Open and Distance Foreign Language Teaching: A Content Analysis Study (2013-2022) A Follow-up Study

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 4, 788 - 798, 10.10.2023

Soner Sözler

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.1340882

Öz

This research presents the results of a content analysis of papers published between 2013 and 2022 in four different journals. To reach conclusions, a content analysis method was employed, which is a qualitative research technique, with the purpose of identifying the subjects of the articles, their samplings, and methodological aspects, as well as analyzing their outcomes and showcasing their trends. Keywords such as English Language Teaching, Distance English Language Teaching, and Distance Foreign Language Teaching were used throughout the research process. The 34 articles obtained were analyzed in detail, and a coding procedure was assigned. In the following step, three factors–study titles, sampling, and research diversity– were used for the analysis of the chosen papers. In the articles published between 2013 and 2022, the most frequently used titles were teaching methodology and technology, as the results showed. For the next variable, sampling diversity, teachers, undergraduate students, and course participants participated utterly in the studies. As for the last variable, which is the research method, the researchers used many more quantitative techniques than qualitative ones. This study is expected to be useful for highlighting potential future studies. It will be simpler to create a framework for studies conducted in this area when content analysis with various variables and journals is conducted.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Content Analysis, Open and Distance Foreign Language Teaching, Distance Learning, Foreign Language.

Açık ve Uzaktan Yabancı Dı̇l Öğretı̇mı̇: Bı̇r İçerı̇k Analı̇zı̇ Çalışması (2013-2022) Bir Devam Çalışması

Öz

Kaynakça

• Sözler S., Karadeniz A. (June 2016). Open and Distance Foreign Language Teaching: A Content Analysis Study Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies, 1-5.
• Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of Distance Education. (3rd edition). London: Routledge.
• Holmberg, B. (1989). Theory and Practice of Distance Education. (2nd edition). London: Routledge.
• Moore, M. G. and Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance Education: A System View (3rd edition). Belmont: Wadsworth.
• Simonson, M., Smaldino, S. E., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education (4th edition). Boston: Pearson.
• Trajanovic, M., Domazet, D. and Misic-İlic, B. (2007). Distance Learning and Foreign Language Teaching. Balkan Conference in Informatics, Bulgaria.
• Johnstone, R. (2009). A review of research on language teaching, learning, and policy was published in 2007. Language Teaching. 42 (3): 305-307.
• Altunışık, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S. & Yıldırım, E. (2010). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri, Adapazarı:Sakarya Yayıncılık.
• Lee, Y., Driscoll, M. P., & Nelson, D. W. (2004). The past, present, and future of research in distance education : Results of content analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 225-241.
• Uzunboylu, H. & Özçınar, Z. (2009). Research and trends in computer-assisted language learning from 1990 to 2008: Results of a citation analysis. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34, 133-150.
• Madyarov, I.(2008). Contradictions in a distance content-based English as a foreign language course: Activity theoretical perspective (thesis). Department of Second Language Acquisition and Instructional Technology, University of South Florida, pp. 374.
• White, C. (2006). The distance learning of foreign languages. Language Teaching, 39 (4): 247-264. Ritzhaupt, A. D., Stewart, M., Smith, P., & Barron, A. E. (2010). An Investigation of Distance Education in North American Research Literature Using Co-word Analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 11(1), 37-60
• Grunfeld, H., & Ng, M. N. (2013). A multimedia approach to ODL for agricultural training in Cambodia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 222. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i1.1275
• Ahangar, A. A., & Izadi, M. (2015, April 15). Online text processing: A study of Iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i2.1974
• Van De Bogart, W. G., & Wichadee, S. (2015). Exploring students’ intention to use LINE for academic purposes based on technology acceptance model. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.1894
• Koç, E. M. (2016). A Critical Look at a Blended English Language Teacher Education Program with an Emphasis on the Practicum. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i4.2286
• Cheng, R. (2016). Reading Online in Foreign Languages: A Study of Strategy Use. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(6). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i6.2567
• Avci, H., & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A Case Study on Mobile-Blended Collaborative Learning in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(7). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i7.3261
• Cabi, E. (2018). The Impact of the Flipped Classroom Model on Students’ Academic Achievement. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i3.3482
• Gómez-Ramirez, I., Arias, A. V., & Duque, L. (2019). Approach to M-learning Acceptance Among University Students. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4061
• Saiful, J. A. (2020). Mobile Teacher Professional Development (MTPD): Delving into English Teachers’ Beliefs in Indonesia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v21i4.4754
• Gurcan, F., Özyurt, Ö., & Cagiltay, N. E. (2021). Investigation of Emerging Trends in the E-Learning Field Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5358
• Polat, E., Hopcan, S., & Yahşi, Ö. (2022). Are K–12 Teachers Ready for E-learning? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 23(2), 214–241. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v23i2.6082
• Borup, J., Shin, J. K., Powell, M., Evmenova, A. S., & Kim, W. (2022). Revising and Validating the Community of Inquiry Instrument for MOOCs and other Global Online Courses. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 23(3), 82–103. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v23i2.6034
• Junhong Xiao (2014) Learner agency in language learning: the story of a distance learner of EFL in China, Distance Education, 35:1, 4-17, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2014.891429
• Susan Y. H. Sun (2014) Learner perspectives on fully online language learning, Distance Education, 35:1, 18-42, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2014.891428
• Po-Hsuan Chen & Olusola Adesope (2016) The effects of need satisfaction on EFL online learner satisfaction, Distance Education, 37:1, 89-106, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2016.1155962
• Christopher D. Hromalik & Tiffany A. Koszalka (2018) Self-regulation of the use of digital resources in an online language learning course improves learning outcomes, Distance Education, 39:4, 528-547, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2018.1520044
• María Fernández-Toro & Concha Furnborough (2018) Evaluating alignment of student and tutor perspectives on feedback on language learning assignments, Distance Education, 39:4, 548-567, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2018.1520043
• Christine Pleines (2020) Understanding vicarious participation in online language learning, Distance Education, 41:4, 453-471, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2020.1821605
• Dettori, G. (2014). Miller, Suzanne M & McVee, Mary B ed (2012) Multimodal composing in classrooms Routledge (New York & London) isbn 978-0-415-89747-1 161 pp £27.99 http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415897471/. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), E6. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12143_3
• Armellini, A., & De Stefani, M. (2016). Social presence in the 21st century: An adjustment to the Community of Inquiry framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1202–1216. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12302
• Hobbs, R., & Tuzel, S. (2017). Teacher motivations for digital and media literacy: An examination of Turkish educators. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12326
• Samaie, M., Nejad, A. F., & Qaracholloo, M. (2018). An inquiry into the efficiency of WhatsApp for self- and peer-assessments of oral language proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12519
• Başal, A. (2019). Learning collocations: Effects of online tools on teaching English adjective-noun collocations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 342–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12562
• Lee, J., & Lee, K. (2019). Informal digital learning of English and English as an international language: The path less traveled. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1447–1461. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12652
• Sevilla-Pavón, A. (2019). L1 versus L2 online intercultural exchanges for the development of 21st century competences: The students’ perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 779–805. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12602
• Brady, M., Devitt, A., & Kiersey, R. (2019). Academic staff perspectives on technology for assessment (TfA) in higher education: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3080–3098. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12742
• Liu, H., Wang, L., & Koehler, M. J. (2019). Exploring the intention‐behavior gap in the technology acceptance model: A mixed‐methods study in the context of foreign‐language teaching in China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2536–2556. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12824
• Hammond, M. (2020). What is an ecological approach and how can it assist in understanding ICT take‐up? British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12889
• Huang, H., Hwang, G., & Chang, C. (2020). Learning to be a writer: A spherical video‐based virtual reality approach to supporting descriptive article writing in high school Chinese courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(4), 1386–1405. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12893
• Shadiev, R., Liu, T., & Hwang, W. Y. (2020). Review of research on mobile‐assisted language learning in familiar, authentic environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 709–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12839
• Hoi, V. N., & Mu, G. M. (2021). Perceived teacher support and students’ acceptance of mobile‐assisted language learning: Evidence from Vietnamese higher education context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 879–898. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13044
• Huang, F., & Teo, T. (2021). Examining the role of technology‐related policy and constructivist teaching belief on English teachers’ technology acceptance: A study in Chinese universities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13027
• Education Tech Research Dev (ETR&D)
• Çelik, S. Unspoken social dynamics in an online discussion group: the disconnect between attitudes and overt behavior of English language teaching graduate students. Education Tech Research Dev 61, 665–683 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9288-3
• Xu, Z., Chen, Z., Eutsler, L. et al. A scoping review of digital game-based technology on English language learning. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 877–904 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09702-2
• Karasar, N. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (28. basım). [Scientific research methods (28th ed.)] Nobel.
• Cronbach, L. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013164404266386
• Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2013). Item response theory. Psychology Press.