Imre Fekete: Technology in English teaching • The Hungarian university context
›
3. Research Methods
›
3.2. Study 2: The Instructors’ Questionnaire Study
›
3.2.2. The Main Study

3.2.2. The Main Study

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

The main English Studies and EFL Teacher Education instructor questionnaire was informed by both the large-scale learner questionnaire (3.1.2) and the piloted instructor survey (3.2.1). Thanks to this considerable advantage, the pilot and the main instrument of the instructor questionnaire were, in the end, identical.
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

3.2.2.1 Research Questions. The main English Studies and EFL Teacher Education instructor questionnaire sought answers to the following research questions:

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  • Study2RQ1. To what extent are ICT devices accepted by Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
  • Study2RQ2. To what extent are ICT devices available for Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
  • Study2RQ3. For what main reasons do teachers of English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes use ICT devices?
  • Study2RQ4. What are the perceptions of Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes about their digital competences?
  • Study2RQ5. How willing are Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes to develop their digital competences?
  • Study2RQ6. What are the connections between the digital competences and the other surveyed dimensions of ICT use such as acceptance and availability of ICT devices, willingness to use and develop in using ICT devices of Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
  • Study2RQ7. Which ICT use dimensions influence the instructional use of technology of Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
  • Study2RQ8. What statistically significant differences do teaching experience and gender as individual variables show in the ICT use of Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
  • Study2RQ9. In what ways did the spring and autumn 2020 Covid-19-triggered emergency remote teaching periods affect the teaching methodology and digital competences of Hungarian university instructors teaching in English Studies and EFL teacher education programmes?
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

3.2.2.2 The Data Collection Instrument. The data collection instrument of the main study consisted of 71 items organised into 15 constructs. The main instrument was identical with the piloted version of the questionnaire (3.2.1) because it was informed by the learner questionnaire which had already undergone a validation and a large-scale administration process. The constructs of the questionnaire and the number of items in each scale are detailed here, while the item pool of the entire questionnaire is reproduced in Appendix C:

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  1. Acceptance of ICT devices (5 items). Sample item: I think using ICT devices confidently is part of one’s basic skills nowadays. Definition: The extent to which participants hold positive attitudes and are accepting of ICT devices (Ham & Cha, 2009; Kozma, 2008; Tondeur et al., 2007a; Voogt & Pelgrum, 2005).
  2. Availability of ICT devices (5 items). Sample item: An ICT device is usually available for me to use. Definition: The extent to which ICT devices are available for the participants in their daily lives, and what features (e.g., Internet connection) do the available devices have (Kárpáti, 2012; MDOS, 2016).
  3. Reasons for using ICT devices (5 items). Sample item: I think nowadays one can be expected to be able to use ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which participants regard the use of ICT devices part of the basic skills of the 21st century (Davies, 2011; Drent & Meelissen, 2008; EU, 2018; Tongori, 2012).
  4. Willingness to use ICT devices (4 items). Sample item: I feel that it is important to get to know new ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that they are willing to develop their ICT skills (EU, 2016; ICTLP, 2007; Vuorikari et al., 2016).
  5. Devoted time (4 items). Sample item: I feel that I devote enough time to develop my knowledge on ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that they need to invest time into learning more and staying up to date about technology (Bayne & Ross, 2011; Drent & Meelissen, 2008; Mossberger et al., 2008).
  6. Opportunities for ICT skills development (7 items). Sample item: I feel that I have every possibility to be up to date in using ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which informants feel that they have the necessary opportunities to develop their ICT knowledge (EU, 2018; Kler et al., 2013; Selinger, 2001).
  7. Substitution: ICT use over personal contact (5 items). Sample item: I think it’s natural nowadays that my students send me their assignments electronically. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that technology can substitute personal contacts in the form of, e.g., online meetings or online assignment handling, such as receiving and providing feedback on assignments (EU, 2015; 2016; ICTLP, 2007).
  8. Using ICT devices for instruction (4 items). Sample item: Classroom management is more organised and transparent thanks to ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which participants use ICT devices for instruction, and how much they feel that using technology for teaching processes (including software, applications, webpages) contributes to more efficient student learning (BECTA, 2003; Lei et al., 2021; Mishra & Koehler, 2006).
  9. Digital competences 1: Creating and sharing content (5 items). Sample item: I can use content created by others for my personal needs using ICT devices. Definition: The extent to which participants perceive that they can create, edit, and share digital content created by themselves or others using technology (EU, 2015; 2016; ICTLP, 2007; Vuorikari et al., 2016).
  10. Digital competences 2: Keeping up with development (5 items). Sample item: I understand how the latest ICT devices work without much difficulty. Definition: The extent to which participants keep up with the development of technology, and how much they feel that they are able to follow and remain up to date about constant updates (EU, 2015; 2016; ICTLP, 2007; Vuorikari et al., 2016).
  11. Digital competences 3: Reliability of digital sources (5 items). Sample item: I can assess the reliability of online sources. Definition: The extent to which informants perceive that they can identify reliable and unreliable, biased, low quality and fake online content (EU, 2015; 2016; ICTLP, 2007; Vuorikari et al., 2016).
  12. Digital competences 4: Using search engines (4 items). Sample item: I can easily use online scientific databases. Definition: The extent to which participants perceive that they can use online search engines such as Google or other common booking engines, e.g., booking accommodation, tickets (EU, 2015; 2016; Vuorikari et al., 2016).
  13. Transitioning to online education (Covid-scale 1; 4 items). Sample item: Transitioning to online education was not much of a burden for me. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that the abrupt transition from traditional to online education was manageable (Fekete & Porkoláb, 2020; Hermann et al., 2021; Hodges et al., 2020).
  14. Effectiveness of online education (Covid-scale 2; 4 items). Sample item: During online education, my students learned as much as if they had had a traditional semester. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that their online lessons were effective and supported their students’ learning processes effectively (Czirfusz et al., 2020; Fekete & Porkoláb, 2020; Hermann et al., 2021; Molnár et al., 2021).
  15. Offline versus online self-image (Covid-scale 3; 5 items). Sample item: I feel more confident when I teach a face-to-face lesson than when I teach an online lesson. Definition: The extent to which participants feel that they are more confident in their teacherly selves in traditional teaching environments as opposed to online instruction (Korlat et al., 2021; Morgan et al., 2021).
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

3.2.2.3 Participants. The study was conducted in the Hungarian university context in the spring and autumn semesters of 2021 involving 71 university instructors of Hungary forming a non-probability convenience sample. Instructors of ten universities participated in the study, 40 (56%) of them taught in both English Studies and EFL Teacher Education programmes, 17 (24%) only in English Studies, eight (12%) only in EFL Teacher Education, three (4%) instructors teach ESP and an additional three (4%) informants taught in English Studies and EFL Teacher Education as well as instructed English for Specific Purposes-related subjects. Altogether, 51 females (72%) and 19 males (27%) participated in the study with an additional informant (1%) wishing not to disclose their gender – a distribution largely similar to the two thirds to one third ratio of females and males in the pilot study. The overall teaching experience of the informants ranged from 4 to 55 years (M = 24.04; SD = 11.13), while their university teaching experience ranged from 1 to 45 years (M = 19.52; SD = 11.24).

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Respondents were asked to rate their perceived technological skills level on a 5-point Likert scale. This self-reported digital competence level grew from an average of 3.52 (SD = 0.88) to 4.15 (SD = 5.77). Simultaneously, on a similar 5-point scale, how much of a burden remote teaching imposed on the informants declined from an average of 3.48 (SD = 1.13) to 2.48 (SD = 1.18) between spring and autumn 2020. Participants revealed that in spring 2020, on average, 62% of their classes were administered real-time either synchronously or asynchronously, while this ratio grew to 89% in autumn 2020. This latter ratio shows no difference between the pilot and the main data collection; thus, it can be assumed that despite the lower number of participants, existing tendencies could be observed; however, the sampling method and the sample size do not allow for generalising the results of this study (Dörnyei & Csizér, 2012).

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

For a comprehensive overview of the respondents participating in the main instructor questionnaire, Table 11 was created. The table displays the total number of participants per university as well as details in which university programmes they teach in. The majority of the participants (n = 51) were involved in teaching methodology or methodology-related subjects, while some of them (n = 17) were involved only in teaching subjects of English Studies programmes that are not related to methodology, and some (n = 3) teach English for Specific Purposes.
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Table 11 An Overview of the Participants of The Main University Instructor Questionnaire
University’s location
Total number of respondents
Teachers of methodology and related subjects
Teachers in the ES programme only
Teachers of ESP only
East 1
8
6
2
–
Budapest 1
9
9
–
–
Northeast 1
3
2
1
–
Budapest 2
9
6
3
–
Budapest 3
1
–
1
–
Northeast 2
6
6
–
–
West 1
5
5
–
–
Budapest 4
23
10
10
3
Southwest 1
2
2
–
–
Southeast 1
5
5
–
–
Total
71
51
17
3
Note. Abbreviations: ES = English Studies programme; ESP = English for specific purposes-related subject teacher.
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

3.2.2.4 Methods of Data Collection. Data was collected with the help of an online Google Forms questionnaire which was administered in the L1 (Hungarian) of the participants. Data collection took place between February and June 2021. At first, participants were recruited via two national email lists: the Hungarian Society for the Study of English (HUSSE) and the Association of Hungarian Applied Linguists and Language Teachers (MANYE). Later, the publicly available email addresses of instructors working in corresponding university programmes were compiled from the websites of the universities and the call for participation was sent to these addresses. Altogether, besides the two circular emails to the HUSSE and MANYE lists, over 200 emails were sent, but a few weeks later, no more responses were registered, and data collection stopped at 71 participants.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Participation in the study was voluntary and anonymous, and it did not take longer than 15 minutes to fill in the questionnaire to maximise response willingness (Dörnyei & Csizér, 2012). To minimise the effects of participants’ social desirability bias (Dörnyei, 2007), they were reassured of response anonymity and encouraged to answer truthfully.
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

3.2.2.5 Methods of Data Analysis. Data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22. Before answering the research questions, construct reliability was tested. Constructs were only accepted as reliable if their Cronbach’s alpha value reached the minimum 0.60 cut-off value as well as if all individual items of the construct loaded to the same dimension applying principal component analysis (Dörnyei & Csizér, 2012). Furthermore, the scales were also tested for skewness and kurtosis following Curran and colleague’s (1996 as cited by Ryu, 2011, p. 1073) cut-off margins of maximum level of skewness = 3 and kurtosis = 21, thus these cut-off values were accepted as normal distribution that allows for running parametric statistical tests on the dataset (Dörnyei & Csizér, 2012; O’Leary, 2017).

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Research questions one to five were answered using descriptive statistics, while the highest and lowest mean values were calculated using paired sample t-tests. To answer research question six, bivariate Pearson correlations were run. To answer the seventh question, linear regression analysis was used for path modelling with the path end being the construct Instructional use of ICT devices. Then, backward, statistically significant predictors were listed until there were only significant links in the model without any more significant predictors found (Székelyi & Barna, 2002). To answer research question eight, independent samples t-tests were run using age group and gender as grouping variables. To answer research question nine, descriptive statistical analyses were run for mean averages and standard deviations, and paired samples t-tests to discover if participants’ perceptions of the first and second covid waves were statistically different. In all cases, the statistical significance level was set to p = 0.05 (APA, 2019; O’Leary, 2017). Reporting of the data follows the standards proposed by the American Psychological Association (APA, 2019).
chevron_left
chevron_right
Tartalomjegyzék navigate_next
Keresés a kiadványban navigate_next
A kereséshez, kérjük, lépj be!
Könyvjelzőim navigate_next
A könyvjelzők használatához
be kell jelentkezned.
Jegyzeteim navigate_next
Jegyzetek létrehozásához
be kell jelentkezned.
    Kiemeléseim navigate_next
    Mutasd a szövegben:
    Szűrés:
    Kiemelések létrehozásához
    MeRSZ+ előfizetés szükséges.
      Útmutató elindítása
      delete
      Kivonat
      fullscreenclose
      printsave