Integrating technology in English language teaching through a community of practice in the Sultanate of Oman: implications for policy implementation

Abstract

Much has been written, published, and presented about the important role and uses of technology in English language teaching (ELT) today and the effect it can have on students’ learning. The present qualitative study is an intervention, which attempted to explore the integration of technology among 11 public school English language teachers in the Sultanate of Oman through the use of community of practice (CoP). As the first in the region, this qualitative study triangulated data using a focus group interview and reflective journals. Three themes emerged from the data analysis. Despite certain challenges, the findings were generally positive and encouraging, and revealed that if a CoP is effectively utilized to the fullest to integrate technology in ELT, it can facilitate policy implementation and Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE) in the Sultanate of Oman, the neighboring Gulf Cooperation Council countries, some Asian and Far Eastern countries, and beyond.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Abigail, L. (2016). Do communities of practice enhance faculty development? Health Professions Education, 2(2), 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abunowara, A. (2014). Using technology in EFL/ESL classroom. International Journal of Humanistic and Cultural Studies, 1(2), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Akiba, M., & LeTendre, G. (Eds.). (2017). International handbook of teacher quality and policy. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Al-Barwani, T. (2016). Teacher Quality and stability in Oman: Who’s responsibility is it? In M. Flores & T. Al-Barwani (Eds.), Redefining teacher education for the post-2015 Era (pp. 159–170). New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Bulushi, N. (2016). Attitudes of cycle two English language teachers towards the effectiveness of three professional development programs in Muscat. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman.

  6. Al Balushi, K. (2017). “…they feel that they have a voice and their voice is heard”: Towards Participatory Forms of Teachers’ CPD in Oman. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Exeter, UK.

  7. Al-Hamdiyah, A. (2014). Investigating the professional development practices of EFL school teachers in Batinah North. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman.

  8. Al-Issa, A. (2009). Reflection through peer collaboration: A study from Omani ELT classrooms. Iranian EFL Journal, 4, 169–216.

  9. Al-Issa, A. (2012). Re-conceptualizing English language teaching teacher education and development in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: Addressing transformations and challenges. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 5(5), 537–559.

  10. Al-Issa, A. (2020). The language planning situation in the Sultanate of Oman. Current Issues in language Planning, 21(4), 347–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2020.1764729.

  11. Al-Issa, A. and Al-Bulushi, A. (2012). English language teaching reform in Sultanate of Oman: The case of theory and practice disparity. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 11(2), 141–176.

  12. Al-Kadi, A. (2018). A review of technology research: From CALL to MALL. Language Teaching and Educational Research, 1(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Al-Lamki, N. (2009). The beliefs and practices related to continuous professional development of teachers of English in Oman. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Leeds, U.K. Retrieved from http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2146/uk_bi_ethos_515286.pdf

  14. Alqahtani, M. (2019). The use of technology in English language teaching. Frontiers in Education Technology, 2(3), 168–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Al-Shabibi, A., & Silvennoinen, H. (2017). Challenges in education system affecting teacher Professional Development in Oman. Athens Journal of Education, 5(3), 261–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Amin, M. (2019). The role of educational technology in the ESL classroom. Global Journal of Archaeology & Anthropology 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.19080/GJAA.2019.11.555801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Attwell, G., Bimrose, J., Brown, A., & Barnes, S.-A. (2008). Maturing learning: Mashup personal learning environments. Paper presented at the Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments - 1st Workshop MUPPLE’08, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

  18. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bozdoğan, D., & Özen, R. (2014). Use of ICT technologies and factors affecting pre-service ELT teachers’ perceived ICT self-efficacy. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 186–196.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Çelik, S., & Aytin, K. (2014). Teachers’ views on digital educational tools in English language learning: Benefits and challenges in the Turkish context. TESL-EJ, 18(2), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Chern, C. (2010). An overview of English language education at primary level in Taiwan. Paper presented at the Open Symposium on Primary School English Education in Asia, Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.iscaspeech.org/archive/L2WS_2010/papers/lw10_S3.pdf

  22. Cifuentes, L., Maxwell, G., & Bulu, S. (2011). Technology integration through professional learning community. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession. London: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. Educational Change and Development Series. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED434878.pdf

  26. Dayoub, R., & Bashiruddin, A. (2012). Exploring English-language teachers’ professional development in developing countries: Cases from Syria and Pakistan. Professional Development in Education, 38(4), 589–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. El-Bilawi, N., & Nasser, I. (2017). Teachers’ professional development as a pathway for educational reform in Egypt. Reflective Practice, 18(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Emara, A. (2020). Identity and technology integration in an EFL context: A study of Egyptian teachers and adult learners. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Nebraska, USA. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1125&context=teachlearnstudent

  29. Farrell, T. (2013). Reflective practice in ESL teacher development groups: From practices to principles. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Firth, S. (2011). Qualitative data analysis: Application of the framework approach. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teachers’ learning. Journal for Staff Development, 28(3), 35–36.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fusch, P., Fusch, G., & Ness, L. (2018). Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Social Change, 10(1), 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gönen, S. (2019). A qualitative study on a situated experience of technology integration: Reflections from pre-service teachers and students. Computer Assisted language Learning, 32(3), 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1552974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gulamhussein, A. (2013). Effective professional development in an era of high stakes accountability. Retrieved from http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Staffingstudents/Teaching-the-Teachers-Effective-Professional-Development-in-an-2013Era-of-High-Stakes-Accountability/Teaching-the-Teachers-Full-Report.pdf

  35. Hackett, A., & Strickland, K. (2018). Using the framework approach to analyse qualitative data: A worked example. Nurse Researcher. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2018.e1580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Keuk, C., & Kimura, K. (2015). Communities of practice: Fostering ELT research in a development context. Language Education in Asia, 6(2), 86–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lailiyah, M., & Cahyono, B. (2017). Indonesian EFL teachers’ self-efficacy towards technology integration (SETI) and their use of technology in EFL teaching. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(2), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.22158/selt.v5n2p344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. McDonald, J., & Cater-Steel, A. (2016). Communities of practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  40. McDonald, J., & Star, C. (2006). Designing the future of learning through a community of practice of teachers of first year courses at an Australian university. In The First International LAMS Conference: Designing the Future of Learning. Sydney, Australia.

  41. McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2008). Developing communities of practice in schools. Retrieved from https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2690

  42. Ministry of Education. (2017). Education system in Oman: Basic education. Retrieved from http://home.moe.gov.om/english/module.php?module=pagesshowpage&CatID=11&ID=17

  43. Mitchell, I., & Mitchell, J. (2008). The project for enhancing effective learning (PEEL): 22 Years of Praxis. In A. Samaras, A. Freese, C. Kosnik, & C. Beck (Eds.), Learning communities in practice. Explorations of educational purpose (Vol. 4). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mollaei, F., & Riasati, M. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of using technology in teaching EFL. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 2(1), 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Morse, J. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. Denizin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Murugaiah, P., Azman, H., Thang, S., & Krish, P. (2012). Teacher learning via communities of practice: A Malaysian case study. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 7(2), 162–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Nasser, R. (2017). Qatar’s educational reform past and future: Challenges in teacher development. Open Review of Educational Research, 4(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Nova, M. (2017). Utilizing video for technology integration support in Indonesian EFL classroom: Usages and obstacles. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 2(1), 15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Oxford Business Group. (2017). The report: Oman 2017. Retrieved from https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/oman-2017.

  50. Pyrko, I., Dorfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: What makes communities of practice work? Human Relations, 70(4), 389–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research by Jane Ritchie and Liz Spencer. In A. Bryman & R. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data (pp. 173–194). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Samuel, R., & Abu Bakar, Z. (2006). The utilization and integration of ICT tools in promoting English language teaching and learning: Reflections from English option teachers in Kuala Langat district, Malaysia. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 2(2), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Siefert, B., Kelly, K., Yearta, L., & Oliveira, T. (2019). Teacher perceptions and use of technology across content areas with linguistically diverse middle school students. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1568327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Snyder, W., & Wenger, E. (2010). Our world as a learning system: A communities-of-practice approach. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 107–124). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Srivastava, A., & Thomson, S. (2009). Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied research note policy research. JOAAG, 4(2), 72–79.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Taie, M. (2015). English language teaching in South Korea: A route to success. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(1), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0501.19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Tang, S. (2011). Teachers’ professional identity, educational change and neo-liberal pressures on education in Hong Kong. Teacher Development, 15(3), 363–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. The Education Council. (2017). Philosophy of Education in the Sultanate of Oman. Retrieved from https://educouncil.gov.om/downloads/AZ27826wxDsr.pdf

  59. Trinder, R. (2017). Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies. ELT Journal, 71(4), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ulla, M., Perales, W., & Tarrayo, V. (2020). Integrating Internet-based applications in English language teaching: Teacher practices in a Thai university. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 356–378.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching & Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Yang, C. (2011). Investigating the information technology courses for pre-service and in-service English teachers in Hong Kong. Profile, 13(2), 43–57.

  63. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179–198). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wenger, E. (2012). Communities of practice and the social learning systems: The career of a concept. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/09-10-27-CoPs-and-systems-v2.01.pdf

  66. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & De Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. The Netherlands: Ruud de Moor Centrum, 202010–2011. Retrieved from http://www.knowledgearchitecture.com/downloads/Wenger_Trayner_DeLaat_Value_creation.pdf

  67. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice: a brief overview of the concept and its uses. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/

  68. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Wheatley, M., & Frieze, D. (2007). Using emergence to take social innovations to scale. The Shambhala Institute for Authentic Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.ohr.wisc.edu/cop/articles/emergence_wheatley_frieze.pdf

  70. Wong, J. (2010). Searching for good practice in teaching: A comparison of two subject-based professional learning communities in a secondary school in Shanghai. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), 623–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zimmerman, W., Knight, S., Favre, D., & Ikhlef, A. (2016). Effect of professional development on teaching behaviors and efficacy in Qatari educational reforms. Teacher Development, 21(2), 324–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Al-Issa.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A: Focus group discussion questions

Appendix A: Focus group discussion questions

  1. 1.

    How do you view your experience of participating in a CoP?

  2. 2.

    How do you view the integration of technology in teaching?

  3. 3.

    How did you contribute to the CoP?

  4. 4.

    Have you achieved what you wanted in the CoP?

  5. 5.

    What things did you like most about the CoP meetings?

  6. 6.

    What things did you like least about CoP?

  7. 7.

    What have you learned?

  8. 8.

    What skills have you gained?

  9. 9.

    Has the CoP helped you build relationships with other members?

  10. 10.

    Did these relationships motivate you to participate? How? Why/why not?

  11. 11.

    How are you currently using technology in your teaching and for what purposes?

  12. 12.

    Has the CoP helped you to integrate technology into your teaching?

  13. 13.

    Has your understanding of how effective technology can be integrated changed?

  14. 14.

    What challenges did you face?

  15. 15.

    How did you deal with the challenges?

  16. 16.

    Do you think you will continue to contribute to the CoP after the study?

  17. 17.

    Do you think you can use technology more effectively in your teaching?

  18. 18.

    What suggestions do you have for improving the CoP?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Al-Habsi, T., Al-Busaidi, S. & Al-Issa, A. Integrating technology in English language teaching through a community of practice in the Sultanate of Oman: implications for policy implementation. Educ Res Policy Prac (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-021-09291-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Technology
  • English language teaching
  • Community of practice
  • Policy
  • Second Language Teacher Education