Índice de contenidos e indicadores GRI

The fourth research question, regarding factors affecting the technology adoption decision by educational decision makers, was addressed in the exit interview with the headmaster, when I asked him directly whether, having seen the participants’ improvement in EFL skills, he would devote the resources the following year necessary to continue the intervention and further strengthen the students’ English skills. These resources might have included both the MALL technology and increased teacher-student ratio. His answer was definite that his resources are limited, and that he chooses to devote them to subjects required for completion of the 12-year certificate of schooling (which does not include English) that is the minimum level needed for all public service jobs in Israel:

It’s clear that it’s a “must” for all of us, but for the students themselves, it’s not a must… I put the

resources into the subjects that the students must have to complete 12 years of school…I would like everyone to get everything all the time. But now we see that it isn’t possible, the priority is for completion, of 12 years of study… and if say there’s a kid, let’s say, Yoav – if he is weak in math and literature, and citizenship, and in English then my last priority is that we focus on English, because – you understand? – because that is what he needs to get a high school completion. Because today someone who doesn’t have the completion credential, 12 years of studies, can’t do anything in the public sector (exit interview with headmaster, June 14, 2015).

Therefore, no matter how effective any intervention of any kind might be in improving learning outcomes on any non-required subject, if it is a choice between devoting flexible resources to that subject or to required subjects, the headmaster’s rational decision would be to devote resources first to required subjects.

This decision is evidently based on the expectation that there is an extremely low likelihood that students who begin at this high-school as non-readers will be able to take the EFL Bagrut

exam at any level, which would change the school’s high-stakes testing statistics and make it worthwhile to the school to invest more resources in English learning. The logic of this assumption was explained to me on several occasions by the third English teacher at the school, (male, middle-aged with years of English-teaching experience at the school, an immigrant from the Former Soviet Union) who was not formally a research participant, but had participated in the initial in-service training for the school network that led to the contact with the school as a research location:

“They’ve missed already 8 years of English” (I said “but they really only start in third or fourth grade”), he said, “okay, five years. Six years. There are occasional students who care enough and are willing to work, to put in the extra hours outside of school so that they can close the gap.” But he also pointed out that the students themselves know the difference, that they feel it - that they’re not motivated if they realize that they’re not going to be able to do Bagrut…and they also don’t think very highly of their own achievements and they don’t feel very proud of themselves.... So I asked if the solution is to try to concentrate on remedial work at a younger age. He said, “Yes, because then if they don’t fall so far behind, they’ll have a better chance of being at grade level when they get here. But who’s been asleep on the job, that they get to junior high and high school without…?” he said “if they come in ninth grade and start to work, then there’s a chance that by twelfth grade, they can catch up.” … The students who are too weak to do bagrut, he feels that they don’t really have much incentive to learn because they, themselves, don’t feel that they’re going to do the bagrut. So that’s it” (Research journal, May 31, 2015)

This conversation, and similar ones throughout the year with the same teacher, made me aware that my optimistic expectation that, with appropriate instruction and adoption of the

intervention approach, many students who started high school as non-readers could reach basic Bagrut level by the end of high school, was not shared by the English-teaching faculty nor by the administration. Their low expectation of student motivation, based on previous experience, was a determining factor in the non-adoption decision.

Rebecca Dewey, the MoE Inspector of English for the technological-vocational network, stated in my interview with her (interview, November 16, 2014) that, for students who arrive at the school with a higher level of English skills than those of the research participants,

completing the three-unit English Bagrut is very important, as it enables the student to complete high school with a full matriculation diploma, a better credential than the 12-year diploma. However, referring to the more challenged learners (the officially diagnosed “special education” students referred to the school by the Placement Committee of the MoE) though

"They excel– once they have gotten help they blossom. The special ed kids with help succeed very well” (ibid.)

sufficiently quickly close the gap in both English and other subjects to pass Bagrut, the criterion for making it worthwhile to invest flexible resources in their English studies posited by the headmaster.

Rebecca Dewey stated, regarding the adoption decision:

We've never had a good solution for weak learners and most schools just give up on them. This school is the most serious about English and sends the most students to the English Bagrut, but still hasn't had a way to help the weakest learners. If your trial works, we'll use it in the other schools too

(interview with Rebecca Dewey, Nov 16, 2014).

Post-intervention, I sent Dr. Dewey a report of the initial findings of the research. I was disappointed that, though she thanked me for them, she did not suggest that we now extend the program to other schools. Once the findings of this research have been finalized, I intend to follow up with Dr. Dewey and to understand better her thinking about the adoption process in this particular school network, which is funded by the Ministry of Welfare and Employment, and not he Ministry of Education. It may be that decisions regarding adoption by this network, of an intervention that requires additional English-learning resources, differ from the decision- making process on adoption in schools under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Education. Further study is therefore required of the adoption decision process, as the findings of this research regarding Bagrut may not be representative of other schools in the Israeli school system. This school weighs investment or edtech adoption decisions against its clearly defined goals, including the tempered expectation of the accomplishment required of its students to achieve target certification (i.e. high school diploma with or without matriculation exam). 5.8 Educational software

Apps are a product of design decisions, balancing constraints with maximizing benefit to learners. App developers evaluate tradeoffs to make their educational software as effective and engaging as possible. The findings of this research support the trend of using short-term cycles of planning, implementation, evaluation, and incorporating feedback for the next cycle,

resembling that advocated for action research (Kemmis, 1993; McNiff & Whitehead, 2011). Design of educational software involves tradeoffs between its pedagogy and attractiveness to learners. Successful educational software must strike a balance between fun/freedom and sound pedagogical principles. Software designers face dilemmas that surfaced in this research, e.g. does requiring learners to unlock the next level of an app only after completing all learning

activities and demonstrating mastery of the current level support their learning, or frustrate them unnecessarily? Does allowing users to skip review of previously learned material, because they find it tiresome, ultimately ensure that they will be more likely use the app for learning, or does it deprive them of valuable review? Successful educational software must strike a balance among tradeoffs, and accommodate widely varying learner needs.

The current research supports the finding of Kam (2013) that learners demonstrate a marked preference for games designed purely for entertainment (both interactive digital games and traditional physical games), over educational language-learning games. Without adult

supervision, the learners in this study, as in Kam’s, did not often voluntarily engage in MALL use. Still, the learners in the current study liked the word game and accruing points for correct answers, and would have liked to have more game formats. The need for the widest possible variety of MALL games to reinforce learned material is thus one finding of this research. This is purely a development cost issue, as an extensive selection of pedagogical games is available in paper format to reinforce learning by this method (see Levitt, 2017b). Two new game formats have already been added to the Android app in response to this finding, beginning another action research cycle.

The MALL app included animated videos to explain principles of English (see Appendix 17). I observed participants becoming aggravated or bored with being required to watch an animated rule video in the review so, as the app designer, I have subsequently enabled learners to skip tips videos during review.

Having observed the learners in my previous research (Levitt, 2013a) attempt to accrue the 2,000 game points required to move to the next level by drumming their fingers simultaneously on all four possible answers in the game, I had asked the app developer to build in detection of a suspiciously high rate and pace of wrong answers. The app first advises the learner to choose answers more carefully. If the learner persists, the app exits the game and recommends to the learner to review and try again. I observed learners in this research attempt the random answer strategy, then revert to choosing individual answers when they realized they could not

circumvent this effort. This indicates that the reward structure in MALL apps must closely adhere to attaining the learning targets.

When I saw in my previous research (Levitt, 2013a) that learners lost patience with lengthy reviews, as the amount of material they learn increases, we created an app setting to enable users to determine the amount of review that will take place at the beginning of each lesson. The concept of the ZPD acknowledges that under-challenging a learner results in boredom, while over-challenging them results in frustration. But in keeping with the Matthew Effect, the very learners who most needed review were those who had the least patience for it. MALL app design must engage learners by acknowledging the variety in their needs.

The scaffolded approach requiring sequential completion of all activities and demonstration of mastery ensured that when students learned independently with the device, they would not skip necessary material. When a human teacher was available to perform this role, the

restrictions of the app were less essential. The app, however, was able to perform this role for students who worked independently with the devices.

In summary, educational software designers need to strike the balance between making the software attractive and engaging, with rewards to the user for investing their effort in learning – but not sacrifice educational value by making software so flexible that it neglects

pedagogically sound principles. Educational software needs to both engage learner interest and to provide solid educational benefits.

Conclusion

This chapter presented findings related directly to the technological aspects of the MALL intervention. Teachers attitudes toward edtech were highly predictive of their support for the intervention. The extremely positive attitudes of the learner participants towards their personal mobile devices did not extend to language-learning devices, though the learners had moderate enthusiasm for the MALL app for limited stretches of learning time. The novelty effect of the mobile devices and MALL intervention wore off once the learners realized that they still had to invest effort in language learning, but having experienced success, their willingness increased to engage with the MALL app.

Tradeoffs among installing MALL software on dedicated, school-owned devices versus on learners’ personal devices represent a complex and sensitive issue for administrators,

dedicated devices for use in class was observed to be justified. The cost and logistical issues of using digital devices in a school setting are non-trivial and require the school to devote

resources for a support and maintenance system. Keeping school devices in school would maximize availability.

The MALL used in the intervention empowered an untrained teacher to effectively accompany her students in acquiring literacy skills and to manage the needs of students in a multi-level classroom where student absences, learner histories and differential abilities required students to learn at widely varying levels.

Given the above findings, the synergy between the interactive MALL app and printed books supports their use in concert. Each provides unique advantages, and their combination maximally supports learning.