A., & Chaichan, R. S. (2014). Saudi high school students’ attitudes and barriers toward the use of computer technologies in learning English. SpringerPlus, 3(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-460
  51. Schmid, M., Brianza, E. M., & Petko, D. (2021). Self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers in relation to digital technology use in lesson plans. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106586
  52. Serhan, D. (2020). Transitioning from face-to-face to remote learning: Students’ attitudes and perceptions of using Zoom during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 335-342. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.148
  53. Setyaningsih, E., Wahyuni, D. S., & Rochsantiningsih, D. (2020). Mapping Indonesian EFL teachers’ perception and practice of technology integration. International Journal of Education, 13(1), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.17509/ije.v13i1.22643
  54. Shevchenko, M. V. (2015). The role of authentic videos in teaching English at technical universities. Advanced Education, 4, 66-70. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.57306
  55. Spaulding, M. (2013). Preservice and in-service teachers’ perceptions toward technology benefits and integration. Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 9(1), 67-78.
  56. Taghizadeh, M., & Hasani Yourdshahi, Z. (2020). Integrating technology into young learners’ classes: Language teachers’ perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8), 982-1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1618876
  57. Taj, I. H., Fatimah, A., Sipra, M. A., & Ahmad, W. (2017). Effect of technology enhanced language learning on EFL reading comprehension at tertiary level. Arab World English Journal, 8(1), 108-129. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol8no1.9
  58. Tomczyk, Ł. (2020). Attitude to ICT and self-evaluation of fluency in using new digital devices, websites and software among pre-service teachers. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(19), 200-212. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i19.16657
  59. Tseng, J.-J. (2019). Do EFL teachers transform their teaching with iPads? A TPACK-SAMR approach. In C. N. Giannikas, E. Kukouli Constantinou, & S. Papadima-Sophocleous (Eds.), Professional development in CALL: A selection of papers (pp. 71-85). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2019.28.871
  60. Tunjera, N., & Chigona, A. (2020). Teacher educators’ appropriation of TPACK-SAMR models for 21st century pre-service teacher preparation. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 16(3), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.2020070110
  61. Vo, T. K. A., Pang, V., & Wah, L. K. (2020). Evaluating Vietnam’s pre-service English teacher education program for technology integration in education. Call-Ej, 21(3), 8-22.
  62. Vungthong, S., Djonov, E., & Torr, J. (2017). Factors contributing to Thai teachers’ uptake of tablet technology in EFL primary classrooms. Asian EFL Journal, 19(2), 8-28.
  63. Wang, A. Y. (2022). Understanding levels of technology integration: A TPACK scale for EFL teachers to promote 21st-century learning. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 9935-9952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11033-4
  64. Wang, Y. C., & Hsu, L. (2020). Shall We go to the MALL?–Students’ perceptions of a business English learning app. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 10(2), 110-116. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2020.10.2.1348
  65. Warsen, G., & Vandermolen, R. (2020). When technology works: A case study using instructional rounds and SAMR model. ICPEL Educational Leadership Review, 21(1), 163-177.
  66. Wiangsima, A., & Boonmoh, A. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions for teaching English in the near future. Journal of Liberal Arts, Ubon Ratchathani University, 14(2), 270-310. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jla_ubu/article/view/242363