Several participants expressed that they used technology both for professional and recreational purposes. One of its main advantages frequently mentioned was that it helped them work more effectively without having to leave the comfort of their homes (Erika, Richárd, László, Evelyn). Evelyn, for example, who often takes on proofreading and translating tasks, said that it had become very economical not having to physically go and fetch copies of texts. Erika and László said that technology was excellent for research purposes because the Internet is basically a huge scientific database, provided one knows where to find what they were looking for. Kálmán added that usually the technological alternative is more environmentally conscious, for example when it comes to sending out handouts as opposed to printing them in hundreds of copies. He said that properly digitalised texts (e.g., document formats instead of image scans) also contributed to better indexing; one can easily find something in a longer document by using the search option. Richárd added that technology makes it easy to take care of grocery shopping or makes it possible to order virtually anything.

However, the participants also elaborated on the disadvantages of technology. Erika expressed that there was a pressure to always be up to date concerning the news, and this pressure also affects online newswriting, and sometimes results in the quick spreading of fake news. Éva said that there were also home-office related problems, “you have to be on standby, this is basically demanded by colleagues and students, you have to reply to their messages immediately”. László said that technology was counterproductive if it was not used effectively, as he put it, “there is the illusion of effectiveness, for example there are endless online meetings and e-mail chains; we write an email which does not solve anything, but it gives us the illusion of having done something”. Both László and Erzsébet said that they liked experimenting with technology a lot, it was a research interest of theirs, but even they sometimes felt pressure to stay updated about recent development. Some participants detailed that while technology was something they liked investing their time and efforts in as a research area, it was difficult for them to divide the line between optimal and too much use. Albert said that he did everything he could to separate his professional and private digital persona, for example he paid much attention to using Facebook for personal purposes only and preferred the LSM system to keep in touch with his students. The same is true when it came to correspondence, he had a personal and a work email address, each with its dedicated purpose.

 

While the informants were experts in the field, the negative experiences they had with technology, especially the hidden need to be constantly available and always reply to inquiries, their beliefs concerning the usefulness of technology were not altered. It seems as though positive experiences can counterweight the negatives, especially if one’s digital competences are relatively well-developed; thus, the individual’s realisation and the ability to identify when technology use is counterproductive psychologically or physiologically develops their digital competences (EU, 2015; ICTLP, 2007). Perhaps by being reflective on these issues surrounding technology use in their teaching practices (Aşık et al., 2020; Graham et al., 2012; Tezci, 2011), the instructors as role models can contribute to the development of their learners’ such competences too.