Doing what works: A grounded theory case study of technology use by teachers of English at a Korean university

Abstract

Despite considerable effort and expenditure by the Korean government and universities to promote technology use in tertiary education, few teachers of English in Korea regularly and consistently employ technology in their teaching. Moreover, research into the hindrances and enablers of technology use in English education in Korea has been limited for primary and secondary schools and conspicuously absent on the tertiary level. This case study examines what teachers in a general English department at a private university in Seoul undergo as they consider the use of technology both in and out of classrooms. It attempts to provide a holistic look into teacher decision-making in this context. It employs a grounded theory of investigation underpinned by a close reading of the diffusion of innovations theory by Rogers (2003). Data for the study involves three main techniques: semi-structured interviews, a survey questionnaire, and classroom observations. Analysis follows an iterative, grounded method and includes use of both qualitative and quantitative software programs (Atlas.ti 5.0 and SPSS 16.0 respectively). Results from the study form a substantive theory entitled "what works" which helps explain the myriad of decisions that teachers make while trying to manage personal (internal) and administrative (external) goals and aims. Further, all decisions within this system are underpinned by "what works" for teachers in any situation both in terms of reliability and consistency. Implications suggest that the use of technology in the classroom exacerbates preexisting pedagogical and infrastructure issues, leading to inconsistencies in representation and application, as well as an overall limitation of potential use by teachers.

Measuring the effect of ARS on academic performance: A global meta-analysis

“…The academic literature illustrates perfectly what ICTs have achieved with respect to student learning (Padilla-Mel endez, Aguila-Obra, & Garrido-Moreno, 2015;Webster & Son, 2015), and demonstrates the limitations of traditional teaching approaches, including less active learner (university student or school pupil) involvement in the classroom (Stowell, Oldham, & Bennett, 2010) and the lack of periodic feedback on the degree to which the knowledge conveyed has been assimilated (Gok, 2011).…”

The higher education system as the driving force of the country’s sustainable development

“…Research conducted by Korean scientists T. E. Webster, J.-B. Son shows that despite the growth of state financing of higher education institution university lecturers are not willing to use new technologies in their professional activities which limits the formation of students' innovation potential [19]. Therefore, an increasing number of researchers agree that the structure of university innovation development financing is no less important than the amount of financing.…”

The Utility of Constructivist Grounded Theory in Critical Policy Analysis

“…The approach has become a cornerstone of studies from various fields like nursing (Miles, 2018; Singh & Estefan, 2018), education research (Fetherston & Kelly, 2007) health and illness (Charmaz, 1990; Swoboda, 2006; Woods et al, 2016), technology (Joo, 2011; Webster & Son, 2015) and policy studies (Weed, 2005; Richards & Farrokhnia, 2016; Sebeelo & Belgrave, 2021) amongst others. These studies tap into the pragmatic and flexible nature of GT that gives the researcher more control of the data collection and analysis process.…”