Leveraging Technology To Support The Goals Of Dual Language Bilingual Education: An Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods Study
2023
- 138Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage138
- Downloads82
- Abstract Views56
Thesis / Dissertation Description
This explanatory sequential mixed methods study explored how and why dual language (DL) teachers used technology and the extent to which their use of technology supported the goals of DL of bilingualism, biliteracy, academic achievement, and sociocultural competence. The study was guided by Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) technological pedagogical content framework, Bunch’s (2013) pedagogical language knowledge, Biesta’s et al. (2015) teacher agency framework, and Moersch’s (1997) levels of technology implementation framework. In the quantitative phase, data was collected with an original survey, and in the qualitative phase, data was generated through observations, interviews, and artifacts. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The qualitative data was analyzed using descriptive and in vivo coding. Codes were used to develop emergent themes. Overall, the DL teachers leveraged technology in various ways for planning, instruction, and assessment supporting their students’ academic achievement by building background knowledge, introducing concepts with comprehensible input, and providing vocabulary practice. They also used different digital tools to develop students’ sociocultural competence by building a strong classroom community, incorporating students into the curriculum, and teaching about different cultures. Moreover, the participants used technology to communicate with parents and seek professional development opportunities. DL teachers’ technology use was influenced by contributing and inhibiting contextual factors. Practical implications stipulated include providing DL teachers with appropriate planning time, supporting teachers with professional development that is relevant to DL and encouraging effective technology integration, allowing for curriculum flexibility, and investing in resources in the partner language.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know