Perceptions of Arabic language teachers toward their use of technology at the Omani basic education schools Ali Al Musawi & Abdullah Al Hashmi & Ali Mahdi Kazem & Fatima Al Busaidi & Salim Al Khaifi # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014 Abstract This study is part of a 3-year strategic research project to measure the effectiveness of the design and use of new software for learning Arabic. However, this paper’ s particular objective is to evaluate the use of technology in the Omani basic education schools as it is perceived by the Arabic language teachers. The study follows the descriptive methods using a questionnaire as the main instrument. It was found that teachers mostly use computer software and presentation devices to introduce and explain their lessons. Significant differences were found among teachers in terms of teaching experience in favor of the (1–3 years) category but there was no significant difference attributed to the technological expertise. The research discusses these find- ings and suggests recommendations. Educ Inf Technol DOI 10.1007/s10639-013-9305-5 A. Al Musawi (*) Instructional and Learning Technologies Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman e-mail: [email protected]URL: http://www.al-musawi.com A. Al Hashmi : F. Al Busaidi Curriculum and Instruction Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman A. Al Hashmi e-mail: [email protected]F. Al Busaidi e-mail: [email protected]A. M. Kazem Psychology Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman e-mail: [email protected]S. Al Khaifi Ministry of Education, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman e-mail: [email protected]
Transcript
Perceptions of Arabic language teachers towardtheir use of technology at the Omani basiceducation schools
Ali Al Musawi & Abdullah Al Hashmi & Ali Mahdi Kazem &
Fatima Al Busaidi & Salim Al Khaifi
# Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
Abstract This study is part of a 3-year strategic research project to measure theeffectiveness of the design and use of new software for learning Arabic. However, thispaper’s particular objective is to evaluate the use of technology in the Omani basiceducation schools as it is perceived by the Arabic language teachers. The study followsthe descriptive methods using a questionnaire as the main instrument. It was found thatteachers mostly use computer software and presentation devices to introduce andexplain their lessons. Significant differences were found among teachers in terms ofteaching experience in favor of the (1–3 years) category but there was no significantdifference attributed to the technological expertise. The research discusses these find-ings and suggests recommendations.
Educ Inf TechnolDOI 10.1007/s10639-013-9305-5
A. Al Musawi (*)Instructional and Learning Technologies Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University,Muscat, Sultanate of Omane-mail: [email protected]: http://www.al-musawi.com
A. Al Hashmi : F. Al BusaidiCurriculum and Instruction Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat,Sultanate of Oman
A. M. KazemPsychology Department, College of Education, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Omane-mail: [email protected]
S. Al KhaifiMinistry of Education, Muscat, Sultanate of Omane-mail: [email protected]
Keywords Technology use . Arabic teaching . Language learning . Teachers . Basiceducation . Oman
1 Introduction
This era of advanced information and communication requires creative languageteaching skills which are commensurate to the requirements of the burst of knowledgeand technological progress. Teaching languages is an art that must keep pace withtechnological developments that are useful for teaching and learning language skills.The provision of language content is an interesting way for students to help themacquire various language skills using multimedia, computers and internet technologieswith guidance and self-learning. It provides an atmosphere for active learning which issupported by the use of sound with motion pictures, watching practical applications andlanguage practice (Sadik 2008).
As evidenced by the results of research (Hoopingarner 2009; Goh et al. 2004) in thefield of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL), effective use of technology canenhance the teaching of language skills and the best educational practices are those thattake into account the educational foundations of language teaching and, at the sametime, make effective use of technology. These researches show that the instructor shouldlook at the technology as a tool that can improve teaching and learning by increasinginput, and provide additional opportunities to deepen the study of language, where themultimedia technology is used as a platform for interaction and implementation ofactivities.
Al Musawi (2000) calls for the need to draw the attention of Arab educators to therequirements of the new generation by nurturing and developing their technologicalskills within the school curriculum and through efficient teacher training; he alsoadvocates avoidance of the insistence on traditional curriculum design and teachingmethods. We must work on design of a curriculum which adopts the latest technologiesand multimedia software to attract the attention of the Arab learner. Awny (2004) hasargued that technology has positive impacts on a large community, but it may carrynegative effects as well. He adds that experience has shown that technology can changethe habits, cultural heritage and local knowledge of the community, and furtherrecommends the importance of technological capacity-building in the Arab countriesin order to enable communities to take advantage of modern technology while main-taining Arab culture and traditions.
This study is part of a 3-year project funded by His Majesty the Sultan of Oman’s grantfor strategic research at Sultan Qaboos University (SQU). The project aims to identify theweaknesses in Arabic language learning, especially reading skills, and to determine thebest methods to design and evaluate remedial software in the field. It also aims to measurethe effectiveness of the design and use of new software utilized in teaching. Therefore, theresearchers will design, produce, and evaluate this remedial software following thesteps outlined below:
i. Conduct a survey of Omani, Arab, and international literature with the purpose to:• Isolate reading weaknesses and their possible solutions using education and
information technology in Arabic language teaching.
Educ Inf Technol
• Develop a set of ‘design criteria’ for the Arabic language software especially toaddress the weaknesses of reading for the targeted age group.
ii. Conduct a survey to explore the technological tools/software and their use inbasic education schools. This paper summarizes the work conducted in this partof the project.
iii. Conduct a survey to explore the existing reading weaknesses among students inthe basic education schools.
iv. Review samples of the existing software addressing the reading weak-nesses.
v. Review samples of the lessons regarding the reading curriculum of the basiceducation schools and choose lessons’ content and skills that deal with theexisting reading weaknesses.
vi. Develop scenarios and produce a remedial software prototype using the selectedcurricular content and the ‘design criteria’.
vii. Prepare field research instruments such as a pre/posttest and associatedattitudinal scale.
viii. Measure the validity and reliability of research tools and software; and modify asdeemed necessary.
ix. Evaluate through field experimentation the effectiveness of the software inimproving the reading ability among the targeted students.
1.1 The research objective and questions
The research objective of the above-mentioned project is to study the currentuse of educational technology in teaching the Arabic language. Its main goalis to investigate the use of technology as perceived by Arabic languageteachers in the Omani basic education schools. The followings are the re-search questions:
1. What is the current use of technology types in Arabic language teachingin the first cycle of basic education schools as perceived by its teach-ers?
2. Does the current use of technology types as perceived by Arabic language teachersdiffer in terms of: teaching experience (three levels: 1–3 years, 4–10 years, andmore than 10 years) and technological expertise (three levels: University degree,In-service training, and ICDL certificate)?
3. What is the current level of classroom applications of technology in Arabic lan-guage teaching in the first cycle of basic education schools as perceived by itsteachers?
1.2 Importance of the research
This research is important as it studies the current status of technology use inthe field of Arabic language teaching in the Sultanate of Oman. In particular, itwill help to identify this use as perceived by Arabic language teachers in theirteaching and in terms of its types, methods, and certain statistical variables.
Educ Inf Technol
2 Literature review
The preliminary results of a study by Al-Khatib (2011), conducted on a group oflanguages studies’ students, indicated that technology-enhanced learning has had apositive impact. Evidence suggests its use has led to higher performance in the finalexamination results and increased the students’ abilities in the following areas: compre-hension, analysis, dialogue and initiative, along with its social, cultural and academicbenefits which resulted from innovative practices for electronically-supported learning.Many studies have been conducted on the impact of new technologies in terms of theacquisition of learning skills for students. They generally emphasize the importance ofusing technology in the educational process, and its potential benefits, if investedeffectively (Alavi 1994; Baker et al. 1994; Means and Olson 1994; Peak and Doricott1994; Riel 1994; Seever 1992). The results also indicate the positive returns of employingtechnologies in developing all language skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing(Cunningham and Redmond 2008; Blake 1998; Beauvois 1997).
Kurt (2013) reveals that teachers’ use of technology is limited to support of theirtraditional teaching methods. In addition, Gilakjani and Leong (2012) find that litera-ture on teachers’ perceptions of the use of computer technology resources in EnglishLanguage Teaching shows that simply introducing computer technology resources doesnot guarantee teachers’ use of these in practice. Nonetheless, it shows that knowledgeof EFL teachers’ attitudes about teaching, learning, and computers, can aid the designand implementation of EFL instruction. Khamkhien (2012) supports this by concludingthat “teachers have to make the decision to use technology as a part of their languagelearning environments and [to] ensure that they are familiar with the technologicaloptions available and their suitability to particular learning goals, and thus implementthese technologies capitalizing [on] their specific features”. Shafaei’s study (2012)provides empirical support for the positive effects of technology from the perspectiveof learners. Findings of this study reveal that most English learners recognized thebenefits of using technology for learning English. However, the studies confirm thateffective investment of technology requires well-designed software which has goalsthat exceed simply installing computers in the laboratory (Al Musawi 2000). Therefore,Al Musawi (2000) notes the importance of developing computer software and wordprocessing applications for local needs, which can then be adapted to the Arabic socialenvironment and its curriculum in the field of language teaching. He adds that thisshould promote the benefits of the use of computers for the writing and reading ofArabic.
In a study to investigate the views of Arabic and English language teachers on theuse of technology in teaching/learning at the United Arab Emirates’ schools conductedby Ismail et al. (2010), teachers collectively agreed on the important role of technologyin the teaching of languages, and confirmed that the employment of technology isinevitable in their teaching practice because they believe that it encourages students tolearn. Teachers also expressed their willingness to accelerate technology integration inteaching in order to improve the language teaching and learning. In addition, Goh et al.(2004) showed positive views among non-native Arab language learners and recom-mended that, for the application of learning using technology in the teaching of foreignlanguages, there is the necessity for a deeper and greater scrutiny in the design of thecomputer software used. A study by Lubis (2009) on the use of ICT in Arabic language
Educ Inf Technol
teaching for students of Islamic Indonesian schools explains that the use of differenttechnologies contributed to the Arabic language learning of these students, and that theuse of this technology was something very important in order to teach them. This wasbecause it facilitated an understanding of educational materials, helped them to gainmore experience and enabled them to take advantage of the information provided. In asimilar study, Mohri (2010) examined the perceptions of teachers towards teachingmaterials which were designed using a combination of story and technology in Arabiclanguage teaching. He found that for high school students in Thailand, Arabic languageteachers believe that these technological learning tools were effective for the teachingof Arabic, and both easier and more effective than traditional materials.
A study of the perceptions of Arabic language learners concerning theprocess of learning using web linguistic games, carried out at the FoundationStudies of the Malaysian Islamic International University, shows that learnershad a positive trend towards learning the Arabic language using web games aswell as some regular video games (Sahrir and Alias 2011). In a study conduct-ed by Aldalalah et al. (2010) to investigate the impact of educational softwareon first elementary grade students in their learning of the Arabic language,students who studied using sounds with pictures performed much better thanthose who used text with pictures. The study concluded that the use of sound withpicture was an important catalyst for Arabic language learning.
Research on the Arab and Omani context indicates that there was a need to increasethe newer less expensive, and more portable technologies in order to make effective useof technology in education (Al Musawi 2007). Almekhlafi and Almeqdadi (2010)found that teachers are integrating technology in their class activities using varioustechnologies to promote students’ learning. Ismail et al. (2010) found that the use oftechnology by Arabic teachers for substantial learning and teaching activities is verymodest and that they mainly used a computer to help them prepare their instruction.Bakr (2011) found that teachers’ attitudes towards computers are typically positive withno significant differences in terms of gender and teaching experience.
3 Methodology
3.1 Design
This research follows the descriptive approach using a questionnaire to quantitativelysurvey the current status and collect data.
3.2 Participants
The study population consists entirely of teachers in the fourth grade of the first cycle ofthe basic education schools in the Sultanate of Oman; the number of students totaled650. The teachers in this cycle are all females and, thus, gender was not considered asan independent variable. The sample of the study was 350 teachers from threeeducational districts; namely; the capital, interior, and Batinah South. Returns fromthe field gleaned 103 questionnaires which comprised the actual participants of thestudy.
Educ Inf Technol
3.3 Instruments
1. A list of the technological devices and tools used in teaching the Arabic language:the list of the technological devices and tools used in teaching the Arabic languagewas obtained from the e-Portal Department at the Ministry of Education. Thiscomprehensive list covers (42) items including AV equipment (e.g. audio recorderand VCR), computer software (e.g. office packages), e-Learning systems (e.g.Moodle), and multimedia devices (e.g. data show).
2. A survey questionnaire (for teachers) to investigate the use of these devices and tools:the questionnaire was in reference to the above list of devices and tools which werevertically arranged in a table with two rating scales on both sides to measure: (1) theteacher’s perceptions of technology types’ use and (2) their classroom’s applicationsof technology. A separate section on the teachers’ demographics was provided,specifically to investigate their teaching experience and technological expertise.
3.4 Validity and reliability
The face validity of the list was calculated by presenting it to a group of referees whowere specialists in the area of educational technology and whomade somemodificationsto the original list. These modifications include: (1) adding new types of technologiesused in Omani schools; namely, the interactive board and geographical informationsoftware; and (2) correcting typographical and formatting errors. The modificationswere carefully added and it was decided to use the modified list for its inclusiveness.
The questionnaire was subsequently developed using the final list of the technologicaldevices and tools. The tools were vertically arranged in a table with two rating scales onboth sides; one for the technology types’ use with three scale categories: (always;sometimes; rarely), and the second for the classroom applications of technology with fivescale categories: (preparation; introduction; explanation; activities; evaluation). The reli-ability coefficient was measured using Cronbach’s alpha and it was found to be in therange 0.87–0.89.
3.5 Data analysis
Statistical analysis of the data using statistical software (SPSS) was conducted to calculatemeans, standard deviations, t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Scheffé test.
4 Results and discussion
Below, the authors will present data derived from the field and interpret them within thecontext of the scope of the literature review and the educational context.
4.1 Current status of technology use in Arabic language teaching
To answer the first research question which states: “What is the current use oftechnology types in Arabic language teaching in the first cycle of basic education
Educ Inf Technol
Table 1 Means (M) and standard deviations (SD) of the teachers’ perceptions of the status use of technologytypes in Arabic language teaching in the first cycle of basic education schools (N=102)
29 16 e-Learning through the educational portal 1.28 1.02
34 17 Internet browser 1.15 1.13
17 18 Interactive board 1.00 1.26
37 19 E-mail 0.98 1.11
10 20 Radio 0.95 1.04
30 21 Arabic language software 0.90 0.91
15 22 Scanner 0.85 0.93
41 23 Geographical information software (e.g. Google Earth) 0.84 0.86
4 24 Multi-purpose video camera 0.78 0.83
13 25 Digital photographic camera 0.78 0.80
32 26 Statistical packages 0.78 0.90
20 27 Headphones 0.72 0.89
38 28 Databases 0.69 0.86
14 29 Digital video camera 0.57 0.71
18 30 Microphone 0.50 0.82
39 31 Multimedia software 0.44 0.62
40 32 e-Learning management system (e.g. Moodle) 0.44 0.71
27 33 Digital libraries 0.42 0.74
28 34 Internet-based video conference 0.41 0.74
2 35 Smart board 0.38 0.80
23 36 TV studio 0.21 0.51
25 37 Language laboratory 0.21 0.54
19 38 Intercom 0.19 0.54
22 39 Audio studio 0.17 0.45
24 40 CCTV laboratory 0.08 0.30
21 41 Assistive technology for special needs students 0.06 0.28
Theoretical mean = 2
Educ Inf Technol
schools, as perceived by teachers?”, the participants were asked to summarize theircurrent use of technology types on a categories scale of: (always); (sometimes);(rarely). These options were analytically given the values of: (3), (2), and (1) consec-utively. Table 1 lists and ranks (in descending order) the means and standard deviationsof the current use of technology types.
Table 1 above shows that the mean figure is located between (0.06) and (2.69). Aftercomparing these means with the theoretical mean (2), it was found that all means werebelow the theoretical mean except for the following technologies/tools: audio recorder,learning resource center (LRC), OHP, computer, and data show. This means that audiorecorders, the computer’s software and presentation devices, such as the data show, andthe OHP are frequently used technology types in the classrooms and the LRC to teachArabic. For example, one teacher commented that technology “gives [...] the chance topresent the course objectives”. Another teacher wrote that technology “helps [them] topresent in the LRC in a logical sequence”. Experiential evidence supports this findingas the present Omani basic education schools are equipped with such technologies.This finding is partially supported by Al Musawi (2000, 2007); Kurt (2013); Shafaeistudy (2012); Almekhlafi and Almeqdadi (2010); Ismail et al. (2010); Lubis (2009),and Mohri (2010). Interestingly, Arabic language software was not ranked highaccording to the teachers’ perceptions of their current use of technology types. Thisimplies a shortfall in the use of the existing software that can be perhaps attributed to anincompatibility with the Omani learners’ needs in terms of the curricular design.
4.2 Teaching experience
To answer the second research question on ‘teaching experience’ as an independentvariable, which states: “Does the current use of technology types as perceived byArabic language teachers differ in terms of teaching experience?” the mean of eachcategory of this variable (1–3 years, 4–10 years, and more than 10 years) wascalculated. Table 2 lists the means and standard deviations for the teaching experiencecategories.
Table 2 shows that the highest mean was 1.15 for the more than 10 years categoryand the lowest was 0.92 for the 4–10 years category. An ANOVA test was conducted tofurther investigate the effect of teaching experience on use of technology types. Table 3below shows the results of this test.
Table 3 shows that a statistical significance was observed at the level of (0.013). Inorder to verify the differences, the Scheffe test was carried out. Table 4 below shows theresults of this test.
The findings in Table 4 show significant differences at the level of (0.05). Thisindicates that teachers with teaching experience of (1–3 years) affect the current use of
Table 2 Means (M) and standarddeviations (SD) for the teachingexperience categories with refe-rence to the current use of techno-logy types in Arabic languageteaching
Category N M SD
1–3 years 22 1.10 0.41
4–10 years 36 0.92 0.34
More than 10 years 44 1.15 0.36
Educ Inf Technol
technology types more than the other categories. This means that the younger gene-ration of teachers has more technological skills and, thus, a higher level of computerself-efficacy than their senior colleagues. One teacher from this category wrote that“my extensive use of technology has developed my skills to create interaction in theclass”. Although this finding is generally supported by Cunningham and Redmond(2008); Gilakjani and Leong (2012); Khamkhien (2012); Blake (1998) and Beauvois(1997), it refutes the above findings by Bakr (2011) and Sendurur (2012) who foundthat teachers’ teaching experience negatively contributed to their use of technology andlevel of computer self-efficacy.
4.3 Technological expertise
To answer the first research question for ‘technological expertise’ as an independentvariable which states: “Does the current use of technology types as perceived by Arabiclanguage teachers differ in terms of technological expertise?”, the mean of eachcategory of this variable (University degree, In-service training, and ICDL certificate)was calculated. Table 5 below lists the means and standard deviations of the teachingexperience categories.
Table 5 shows that the highest mean is (1.12) for the category (in-servicetraining) and the lowest is (1.04) for the category (university degree).Furthermore, an ANOVA test was conducted to investigate the effect of techno-logical expertise on the current use of technology types. Table 6 below shows theresults of this test.
Table 6 shows that there is no statistically significant difference between thetechnological expertise categories which means that they have no effect on thecurrent use of technology types for teaching Arabic. This finding can beinterpreted by the fact that Omani teachers usually hold university degrees,take in-service training, and complete ICDL certificate requirements. However,this finding contradicts those of Iyamu and Ogiegbaen (2005) who found thatthe teachers’ use of educational technology was significantly related to their pre-serviceand in-service training. It also contradicts the findings of Adeyinka et al. (2008) whoconclude that teachers’ lack of technical expertise was a prominent factor hindering theirconfidence in using technology.
Table 3 ANOVA test for the effect of teaching experience on the current use of technology types
Source of variance S.S df M.S “F” value Sig.
Between groups 1.131 2 0.565 4.551 0.013
Within groups 12.299 99 0.124
Table 4 Multiple comparisonsScheffé test showing the effect ofteaching experience on the currentuse of technology types
Comparisons Diff. Sig.
1–3 years 4–10 years 0.18 Not significant
1–3 years More than 10 years −0.05 Not significant
4–10 years More than 10 years −0.23 0.05
Educ Inf Technol
4.4 Classroom applications of technology in the teaching of Arabic
To answer the third research question, which states “What is the current level ofclassroom applications of technology in Arabic language teaching in the first cycle ofbasic education schools, as perceived by teachers?”, the participants were asked todescribe the frequency of their use of instructional software and equipment in theirclassroom teaching on a rating scale of five options: (preparation); (introduction),(explanation); (activities); and (evaluation). Table 7 below shows the descriptivestatistics of the responses.
Table 7 shows the patterns of the current level of teachers’ use of technology in theclassroom, in terms of the methods used in teaching the Arabic language. These can beprioritized in the following order:
1. mostly to explain the main concepts within lessons;2. less to introduce the ideas at the beginning of the lessons;3. less frequently to prepare for their lessons;4. the least during activities and/or evaluation within lessons.
This finding demonstrates the need to increase the use of technology in terms ofthe methods used in Arabic language teaching and specifically during activities andevaluation. For example, audio recorders, one of the most important technologies inlanguage teaching (see Table 1 above) has a percentage of (54.9 %) during thelessons’ introduction but has ‘nil’ use when it comes to the evaluation method. Theneed for basic education teachers to increase their use of technology duringactivities is noted in the works of Almekhlafi and Almeqdadi (2010); Kurt(2013), and Ismail et al. (2010). This should improve their students’ learningmethods and academic performance (Sahrir and Alias 2011; Aldalalah et al.2010). In addition, the current usage level of the existing Arabic language softwareis low due perhaps to its improper curricular content and this emphasizes the need toincrease its use.
The finding also corroborates the findings in Table 1, in that computer software andpresentation tools, LRC and OHP, are mostly used for an introduction and as explana-tion for teaching Arabic in the classroom with, for example, a percentage of (55.9 %)for the data show. One teacher mentioned that “students develop self-learning, acquirelanguage skills and easily increase them by accessing computer resources”. This
Table 5 Means (M) and standarddeviations (SD) and their impact onthe technological expertise catego-ries of the current use of technologytypes in teaching the Arabiclanguage
Category N M SD
University degree 68 1.04 0.38
In-service training 24 1.12 0.26
ICDL certificate 10 1.05 0.47
Table 6 ANOVA test for theeffect of technological expertiseon the status use oftechnology types
Source of variance S.S df M.S “F” value Sig.
Between groups 0.605 2 0.303 0.847 0.432
Within groups 35.392 99 0.357
Educ Inf Technol
finding shows that teachers’ perceptions of technology use are generally positive; thisresult substantiates many works of the literature review such as: Al-Khatib (2011);Awny (2004); Hoopingarner (2009), Shafaei study (2012); Goh et al. (2004); Alavi
Table 7 Frequencies and percentages of the current use of technology in terms of methods for Arabiclanguage teaching (N=102)
No Type of technology Frequencies and percentages of technology use methods
(1994); Baker et al. (1994); Means and Olson (1994); Peak and Doricott (1994); Riel(1994) and Seever (1992).
5 Conclusion
This study was conducted to study the current use of educational technology in theteaching of the Arabic language. Its main objective was to investigate the use oftechnology as perceived by Arabic language teachers in Omani basic education schools.
It was found that teachers typically perceive the LRC as a good place to use audiorecorders and computer’s software and presentation devices, such as the data show andthe OHP, to prepare for the classroom-based Arabic; furthermore they mostly use thesetechnologies to introduce and explain their lessons. However, it seems that there is aneed to increase the use of educational technology in the lessons’ activities andevaluation. A significant difference was found among teachers in terms of the variableof teaching experience in favor of (1–3 years) category indicating its marked effect onthe current use of technology types more than the other teaching experience categories.On the other hand, there was no significant difference attributed to the technologicalexpertise variable. It would appear that this variable has no effect on the status use oftechnology types in the teaching of Arabic. One of the noted findings was the low useof existing Arabic language software and this study has emphasized the need toincrease the design and use of locally produced resources.
It can be concluded that use of educational technology for teaching Arabic in Omanibasic education is reasonable but not optimal. Written comments by the respondentssupports this conclusion. Other findings have shown the need to increase the use ofeducational devices and tools during the activities sections of the lessons and to preparesoftware which is specifically designed for the purpose of teaching the Arabic lan-guage. They also show that the technological skills acquired by the younger generationof teachers are better than those of the senior ones indicating a need to re-train the latterto improve their language teaching methods by implementing new technological skills.
5.1 Recommendations
Within the scope of the results above, this study recommends the following:
1. For this project, which is funded by His Majesty the Sultan of Oman’s grant forstrategic research at SQU: the project will continue focusing on the followingobjectives:
• Identify weaknesses in learning the Arabic language, especially reading skills;• Design remedial software content to deal with these weaknesses;• Determine the best methods to evaluate the impact of remedial software on the
student’s performance in the field.2. For the field practice: conduct workshops to upgrade teachers’ technological skills
and to disseminate ways and methods drawn from the research findings among thesenior teachers in the Omani basic education schools.
3. For further research: conduct in-depth studies to examine the impact of technologyfor teaching Arabic on different participants, variables, and categories.
Educ Inf Technol
References
Adeyinka, T., Adedeji, T., Majekodunmi, T., Adika, L., & Adeyinka, A. (2008). An assessment of secondaryschool teachers uses of ICT’s: Implications for further development of ICT’s use in Nigerian secondaryschools. Retrieved April 2012, from http://unilorin.edu.ng/publications.
Al Musawi, A. (2000). Technology effectiveness in improving teaching, learning, and communication skills:literature review and implications to Arabic education. Contemporary Education Journal, 54, 221–244.
Al Musawi, A. (2007). Current status of educational technologies at Omani higher education institutions andtheir future prospective. Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), 55(4), 395–410.doi:10.1007/s11423-007-9041-x. USA.
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: an empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2),159–174.
Aldalalah, M., Soon, F., & Ababneh, W. (2010). Effects of multimedia-based instructional designs for Arabiclanguage learning among pupils of different achievement levels. International Journal of Human andSocial Sciences, 5(5), 311–317.
Al-Khatib, H. (2011). Technology enhanced learning: virtual realities; concrete results case study on theimpact of TEL on learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning- EURODL, Issue 1,Retrieved April 2012, from http://www.eurodl.org.
Almekhlafi, A. G., & Almeqdadi, F. A. (2010). Teachers’ perceptions of technology integration in the UnitedArab Emirates school classrooms. Educational Technology and Society, 13(1), 165–175.
Awny, M. (2004). Social impact of technology: a perspective of developing countries. Proceedings of 13thInternational Conference on Management of Technology (IAMOT2004), (pp. 1–7), Retrieved April 2012,from http://www.iamot.org/conference/index.php.
Baker, E., Gearhart, M., & Herman, J. (1994). Evaluating the apple classrooms of tomorrow: 1990 evaluationstudy. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O’Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 172–197). Hillside: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bakr, S. (2011). Attitudes of Egyptian teachers towards computers. Contemporary Educational Technology,2(4), 308–318.
Beauvois, M. H. (1997). Computer-mediated communication: Technology for improving speaking andwriting. In M. D. Bush (Ed.), Technology-enhanced language learning (pp. 165–184). Lincolnwood:National Textbook Company.
Blake, R. J. (1998). The role of technology in second language learning. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Learning foreignand second languages: Perspectives in research and scholarship (pp. 209–237). New York: ModernLanguage Association.
Cunningham, A., & Redmond, M. (2008). Instructional design and early language learning: cognition,creativity, and technology. American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese, pp. 435–445.
Gilakjani, A., & Leong, L. (2012). EFL teachers“ attitudes toward using computer technology in Englishlanguage teaching. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(3), 630–636. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.3.630-636.
Goh, Y., Ng, A., Raja, B., & Wan, A. (2004) Technology and foreign language learning: student perceptionson the feasibility of using WBI (Web-Based Instruction) to supplement the on-campus foreign languagecourses in UiTM, Technical Report. Institute of Research, Development and Commercialization,Universiti Teknologi MARA.
Hoopingarner, D. (2009). Best practices in technology and language teaching. Language and LinguisticsCompass, 3(1), 222–235.
Ismail, S., Almekhlafi, A., & Almekhlafy, M. (2010). Teachers’ perceptions of the use of technology inteaching languages in United Arab Emirates’ schools. International Journal for Research in Education(IJRE), 27, 37–56.
Iyamu, E., & Ogiegbaen, S. (2005). Assessment of the use of educational technology by social studies teachersin secondary schools in western Nigeria. Australian Journal of Educational Technology (AJET), 8(1),Retrieved April 2012, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/e-jist/docs/vol8_no1/commentary/assess_ed_tech.htm.
Khamkhien, A. (2012). Computer assisted language learning and English language teaching in Thailand:overview. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 55–64. doi:10.5901/mjss.2012.03.01.55.
Kurt, S. (2013). Examining teachers’ use of computer-based technologies: a case study. Education andInformation Technologies, 18(4), 557–570.
Lubis, M. (2009). Teaching and learning Arabic language through multicultural approach and applying ICT inpesantren institution. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 3(3), 171–178.
Means, B., & Olson (1994). Using technology to support education reforms. Washington, D. C.: Office ofEducational Research and Improvement, U. S. Department of Education. ERIC Document ED 364 220,ERIC Clearinghouse on Information Resources, Syracuse, N.Y.
Mohri, M. (2010). Perceptions of using short story and technology in teaching Arabic language to secondarystudents in Thailand, paper presented at the regional conference on knowledge integration in ICT, June2010. Putrajaya: Institution Institute of Education, IIUM.
Peak, K., & Doricott, D. (1994). Why Use technology? Educational Leadership, 51(7), 11–14.Riel, M. (1994). Educational change in a technology-rich environment. Journal of Research on Computing in
Education, 26, 452–474.Sadik, A. (2008). Arabic language teaching technology, paper presented at seminar of the Qatari National
Committee of Education, Culture, and Science; Retrieved April 2012, from http://www.slideshare.net/alrefa3ia/ss-6381870.
Sahrir, M., & Alias, N. (2011). A study on Malaysian language learners’ perception towards learning Arabicvia online games. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 11(3), 129–145.
Seever, A. (1992). Achievement and enrollment evaluation of the central computers unlimited middle magnetschool 1990–1991. Report No. IR 015 634. Kansas, MO: Kansas City School District. ERIC Document348 962.
Sendurur, P. (2012). Identification of factors affecting integration of information and communication technol-ogies in basic education schools grades from 4 through 8, PhD, Middle East Technical University,Retrieved April 2012, from http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12614401/index.pdf.
Shafaei, A. (2012). Computer assisted learning: a helpful approach in learning English. Frontiers of Languageand Teaching, 3, 108–115.
