Published in the Canadian Modern Language Review - Volume 56, No. 3, March / mars 2000

To see more articles and book reviews from this and other journals visit UTPJOURNALS online at UTPJOURNALS.com

 

Technophilia vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why Second-Language Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology in Their Classrooms

Yvonne Lam

Abstract: Given the increasing pressure exerted by technological developments on education, it is important to understand the perceived `technophobia' of teachers and to determine whether fear is the underlying factor behind their decisions regarding technology. Oral interviews were conducted with 10 L2 teachers and analyzed for their content in light of the following questions: (1) What are the reasons behind L2 teachers' decisions to use technology for teaching? (2) Why do some L2 teachers choose not to use computers in their teaching? (3) What factors influence these decisions? The main reasons are related to the teacher's personal belief in technology's benefits, or lack thereof, rather than to a resistance to technology. This finding suggests that teachers are not really `technophobic' and that institutions are perhaps overly `technophilic' in their rush to obtain the latest innovations without considering the needs of teachers and students.

Résumé : Etant donné la pression croissante d'intégrer les nouveautés technologiques en éducation, il s'avère important de comprendre la " technophobie " que l'on croit observer chez les enseignant.es et de déterminer si la peur est à la base de leurs décisions concernant la technologie. Cet article résume les analyses d'entrevues faites auprès de 10 enseignant.es de L2. Nous nous sommes penchés sur les questions suivantes: (1) Quelles raisons sont à la base des décisions des enseignant.es de L2 d'utiliser la technologie pour enseigner ? (2) Pourquoi des enseignant.es de L2 ne choisissent-ils pas d'utiliser les ordinateurs pour enseigner ? (3) Quels sont les facteurs qui influencent leurs décisions ? Les raisons principales ont rapport à la conviction de l'enseignant.e des avantages, ou des inconvénients de cette technologie, plutôt qu'à la peur de la technologie. Cette conclusion suggère que les enseignant.es ne sont pas vraiment " technophobes " et que les institutions sont peut-être trop " technophiles " ; elles se seraient précipitées trop rapidement pour se procurer ces dernières innovations sans tenir compte des besoins des enseignant.es et des étudiant.es.

Technology can be acknowledged to be an integral part of teaching today. Whether it be state-of-the-art computers or older VCRs, the arsenal of teaching tools is no longer limited to paper and blackboard. The rapid development of machines has helped to enhance the way teachers present material to students. For instance, one Canadian post-secondary institution recently spent $3.7 million outfitting a classroom with the latest technology so that the teacher can project an image of a book using a document camera, display the contents of his laptop computer screen, or start a VCR

with the touch of a button on the lectern (Danard, 1999). At the same time, it is often remarked that

teachers, while often among society's most liberal members, are also, as keepers and carriers of tradition, at the same time conservative and slow to change.... While the growth of technology has been rapid, teachers have been generally slow to adopt this technology, and even slower to make productive use of it. (Gratton, 1998)

There is an obvious discrepancy of opinions between those who provide the technology and those who actually use it. Such a conflict can be viewed in one of two ways. The first interpretation considers educational institutions overly `technophilic,' charging that they install new technology without consulting the teachers, who end up with resources they do not need (e.g., Connor, 1984). The second interpretation is reflected in the passage quoted above and regards teachers as `technophobes' who refuse to take advantage of new developments. The prevailing view seems to be the latter, blaming the `technophobic' teacher rather than the `technophilic' institution. No institution has ever been criticized for spending money on technology: there is a continual `technological power game' in our society in which those who have the latest technology are perceived as better than those who do not. The teachers who choose not to play this game are therefore considered the losers (Connor, 1984, p. 63).This biased perception underlines the need to obtain a more balanced view of the situation by examining more closely the `technophobia' of teachers. Is it really a question of fear of technology and of overcoming this fear? This preliminary study, based on interviews conducted with 10 second language (L2) teachers, attempts to provide some answers to this question by exploring the reasons why these teachers decided to use or not to use technology as well as the factors that influenced these decisions. Only by understanding whether or not it is `technophobia' that motivates teachers can we ensure that the money spent by `technophilic' institutions does not go to waste.

Previous studies

Not much research has been done on technology from the point of view of the teacher. The focus has largely been on students and how technology affects them, and it has therefore addressed why teachers should or should not use technology, rather than why they do or do not. For example, Nutta (1998) examined the effectiveness of computer-based grammar instruction, while Baltova (1999) studied the effect of subtitling video on content comprehension and vocabulary acquisition, and González-Bueno (1998) analyzed the impact of e-mail use on the development of L2 discourse. Other studies have looked at student reactions to using technology, including Osuna and Meskill (1998), who examined students' attitudes towards learning via the World Wide Web. The limitation of such studies is that by focusing on the students, they fail to take into account the teachers' own beliefs and experiences as factors influencing technology use in the classroom.The small number of studies that have focused on teachers generally reveal that the use of technology is a complex decision that extends beyond the consideration of student needs. As McFarlane, Green, and Hoffman (1997) note, the educational utility dimension is merely one component of teachers' attitudes towards technology, the other two components being the usefulness of the technology for job performance and its ease of use. Cuban (1986) found that teachers evaluated technological innovations according to a `practicality ethic' that measured the personal cost of integrating the technology against its return and its efficiency. The compatibility of the innovation with the teacher's beliefs, attitudes, and/or teaching context also

affects its likelihood of being used (Kennedy & Kennedy, 1996). Although technology has primarily been used for instructional purposes, such as presenting essential information (Librero, 1981), clarifying concepts (Anderson, 1989), bringing unattainable experiences into the classroom (Mohammed, 1994), and giving students experience with the technology (Zammit, 1992; Winnans & Sardo Brown, 1992), the main obstacles cited by teachers often have little to do with its pedagogical purpose. Deterrents include a lack of time to find and review materials (Librero, 1981; Zammit, 1992; Mohammed, 1994), a lack of professional development to prepare teachers for the integration of technology into the curriculum (Akins, 1992; Zammit, 1992; Winnans & Sardo Brown, 1992), and a lack of access to multimedia facilities and materials (Akins, 1992; Moore, Morales, & Carel, 1998). Zammit found that teachers who did manage to access the facilities felt obliged to use the equipment more than was necessary in order to justify their use of it. Intrinsic factors also play a role in determining the level of technology use. Teachers who lack confidence in their skills with technology are less likely to use it because it threatens their sense of competence in front of their students (Zammit, 1992; Winnans & Sardo Brown, 1992; George & Camarata, 1996). Moreover, since the implementation of the innovation typically originates outside the classroom, some teachers may resent having their behaviour dictated by a higher authority and therefore refuse to use the technology (Terrell, Dringus, & Rendulic, 1995). Marcinkiewicz (1993) found a relationship between specific personality traits, such as innovativeness and self-confidence, and the use of computers in a questionnaire survey administered to 170 elementary school teachers in the United States. Shneiderman, Borkowski, Alavi, and Norman (1998) discovered that although the faculty at an American university recognized as positive the motivational aspect of technology for both teachers and students and the ability to vary the mode of presentation, many had backup lesson plans in case too many technical problems led to the technology becoming the focus of the lesson. In addition, teachers are often suspicious of the claims to effectiveness of technological innovations; for instance, some teachers do not perceive audiovisual and computer technologies as a legitimate educational tool because of the influx of computer games, video, and film as entertainment (Albaugh, 1997), while other teachers resist being supplanted by machines (Cuban, 1986; Marcinkiewicz, 1993).A number of studies have examined the correlations between teachers' background and their attitudes to the use of technology, especially computers, although no definitive conclusions seem to have been drawn. Clerc (1985) and Mohammed (1994) both found that age and years of teaching experience were positively related to the acceptance of computers, but other studies saw no correlation between age and the predisposition to learn about computers (Stenzel, 1982) or between years of experience and positive attitudes towards computers (Burke, 1986; Forgette-Giroux, 1990). Gender was a factor in several studies that showed male teachers as more favourable towards computers than female teachers (Burke; Forgette-Giroux), but gender did not have an influence in Stenzel's study of American elementary and secondary school teachers. Some studies have cited a positive correlation between the amount of computer knowledge, whether from personal computer use or from training, and positive attitudes towards computers (Bradford, 1984; Burke, 1986; Clerc, 1985; Kellenberger, 1994; Taylor, 1986). However, Sofranova (1993) found that despite a positive attitude among teachers towards the use of computers (68%), they were used regularly by less than 8% of the teachers in the three Russian schools she studied.Among the few studies that have focused specifically on L2 teachers, Gray (1996) found that as a result of pre-service training, 24 modern language education students in Britain improved in their capabilities with computers and gained insight into the computer's applications for language teaching; consequently, the majority intended to use computers from the start. Al-Juhani (1991) found a correlation between in-

service training on computer-assisted language instruction and greater positive attitudes among 60 English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers in Saudi Arabia. Leh (1995), however, did not find a significant change in attitudes among 12 American language teachers despite a two-week workshop, although they did gain more confidence in their knowledge about technology.Factors other than the amount of training have also been examined as influences in the use of technology in L2 instruction. Tutunis (1991) discovered that, since English as a second language (ESL) teachers in Britain were not given enough time and financial assistance for self-development, they preferred conventional teaching aids to computers. Burnett (1997) found that linguistic difficulties and technical problems with the computer prevented a group of French teaching assistants at an American university from creating an environment conducive to sustaining lessons in French and that, as a result, computer literacy was privileged over linguistic proficiency. Lamerand and Tracy (1975), in a survey of 80 French and English teachers in Canada, found that professional support, ease of access to the equipment, and the opportunity for teachers to have input into the implementation of television in the classroom also served to increase its acceptance. As for relationships between teacher background and technology use, Moore et al. (1998) found that the level of education and the amount of teaching experience correlated positively with the use of computers and video for culture teaching among 388 foreign language teachers in the United States. Leh (1995) found that despite positive attitudes by 12 American teachers towards the use of technology in language teaching, their actual level of use was minimal, since they lacked access to equipment and knowledge of how to use the technology. Pickard, Chan, and Tibbetts (1994) and Dunkel (1987) note that integrating technology into teaching requires a major adjustment to teaching practice, which some teachers are unwilling to make. Other studies have observed that some teachers question the effectiveness of the technology even while making use of it (Dunkel, 1987; Harvey, 1987; Hopwood, 1989). Pickard et al. also found that teachers in the Hong Kong schools they studied saw the computer as a subject to be taught, rather than a tool to be used in teaching. In sum, these studies have shown that the use of technology is determined by a wide range of factors, ranging from external factors such as access to appropriate materials and professional development opportunities to more internal factors such as awareness of the benefits of technology and personal attitudes towards technological innovations. The major limitation of these studies is their principal focus on computers, although a few did examine the use of video and other audiovisual media (e.g.. Lamerand & Tracy, 1975; Librero, 1981; Anderson, 1989; Mohammed, 1994; Moore et al., 1998; Shneiderman et al., 1998). Another limitation is the lack of focus on L2 teachers, since most of the studies looked at teachers in general. This study will attempt to address some of these limitations by taking into account not only the use of computers but also the use of audiovisual technologies such as videos and cassette tapes, which few studies have addressed. It will specifically examine L2 teachers, thereby focusing on a relatively neglected area of prior research. I will take into account the factors already raised as well as additional ones that I feel may be relevant, such as teachers' perceptions of technology and their own experiences with it when they were L2 students. This study was conducted in the form of oral interviews, rather than the written questionnaires that characterize many of the previous studies. This format, together with the smaller sample, allowed me to give more emphasis to the teachers' own experiences with teaching with technology, rather than just their attitudes and beliefs, and to examine in greater detail the motivations behind the teachers' use or non-use of technology.

Methodology

Definition of `technology'

The term `technology,' in its most general sense, could simply be defined as `machines or tools designed to accomplish a specific task or tasks.' The set of objects it refers to depends on the culture and on the context. For instance, the word `technology' in an L2 teaching context is unlikely to evoke the microwave oven or the space shuttle. Rather, it conjures up images of overhead projectors, cassette recorders, video players, film projectors, computers, and so on. In this study, the word `technology' and its related terms refer to any machines that can be used for L2 teaching. The ones mentioned by the participants are cassette recorders, video players, and computers; however, the application of the findings is by no means limited to these three machines. Had this study been conducted 30 years ago, participants would no doubt have discussed film and slide projectors rather than video players and computers.

Research questions

The initial research questions were

1. What are the reasons behind L2 teachers' decisions to use technology for teaching?2. Why do some L2 teachers choose not to use technology in their teaching?3. What factors influence these decisions?

However, among the three technological tools mentioned by the participants (cassette tapes, videos, and computers), the only variation was in the use of computers; all the participants incorporated cassette tapes and videos into their teaching. As a result, the second research question required further definition, resulting in the following reformulation:

2. Why do some L2 teachers choose not to use computers in their teaching?

The formulation of the first question remained the same, since the participants who used computers in addition to cassette tapes and videos often had the same motivations as those who used only cassette tapes and videos.

Participants

Since the purpose of this preliminary study is to explore factors that affect teachers' decisions to use technology, I drew a convenience sample of 10 participants from among my colleagues. Table 1 provides a description of each participant. There were four male and six female teachers. Five participants taught English, three taught Spanish, and two taught French. One participant taught at the elementary school level, another taught at the intermediate school level, and a third taught children, adolescents, and adults at private language schools, while the rest all worked only with

396Lam

TABLE 1Profile of the participants

Age Taken UsedYears of Age Countries Highest Hold Degree general computers20- 31- 36- 41- 46- teaching group Language taught degree teaching in computer in Currently Teacher 30 35 40 45 50 Gender experience taughta taughta in completed certificateb progress course teaching teaching

1 X M 17 adult Spanish Canada, MA N PhD N Y YEurope, (Linguis- (SpanishJapan tics) linguistics)2 X M 6 adult ESL Canada, BA Y (TESL) MA (L2 Y N YFrance (French, education)Spanish)3 X F 5 middle French Canada BA Y MEd (L2 N Y Nschool (core/ (French) education)immersion) and BEd4 X F 20 adult ESL Canada, MA Y EdD (L2 Y Y YIran, (educa- (RSA- education)Japan, tion) Britain) Singapore 5 X F 10.5 adult ESL Hong MA Y PhD (Educa- N N NKong (English tion - teacherlanguage development)teaching)6 X F 3 adult Spanish Canada MA N PhD N N Y (Spanish) (Spanishliterature)7 X F 5 elementary French Canada BA (French, Y MEd (L2 Y Y Yschool immersion Economics) education)8 X M 2 children, EFL Japan BA N MA (L2 Y N Nadolescents, (Religious education)adults studies)

L2 Teachers' Use of Technology 397

TABLE 1 (continued)

9 X M 7 adult Spanish Canada MA N PhD N Y Y(Spanish) (Spanishliterature)10 X F 15 adult ESL Canada, MA Y PhD (L2 N N NUS, Hong (TESOL) education)Kong, and MEdPhilip- (Elementarypines education)

Note: The participants are listed in no particular order.a These two categories refer to the students they work with most or have most recently worked with, since many of the participants have had a range of experience.b Unless noted, "teaching certificate" refers to a public school teaching certificate.

adult learners. Years of teaching experience ranged from two to 20; ages ranged from 25 to 50. All of the participants taught in developed countries.The participants were all graduate students at the time of the study: seven in

education, two in literature, and one in linguistics. They came from varied educational backgrounds; not all of them held previous education degrees or teaching certificates. However, all of them had been second language learners themselves. Of the 10 participants, six were teaching at the time of the study, while the remaining four had taken a leave of absence to pursue full-time studies. Participants who were teaching spoke both of their current experiences and of their past experiences, while the four on leave of absence could only speak of past experiences. With the exception of Teacher 6, all the participants were actively involved in the teaching profession, either through reading journals, attending conferences, belonging to professional associations, or all three.The participants all owned computers, which they used a minimum of three to four times a week, mainly for word processing and e-mail. However, only five of them had used computers in teaching, although all of them had used audiovisual media. Four participants had taken general computer courses, but none had taken a course that dealt specifically with educational technology, although a few had attended short workshops on using multimedia for instructional purposes.

Data collection

The participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their professional, educational, and personal background (see Appendix A). I then conducted a semi-structured oral interview with each individual, based on a list of questions I had generated using the suggestions made by Payne (1951) about forming unbiased questions (see Appendix B). However, the questions were by no means limited to the list, which allowed me to follow the flow of conversation and to ask for elaboration of certain points or probe other issues that were not mentioned by the participant. As a result, questions were not asked in the same order for each participant, nor were exactly the same questions asked. However, I made certain that I first asked the general question - why the participant did or did not use technology - so that he or she could formulate an initial answer without any undue influence from the interviewer. Each interview was tape-recorded and transcribed upon completion of the data collection process.

Data analysis

The transcripts of the interviews and the background questionnaires were analyzed for their content in light of the research questions. The content analysis consisted of listing the range of responses given by the participants, then grouping together common elements and recurrent patterns into larger descriptive categories. No statistical analyses were performed on the data, since this study was qualitative in nature, although I did look for possible links between various factors and the use of technology.

Analysis of results

Analysis of the data revealed four main categories: (a) teachers' perceptions of technology; (b) their stated reasons for using technology; (c) their stated reasons for not using computers; and (d) other factors mentioned by the participants that influenced their decisions about using technology.

Perceptions of technology

The participants all viewed technology from a utilitarian perspective, as something that simplified everyday tasks or enhanced their way of life by allowing them to do more:

They allow us to do things quickly and efficiently. (Teacher 4)Technology is tools ... anything we can use to extend our ability.(Teacher 8)It's some machines that you use that would make things easier. (Teacher 10)

When I probed the participants' attitudes towards innovation in technology by asking them whether they would consider purchasing a video phone or a palm-top computer, the general reaction was cautious; their decision depended on whether or not they had a use for the `gadget,' as Teacher 1 called it:

I'd have to have a use for it and if I did, then I would get one.(Teacher 3)I have no use for that, not now. (Teacher 6)

This utilitarian perspective is also reflected in the role the participants attributed to technology in language teaching:

A means to facilitate language teaching. (Teacher 2)It aids instruction, but it doesn't drive the instruction. (Teacher 4)I think it can be a good supplement to enhance teaching and learning.(Teacher 5)It's more of a resource that's used to achieve an outcome. (Teacher 7)

Technology-based language teaching was perceived as using technology in a supportive and supplementary role, as an aid or a tool for the teacher, but not as a substitute. As a result, none of the participants felt threatened by advancements in educational technology. As Teacher 10 stated: `the students still need me, more than they need the machine.'This attitude towards technology as a tool was further reflected in the responses given by the participants when they were asked whether we should be looking at technology in the language classroom or at the language classroom in a technology-based society (Warschauer & Healey, 1998). Six of the participants agreed with the former, while three chose the latter and one saw the relevance of both. Interestingly, the three participants who chose the latter view did not support it wholeheartedly: much as they saw the language classroom as having to `reflect the realities outside' (Teacher 4), and that it would thus be `negligent' of them to not bring it into the classroom (Teacher 3), none of them saw `the classroom being swallowed up by technology' (Teacher 8). Technology was seen as a means, not an end.A second finding revealed that for six participants, using technology in language teaching explicitly meant using computers:

I would think it means using the computer to assist language learning. (Teacher 5)[Technology-based language learning is] software that would allow, ideally, students to progress at their own rate. (Teacher 7)More the use of computers, though. I guess that would be more getting technology into the language learning process. (Teacher 9)

These teachers talked almost solely about computers, despite the fact that I deliberately used the term `technology,' and several needed to be prompted before

they would talk about using video or cassettes. Moreover, while filling out the questionnaire, a number of participants answered that they had never experienced technology-based language teaching as students, although, when specifically probed, they did admit to having used video, cassettes, or both. It appears that the use of cassettes and video is now accepted as an unquestionable part of language teaching, which is not yet the case with computers.

To sum up, technology, as perceived by language teachers, is seen as a tool to supplement their teaching. The prototypical case of technology in language teaching seems to be the use of computers, since the use of cassettes and video is essentially considered as given.

Reasons for using technology

Table 2 summarizes the reasons given by the ten participants for using technology in their classrooms, along with their distribution.

Different mode of presentation

Seven of the 10 participants mentioned technology as allowing them to present the language in a varied way, thereby enhancing the students' learning experience. Technology offered `a change from grammar' (Teacher 6) that brought `a different dimension to class' (Teacher 2). It gave the teacher the opportunity to `add some flavour to [his] teaching' (Teacher 5) and benefited the students who were `getting bombarded with different approaches or different presentations of the language, and also using the language different ways themselves' (Teacher 3).

Motivation for students

Just as important as the variety that technology offered was its motivational aspect, mentioned by seven participants. It made the class `more interesting' (Teacher 1) and provided `more of a stimulus' xxxxxxxTABLE 2Why L2 teachers use technology for teaching

Reason Number of responses (n=10)

different mode of presentation 7motivation for students 7authentic context 4teaching of a specific skill or syllabus 4availability of materials 3source of information (computers only) 2increased student response (computers only) 2personal experiences as a student 1

(Teacher 8). Videos helped the teacher `attract students' attention' (Teacher 5) because `it's more lively than reading' (Teacher 10). As for computers, `kids are very interested in the Internet, they're very drawn to the computer' (Teacher 7). Teacher 3 even mentioned that `it's interesting for me' and motivated her as well!

Authentic context

Four participants used technology to present the language in a more natural, authentic context. Teacher 7 used the Internet to provide `authentic communication' with other French speakers. Cassettes and video helped students learn `how to deal with the situation of the language' (Teacher 1) and `understand something in context while it's going on' (Teacher 8). Teacher 2 used videos because

it's culturally embedded, the input, and it's contextual so the students can decipher a lot of the language through the picture and through the images, and through the interaction they see, and the body language, and all those aspects that aren't easily taught in a traditional classroom.

Teaching a specific skill or syllabus

Technology was used by four participants for a specific purpose, namely using cassettes or video for developing listening skills or for teaching culture, or both. One ESL teacher (Teacher 4) mentioned that the mere use of technology, especially computers, was a culture lesson in itself, since it helped students `construct a view of [our] culture' where technology was prevalent.

Availability of materials

Three of the participants chose to use technology because they were constantly being made aware of the existence of multimedia materials. As Teacher 3 said simply, `the materials were there.' Teacher 10 found that `you open a catalogue and there are so many good ones,' while Teacher 2 felt a slight pressure to use these materials: `if it's there, I will use it, and integrate it into the classroom.'In fact, four participants said that they began teaching with technology just because it was available and they decided to explore it as an option for teaching:

it wasn't really anything that anyone informed me about, it was just, you know, I do this at home, why don't I tape the news tonight and show it to the students tomorrow and try to do some activity around it. (Teacher 2)

Teacher 1 acted out of `curiosity how these things could be used, could be of any use for a class.'

Source of information

Two of the participants mentioned using computers, specifically the Internet, as a source of up-to-date information in the target language. As Teacher 7 explained, `there's so much available at [the students'] fingertips.' Interestingly, both of these teachers taught a foreign language, French or Spanish, yet neither of them mentioned having difficulties finding information in that language. The overwhelming predominance of English on the Internet did not appear to be a disadvantage, at least not for teachers of the more common foreign languages.

Increased student response

Two participants said that some of their students appeared to feel more at ease working with computers. Teacher 7 observed that some of her elementary school students `respond to the technology more than to the teacher. ... There are some students that really like to work independently, they just want to be in front of a

computer screen.' She did not feel threatened by this reaction from her students, however: `if it works for the student I think we should follow it.'

Personal experiences as a student

One participant explicitly mentioned that he used cassettes `because my teachers used [them] with me, so it's natural that I tend to follow that line of thought' (Teacher 2). Although none of the other participants mentioned their own experiences as L2 students, the influence of these experiences perhaps explains why all the participants used cassettes, video, or both in their classrooms, since all of them had been exposed to these media as students, as was revealed by the questionnaire. This was not the case with computers, however; only Teacher 6 and Teacher 9 had used computers in their own language learning.

Reasons for not using computers

Five of the 10 participants had never used computers in teaching. Table 3 summarizes the reasons given by these five participants for not using computers:

TABLE 3Why some L2 teachers do not use computers for teaching

Reason Number of responses (n=5)

lack of knowledge about teaching L2 with computers 4lack of access to computers 3lack of confidence in computer skills 2inadequacy for students' needs 2

Lack of knowledge about teaching L2 with computers

Only one of the participants who did not use computers in teaching (Teacher 2) considered himself knowledgeable about the pedagogical use of computers: his only deterrent was a lack of access to computers. The other four participants all cited a lack of knowledge about applying computers to language teaching as their main reason for not using computers:

o I didn't see how I can use the computer in language teaching. (Teacher 5)o I'd have to know more of what, how it would benefit the student. (Teacher 6)o I was not aware of computers, using them, even though we had a whole computer room with word processing going on, but it never occurred to me how computers would be used [as a teaching tool]. (Teacher 8)o The thing that puzzles me is, when every student is facing the screen, then how am I going to talk to them, through e-mail? So I have to learn the pedagogy first, the classroom teaching method using computers. (Teacher 10)

Both Teacher 5 and Teacher 6 saw computers as beneficial for their own use at home, but they did not see how computers could be integrated into the classroom.

Lack of access to computers

In three cases, a lack of access to computers discouraged the participants from integrating them into their teaching. Teacher 2 and Teacher 10 had computers in their institutions, but they were not available for class use, only for student word processing. Teacher 6 did not have access to the software programs used by the students, who were expected to go on their own to the lab; therefore, she was not aware of what benefits using computers could bring to her students.

Lack of confidence in computer skills

Two participants were uncomfortable with using computers in front of a class:

For a teacher who has no experience with computers, it represents a great step ahead to get into them. ... If you're a teacher, you don't want to step into a classroom with something you don't know how it works, because you look like an idiot. It's already stressful to use something in a classroom, but if you don't know [how to use it], that's adding more stress. (Teacher 8)

This lack of confidence in their computer skills suggests that these two teachers did not see their students as a resource (M. Swain, personal communication, May 20, 1999). They seemed to prefer the traditional role of the teacher as expert, which could imply that their discomfort was perhaps not so much with the lack of computer skills, as they claimed, but rather with the idea of relinquishing their expert role (see Warschauer, Turbee, & Roberts, 1996).

Inadequacy for students' needs

Another reason for not using computers was the perception that computers could not meet the students' needs. Teacher 5 had seen some computer programs, but she thought `they were pretty stupid and too mechanical,' while Teacher 8 did not feel that computers were fast enough or language-rich enough.When these five teachers who did not use computers were asked whether they would use computers if circumstances were different, two said yes, one said no, and two still had some reservations. For the two teachers who would use computers, Teacher 2 was hindered only by a lack of access to computers, while Teacher 10 had since been using the computer more in her personal life and thus felt more confident in her skills. Teacher 8 continued to express reluctance because he still did not feel comfortable with the computer, especially since he taught overseas, in a country where the language used on the computer was different. As for Teacher 5 and Teacher 6, who still had reservations, they admitted seeing some benefits to using the computer, such as giving students access to other students or practising writing skills, but they were not yet convinced of any other advantages.

Factors influencing the decision to use technology

Table 4 lists other factors cited by the participants that affected their decision about using technology in their teaching, whether it be computers, cassettes, or video.

Professional development opportunities

Four participants felt that there was inadequate training for teachers on using and particularly on integrating technology into the classroom. The few in-service workshops that they attended dealt mostly with the technical aspects of using the technology, not with the pedagogical aspects. Teacher 9 expressed the view that

technology is often treated as something `peripheral and departments have a hard time incorporating it into the actual language learning.' The lack of training was initially a deterrent for Teacher 2 to use videos `because it seemed that [they] didn't really serve much of a purpose, [they] just confused the students and demotivated them.' However, the absence of professional development opportunities did not seem to prevent teachers from using technology: all four managed to learn how to use technology effectively through trial and error, despite explicitly citing a lack of training. In fact, the other six participants did not mention professional development as a factor, which suggests that providing training in using technology is by itself insufficient in encouraging teachers to use it.

Resources and money

Insufficient resources can also discourage teachers from using technology. Teacher 4 was trying to find a computer-equipped classroom with a data projector, an experience which turned out to be `a real hassle and I found that unnecessary.' For Teacher 10, the problem was not only the lack of resources but also the lack of resource people who TABLE 4Influencing factors

Reason Number of responses (n=10)

professional development opportunities 4resources or money 4student background 4administrators' attitudes 3language level 2time 2attitudes of the parents 1

could help her. Teacher 3 and Teacher 7 mentioned that they were willing to invest the time to search for materials, but that, because of limited financing, they felt that it was almost `a waste of time' (Teacher 7).

Student background

The background of the students in the class was mentioned by four participants as a factor to be taken into consideration. Two ESL teachers (Teacher 2 and Teacher 10) spoke of dealing with immigrant students who had never seen a computer or a VCR and so first needed to be exposed to the concept of these machines before experiencing them. In another case, the EFL teacher (Teacher 8) recognized that students in the culture he was teaching in would have felt threatened by technology because they were afraid of making fools of themselves; therefore, he had to change the way he used the technology so that students would feel successful with it. Teacher 1 mentioned the age of his students as a factor: `if you have to teach it to older people, I don't think it would make that much of a difference at all.'

Administrators' attitudes

The attitudes of the person in charge can sometimes make a difference in whether or not teachers decide to use technology. Three participants explicitly mentioned administrators' attitudes as an influencing factor. These attitudes can have a positive

effect: in the case of Teacher 4, it was the coordinator who showed her how to create Web sites for her class. Conversely, Teacher 10 was frustrated by administrators' misconceptions about ESL teaching - `if you tell them ... that we need computers, he would be shocked, ESL, learning English, why would you [need computers]' - while Teacher 8 disliked the fact that his administrators `will support you morally, but they don't really support it.'

According to the other seven participants, their administrators were open and willing to have technology in the classroom, but that did not appear to influence their decisions to use technology. Three of these participants did not choose to use computers, despite the open support of the administration. In fact, in the case of Teacher 5, the department openly encouraged its teachers to use technology by creating a computer centre for the department, but she admitted (quite honestly!) that she had never set foot inside. This finding suggests that the use of technology is largely a personal decision, irrespective of administra-tive support, although for some teachers the level of support may be a factor.

Language level

Two participants found the language level of videos and cassettes to be a problem: `technology can sometimes be daunting for them [the students] to understand because you have very authentic language' (Teacher 2). Teacher 6 received complaints from students about the cassettes for the textbook: `they didn't understand the questions, they [people on the tape] were speaking too quickly.' However, this did not stop either of them from using technology: they merely learned how to compensate for the level of difficulty in their instruction.

Time

Time was cited as a factor not in terms of learning how to use technology, but in terms of searching for appropriate materials: `the only limitation is to spend more time in order to search for more' (Teacher 7). Teacher 1 mentioned the large amounts of time he spent on finding materials `and not necessarily the material you find would be what's required.'

Attitudes of the parents

One participant (of the three who taught children or adolescents) cited the attitudes of the parents as an influencing factor. The parents saw technology as `a way to the future ... so they want them to have the basic skills, even by grade 7, so they're really pushing [the use of technology]' (Teacher 3).

Other possible factors influencing computer use

The following factors - which deal specifically with computer use, since no variation was observed in the use of cassette tapes and videos - were not explicitly stated by the participants but, rather, were gleaned from various pieces of information that may have had an effect on their decision to use computers.Age may have an influence on the use of computers. Four of the five participants who did use computers were between the ages of 25 and 35, while three of the five participants who did not use computers were between the ages of 35 and 50. The age of the teachers' students may also be a factor: both the elementary and the middle school teachers used computers to teach language although it was not mandated by the curriculum, while among the teachers of adult learners, computer

use was more variable.The number of years of teaching experience does not appear to be a factor. Two participants with less than five years of experience did use computers, but two did not; one participant with 15 or more years of experience did not use computers, while two did. Gender does not appear to be a factor either: exactly half the male teachers (two of four) and half the female teachers (three of six) did use computers, while the other half did not.No conclusions can be drawn about the influence of the language taught (for example, English being taught more with computers than French or Spanish) because the sample size was too small. Nor can any connection be made between possessing a teaching certificate and using computers, since I did not delve into the nature of the participants' pre-service training. Having taken a general computer course does not appear to be a factor either: three of the five participants who used computers had never taken such a course, while two of the five participants who did not use computers had taken one. The level of education does not seem to have an influence, since there were both computer users and computer non-users among participants with the same academic degree. Findings on the effect of past experiences as a language student are inconclusive as well. Two participants had been exposed to computers, but only one of them used computers in language teaching.These links between factors are mentioned only as possible relationships. Since the purpose of this study was not correlational, the data did not lend themselves to quantitative analysis. Moreover, some of the participants were not currently teaching, so I had a mix of current information from their background profile and past information from the interview. It was thus impossible to draw correlations between the use of computers in teaching and factors such as personal use of computers or comfort level with technology, since the situation might have changed since the participants last taught. In fact, two participants mentioned that as a result of their current graduate work, their views on computers in language teaching had changed considerably: because they had had to use the computer more often, they were more aware of possible pedagogical uses than before.

Discussion of results

The results of this study confirm several factors that had already been identified in prior research. Like the teachers in previous studies, the participants used technology because it motivated students and because it offered a different mode of presentation, while they were also hindered by a lack of access to equipment, a lack of professional support, and a lack of confidence in their computer skills. However, this study also brought out other factors that may be more specific to L2 teachers, such as the opportunities for authentic use of the target language and the level of linguistic difficulty of the materials, two factors that are very important to consider when dealing with L2 learners. Moreover, this study revealed the inability of several teachers to see the connection between computers and language teaching, a perspective that would not likely occur in other subjects such as math or science. However, the background of the teacher did not turn out to be as important in determining the use of technology as prior studies would suggest. The number of years of teaching experience, prior technological training, gender, and even age did not appear to have a major impact on determining whether or not a teacher would use computers in language teaching. In addition, this study goes one step further than prior ones by examining L2 teachers' perceptions of technology and technology-based language teaching. The teachers saw technology as a tool, as a means to enhance teaching and promote learning, not as an end in itself. They also tended to associate the term `technology' with computers, which would perhaps explain why so many of the prior studies focused solely on computers.

The main reasons for the teachers' decisions regarding technology seemed to depend on whether the teacher was personally convinced of the benefits of using technology for L2 instruction, a factor that is underemphasized in previous studies. Most of the reasons cited by the participants for using technology deal with how it can help their students learn the target language better, such as offering a variety of input and motivating students, while two of the four reasons given for not using computers reflect a lack of confidence in the advantages of computer-assisted instruction for students. Although time was cited as a factor, it was not in terms of the time needed to learn how to use technology, but rather in terms of the time required for selecting materials, suggesting that teachers would be willing to use technology more if they felt it were beneficial. Likewise, the availability of professional development opportunities and the attitudes of administrators did not necessarily play a role in influencing decisions, implying that personal beliefs were still the major factor.In fact, Anderson (1989) found that intrinsic factors such as personality or philosophical beliefs might be determining the levels of use of film and video among his participants, rather than extrinsic factors such as equipment or media services. Research on teacher decision making indicates how important teacher beliefs are in determining what they do in the classroom (Burns, 1996; Richards & Lockhart, 1994; Smith 1996). After all, `teaching is realized only in teachers'; it is not something to be memorized and regurgitated (Richards, 1998, p. 81). The critical role played by teacher beliefs perhaps explains why, in the present study, there were cases of older teachers who were using computers and younger teachers who were not using them, as well as why previous correlational studies have been unable to come to any definitive conclusions.The results of this study indicate that it is unfair to brand teachers as `technophobic'; they suggest that teachers' decisions regarding technology use are based not on fear but on personal convictions. The teachers who did not use computers in their teaching never cited fear of computers as a reason for not using them; two of the participants spoke of a lack of confidence in their computer skills, but not of `technophobia' or of a complete resistance to computers. It is likely that if these participants were to learn more about using computers and about integrating them into their teaching, they would be perfectly willing to use them. Similarly, the reasons given for using computers and other technologies reflected the teachers' beliefs in the benefits of these technologies for students, rather than an adoration of all things technological. No one felt that language teaching could not take place without technology, even among those who believed that their teaching should reflect the technology-based society we live in. It is not a love-hate situation, therefore, but one based on practical concerns and personal convictions.

Implications of the study

The results of this study indicate that merely providing teachers with the equipment is not enough; rather, it is necessary to convince them of the benefits of using it in the classroom. A case in point is the teacher who had full access to a computer lab within her own department, yet never once went inside. Conversely, a number of teachers had little or no support for using technology, yet they still took the initiative to learn about it themselves because they saw its usefulness to their students. Moreover, training cannot be limited to the simple `how-to' of technology; several teachers expressed a desire to learn not so much how the equipment works as how it can be effectively integrated into the curriculum. One way to persuade teachers of the benefits of technology in language teaching would be involve them in the implementation process. In a study of the degree of correspondence between the views of educational technologists and those of teachers about instructional technology, Lowther and Sullivan (1994) found that

there was a great difference in perceptions in some areas, suggesting that educational technologists and administrators must show greater sensitivity to teachers' point of view if educational technology is to gain credibility among teachers. Connor (1984) saw a problem when teachers are forced, either by society or by educational administrators, to `create the need' for the technology (p. 63). As long as teachers feel alienated from technology, they will not see its benefits for language teaching. Understanding what factors influence teachers' decisions on using technology is an important step in ensuring that institutions are not wasting already limited funds on equipment that no one uses.

Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research

The most obvious limitation is the lack of representativeness of the sample, since this is a preliminary study. In addition to the fact that there were no secondary school teachers in my sample, all the participants were graduate students who were interested in improving their teaching. As a result, this sample is one of teachers who, by choosing to `go back to school,' have demonstrated that they are open to new ideas while casting a critical eye on issues. In fact, when participants were asked in interviews about their attitudes towards changes or innovations in teaching, their general reaction was that they were all willing to consider or to try new things, but with a degree of scepticism. This attitude may or may not be representative of the teaching population as a whole.Another limitation is the lack of focus on the relation of the technologies to each of the language skills, which would have helped to shed more light on issues unique to L2 teaching. It would also have been interesting to include teachers of less commonly taught languages, who would have considerably less access to materials than English, French, and Spanish teachers do. Another group worth consulting are teachers in developing countries: all the participants in this sample had taught or were teaching in Western Europe, North America, or Southeast Asia, in areas where technology is more common than in less developed regions. It would be worthwhile to obtain the point of view of an L2 teacher in a society where VCRs are not common and computers are an object of curiosity.This study sought to identify the range of factors influencing teachers' use of technology in teaching. Since the factors were not predetermined, it was impossible to compare the factors or correlate them. Future studies may wish to be more comparative in order to the determine which factors are the most influential in teacher decisions regarding technology. Triangulation of data may yield factors not mentioned by teachers, since the decision to use technology is a complex and multifaceted one. Extrinsic factors such as administrative attitudes or professional development opportunities could be dealt with more objectively than in this study, which relied on the teachers' interpretation. It would also be interesting to determine whether a correspondence exists between the beliefs that teachers express about the use of technology in their teaching and their actual behaviour with it in their classrooms.

Conclusion

As technology becomes more and more dominant in our everyday lives, it will continue to exert a constant pressure on education. Under this increasing pressure, it becomes even more necessary for all parties involved to step back and examine their motivations. At the moment, the general opinion seems to be focused negatively on teachers, who are considered `technophobic' and unwilling to change, while no one has thought to criticize educational institutions for their attempts to win the `technological power game.' This study has sought to show that the `technophobia'

of teachers is a misconception and that their decisions regarding technology use are not based on a resistance to or an adoration of technology, but rather on their beliefs about the benefits of the technology for their students. If teachers choose not to use the technology provided to them, it is not because they fear technology but, rather, because they are not convinced of its usefulness. This conclusion suggests that when technology is not used, it is not simply the fault of the teacher, as we tend to believe, but also the fault of the institutions who are overly hasty in purchasing the latest technological innovations without considering the needs of both teachers and students.

Yvonne Lam is currently a PhD student in Hispanic linguistics in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at the University of Toronto. Her research interests include applied Spanish linguistics, the use of the Web and other multimedia technology in second-language teaching, and Spanish syntax.

References

Akins, K. (1992). Revolution or Rhetoric: Factors affecting teachers' decisions about computers in classrooms. Masters' Abstracts International, 32, 795.Albaugh, P.R. (1997). The role of skepticism in preparing teachers for the use of technology. Paper presented at Education for Community: A Town and Gown Panel Discussion, Westerville, Ohio, January 1997. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 406 339)Al-Juhani, S. (1991). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi secondary schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(07), 2383A.Anderson, J. (1989). Film and video utilization by elementary classroom teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(09), 2781A.Baltova, I. (1999). Multi-sensory language teaching in a multidimensional curriculum: The use of authentic bimodal video in core French. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 32-48.Bradford, C. (1984). An analysis of the relationships between computer literacy, attitude and the utilization of microcomputers in public school settings. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(07), 2070A.Burke, M. (1986). The effects of in-service microcomputer training on teachers' attitudes toward educational computing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(06), 2026A.Burnett, J. (1997). The social construction of technologizing French 103: Case studies of teachers and computers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58(05), 1687A.Burns, A. (1996). Starting all over again: From teaching adults to teaching beginners. In D. Freeman & J. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 154-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Clerc, R. (1985). Acceptance of technological change in the public schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(06), 1452A.Connor, S. (1984). Language teachers and technophobia. In P. Westphal (Ed.), Strategies for foreign language teaching (pp. 59-67). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.Danard, S. (1999, March 7). UVic takes fresh path. Times Colonist, pp. C1, C2.Dunkel, P. (1987). Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and computer-assisted language learning (CALL): Past dilemmas and future prospects for audible CALL. Modern Language Journal, 71, 250-260.Forgette-Giroux, R. (1990). L'ordinateur à l'école: attitudes des élèves, des enseignantes and des enseignants. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.

George, G., & Camarata, M.R. (1996). Managing instructor cyberanxiety: The role of self-efficacy in decreasing resistance to change. Educational Technology, 36(4), 49-54.González-Bueno, M. (1998). The effects of electronic mail on Spanish L2 discourse. Language Learning and Technology [On-line serial], 1(2). Available WWW: polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/ vol1num2/article3/default.html

Gratton, W. (1998). The development of computer technology in ELT. In J. Kahny & M. James (Eds.), Perspectives on secondary school EFL education (pp. 44-49). Odawara, Japan: Language Institute of Japan.Gray, C. (1996). Will your NQT use IT? Language Learning Journal, 13, 58-61.Harvey, T.E. (1987). Second-language composition instruction, computers and first-language pedagogy: A descriptive survey. Foreign Language Annals, 20, 171-180.Hopwood, T. (1989). The use of the word-processor in the teaching of English as a foreign language. Cambridge, UK: Bell Educational Trust. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 312 892)Kellenberger, D. (1994). Preservice teacher beliefs related to educational computer use. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 58(07), 2643A.Kennedy, C., & Kennedy, J. (1996). Teacher attitudes and change implementation. System, 24, 351-360.Lamerand, R., & Tracy, P. (1975). Acceptance by the classroom teacher of television technology for second language instruction. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.Leh, A. (1995). The reformation in foreign language instruction. In Proceedings of the 1995 Annual National Convention of the Association for Education Communications and Technology (pp. 333-342). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383 320)Librero, F. (1981). A descriptive analysis of audiovisual media utilization by the faculty of the School of Education at Indiana University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42(07), 2984A.Lowther, D., & Sullivan, H. (1994). Teacher and technologist beliefs about educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 73-87.Marcinkiewicz, H.R. (1993). Computers and teachers: Factors influencing computer use in the classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 220-237.McFarlane, T., Green, K., & Hoffman, E. (1997, March). Teachers' attitudes toward technology: Psychometric evaluation of the technology attitude survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421 279) Mohammed, M. (1994). Media utilization by faculty at the University of Qatar. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 108-119.Moore, Z., Morales, B., & Carel, S. (1998). Technology and teaching culture: results of a state survey of foreign language teachers. CALICO Journal, 15, 109-128.Nutta, J. (1998). Is computer-based grammar instruction as effective as teacher-directed grammar instruction for teaching L2 structures? CALICO Journal, 14, 53-75.Osuna, M., & Meskill, C. (1998). Using the World Wide Web to integrate Spanish language and culture: A pilot study. Language Learning and Technology [On-line], 1(2). Available WWW: polyglot.cal.msu.edu/llt/vol1num2/article4/default.htmlPayne, S. (1951). The art of asking questions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Pickard, V., Chan, K., & Tibbetts, J. (1994). Concordancing for schools: Problems and potential. Paper presented at the Annual International Language in Education Conference, Hong Kong, 1993. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 056)Richards, J. (1998). Beyond training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Shneiderman, B., Borkowski, E. Alavi, M., & Norman, K. (1998). Emergent patterns of teaching/learning in electronic classrooms. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 23-42.Smith, D. (1996). Teacher decision making in the adult ESL classroom. In D. Freeman & J. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 197-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sofranova, N.V. (1993). Teachers' attitudes towards the use of new information technologies. Russian Education and Society, 37(2), 5-8.Stenzel, L. (1982). Teacher attitudes toward computer literacy. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(01), 145A.Taylor, C. (1986). Teacher opinions of instructional computing in selected public elementary schools in Michigan. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(01), 81A.Terrell, S.R., Dringus, L., & Rendulic, P. (1995). A transitional model for the introduction of technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 171)Tutunis, B. (1991). The integration of computers into the teaching of English to speakers of other languages. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(05), 1671A.Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and student empowerment. System, 24, 1-14.Winnans, C., & Sardo Brown, D. (1992). Some factors affecting elementary teachers' use of the computer. Computers and Education, 18, 301-309.Zammit, S. (1992). Factors facilitating or hindering the use of computers in schools. Educational Research, 34, 57-66.

Appendix A

Background questionnaire

Date: Name:

1. Age: o 20-30 o 31-35 o 36-40 o 41-45 o 46-50 o 50+2. Gender: o M o F

Teaching background

3. Years of teaching experience: 4. Age group(s) taught:o under age 6 (preschool)o elementary (6-11) - o public school o private schoolo extra-curricular programo intermediate (11-13) - o public school o private schoolo extra-curricular programo high school (14-18) - o OACo public school o private schoolo extra-curricular programo adult learners (19+) - o college/university degree programo continuing educationo private language schoolo other language level(s): o beginner o low intermediate o high intermediate

o advanced o other o currently teaching - age group & place language level: # of students: length of class: 5. Countries taught in: 6. Language taught: o ESL o EFL o ESP o French immersion o core French o FL o other

Educational background

7. Degree: o none o teaching certificate o other o university degree(s) - o B.A. in o B.Ed. in o M.A. in o M.Ed. in o Ed.D in o Ph.D. in from where (country) 8. took a course in educational tech? o yes o neverwhich one(s) in computers? o yes o neverwhich one(s) 9. have you ever learned another language? o yes - which one(s) o noany tech used in teaching you? o yes o no

10. attend conferences on L2 teaching? o yes o no read journals on L2 teaching? o yes o nobelong to any professional teacher associations? o yes o no

Personal use of technology

11. do you have: o TV o VCR o cassette player o CD player o DVD player o electronic organizer o cell phoneo computer - o at home o at worko Internet access - via o phone o cable12. (if have computer) primary use(s)? o word processing o e-mailo newsgroups o games o personal finance o surf Interneto Web publishing o chat rooms oother how often? o less than once/wk o 1-2 times/wk o 3-4 times/wko 5 or more times/wk

Appendix B

Question guideline for the oral interview

Technology in general

1. If I were an alien from the planet Zorktan and I had never heard of the word

`technology', how would you explain it to me?2. How comfortable do you feel with technology? 3. Would you buy things over the Internet? Would you buy a video phone? Would you buy a palm-top computer?

Technology-based language teaching

4. How do you feel a second language should be taught? How would you describe the way you teach a second language?

5. What does the term `technology-based language teaching' mean to you? Can you give me examples?6. Have you ever experienced technology-based language teaching? How did you find it?7. Have you ever used technology in your language teaching? In what ways?8. Why did you use/didn't use technology in your language teaching?If no: If circumstances were different/more favourable, would you use technology in your classroom?9. Have you experienced any difficulties using technology in language teaching? Has that affected your use of technology in any way?10. Has using technology influenced your teaching in any way?11. How important do you feel it is to use technology in language teaching?12. What role do you think technology plays in language teaching?13. At the institution where you teach, is there any support for teachers wishing to use technology in language teaching? What type of support? What type of support would you like to see made available?14. What are the attitudes of the principal/director/chair towards technology in teaching? What about the other teachers? The students? (The parents?)15. How did you start using technology in your language teaching? Has anyone ever talked to you about it or have you read something about it?16. As a teacher, do you feel threatened by advancements in educational technology, or do you welcome it?

Attitudes to innovation in teaching

17. How do you feel about new things in teaching, such as the new `methods' or `approaches' or the new materials and resources that are published every year? Do you think they're worth looking at or do you think it's not really worthwhile?

The language classroom in a technology-based society

18. In a recent article, someone posed the question of whether we should be asking `What is the role of informational technology in the language classroom?' or whether we should ask `What is the role of the language classroom in the information technology society?' Which question do you tend to agree with more and why?

© 2000 The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 56, 3 (March/mars)