The cultuling analysis of technophobe and technophile EFL teachers' utterances in online classes
Keywords:
Cultuling analysis, E-speaking, Technophile, Technophobe, EmolingAbstract
The present study elaborates on the cultuling analysis of technophile and technophobe EFL teachers in online classes. To this end, twenty EFL teachers were invited to participate in an interview. The recorded version of their classes was obtained for further cultuling analysis. The recorded interviews were analyzed using Pishghadam's emoling model (e-speaking). A cultuling and emotioncy analysis showed some EFL teachers were technophobe and others were technophile. To verify the results of the analysis, a questionnaire of Technophobic and Technophilic teachers was utilized to differentiate between technophile and technophobe teachers. The findings of the questionnaire also confirmed the results of the first part of study, depicting cultuling and E-SPEAKING models are suitable indicators of divulging the concealed parts of EFL teachers' personality. Finally, the relationship between teacher emotional supports and their technophobic and technophilic characteristics was investigated. The findings revealed that technophile teachers showed more positive classroom climate and regard for students’ perspective than technophobic teachers.
Downloads
References
Agar, M. (1994). Language shock. Understanding the culture of conversation. New York:
William Morrow.
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A
psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Albrecht, T. L., & Adelman, M. B. (1987). Communicating social support. Sage Publications, Inc.
Aunger, R. (2002). The electric meme: A new theory about how we think. New York: Free
Press.
Axelrod, R. (1997). The dissemination of culture. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41(2), 203-
Barron, A. (2005). Variational pragmatics in the foreign language classroom. System, 33(3),
-536.
Barron, A. (2015). Explorations in regional variation: A variational pragmatic perspective.
Multilingua, 34(4), 449-459.
Barron, A. (2017). Variational pragmatics. In A. Barron, Y. Gu, & G. Steen (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of pragmatics (pp. 91-104). Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Barron, A. (2019). Norms and variation in L2 pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), Routledge
handbook of SLA and pragmatics (pp. 287-307). New York: Routledge.
Barron, A., & Schneider, K. P. (2009). Variational pragmatics: Studying the impact of social
factors on language use in interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(4), 425-442.
Blackmore, S. (2010). Memetics does provide a useful way of understanding cultural evolution.
In F. J. Ayala & R. Arp (Eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology (pp. 255-
. New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brodie, R. (2009). Virus of the mind: The revolutionary new science of the meme and how it can
help you. London: Hay House U.K.
Burleson, B. R. (1984). Comforting communication. Communication by children and adults:
Social cognitive and strategic processes, 63-104.
Burleson, B. R. (2003). The experience and effects of emotional support: What the study of
cultural and gender differences can tell us about close relationships, emotion, and
interpersonal communication. Personal Relationships, 10(1), 1-23.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural competence. Cleveland: Multilingual
Matters.
Corbel, C., & Gruba, P. (2004). Teaching computer literacy, Teaching with new technology.
Sydney: NCELTR.
Cote, T., & Milliner, B. (2018). A survey of EFL teachers digital literacy: A report from a
Japanese university. The Journal of Teaching English with Technology, 18(4), 71-89.
Cutrona, C. E., & Russell, D. W. (1990). Type of social support and specific stress: Toward a
theory of optimal matching.
Dashtestani, R. (2014). Computer literacy of Iranian teachers of English as a foreign language:
Challenges and obstacles. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 9(1), 87–
doi:10.1080/18334105.2014.11082022Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype. Oxford: Freeman.
Dawkins, R. (1989). Memes: The new replicators, the selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Derakhshan, A. (2018). The critical analysis of cultural values in American English File
textbook series. Critical Studies in Texts and Programs in Human Sciences, 18(8), 53-76.
Farah, I. (1998). The ethnography of communication. In N. H. Hornberger & P. Corson (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of language and education: Research methods in language and education
(pp.125-127). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer
Fasold, R. (1990). The sociolinguistics of language: Introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford,
England: Blackwell.
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does culture affect economic outcomes? Journal
of Economic Perspectives, 20(2), 23-48
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language.
London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional grammar (2nd ed.). London,
England: Edward Arnold.
Hall, E. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.
Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of
children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72, 625–638
Harris, K. (2015). Integrating digital literacy into English language instruction (Issue Brief).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Career, Technical and Adult
Education. Retrieved from https://lincs.ed.gov/programs/eslpro
Healey, D., Hegelheimer, V. H., Hubbard, P., Ioannou, S., Kessler, G., & Ware, P. (2008).
TESOL Technology Standards Framework. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Henslin, J. M., Possamai, A. M., PossamaiInesedy, A. L., Marjoribanks, T., & Elder, K. (2015).
Sociology: A down to earth approach. Melbourne, Australia: Pearson Higher Education.
Howes, C., Hamilton, C. E., & Matheson, C. C. (1994). Children’s relationships with peers:
Differential associations with aspects of the teacher-child relationship. Child
Development, 65, 253–263.
Hymes, D. H. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E.
Ingram (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 3- 28). London,
England: Academic Press.
Hymes, D. (2003). The interaction of language and social life. In C. B. Paulston & R. G. Tucker
(Eds.), Sociolinguistics: The essential readings (pp. 30-47). Oxford, England:
Blackwell.
Hymes, D. (1967). Models of interaction of language and social setting. Journal of Social Issues,
(2), 8-28.
lagan, S. V. (2009). Exploring the impact of culture on the formation of consumer trust in
internet shopping. Wyoming, Laramie, USA: University of Wyoming Press.
Kecskes, I. (2014). Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Khany, R., Ghasemi, F. (2018). Development and Validation of Teacher Emotional Support
Scale: a structural equation modeling approach. Journal of English Language Teaching
and Learning, 21, 2018
Lam, Y. (2000). Technophilia vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why Second Language
Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology in Their Classrooms. Canadian Modern
Language Review, 56(3), 389– 420. doi:10.3138/cmlr.56.3.389
Lynch, A. (1996). Thought contagion: How belief spreads through society. New York: Basic
Books.
Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1992). Maltreated children’s reports of relatedness to their teachers.
In R. C. Pianta (Ed.), Relationships between children and non-parental adults: New
directions in child development (pp. 81–108). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Martin, A. (2005). DigEuLit—A European framework for digital literacy: A progress report.
Journal of eLiteracy, 2(2), 130–136.
Martínez-Córcoles M, Teichmann M, & Murdvee M, (2017). Assessing technophobia and
technophilia: Development and validation of a questionnaire, Technology in Society, doi:
1016/j.techsoc.2017.09.007.
Meyer, E. (2014). The culture map: Breaking through the invisible boundaries of global
business. New York: Public Affairs.
Miller, A. (1982). Historical and contemporary perspectives on stereotyping. In A. Miller (Ed.),
In the eye of the beholder: Contemporary issues in stereotyping (pp. 1-40). New York:
Praeger.
Minkov, M., & Hofstede, G. (2013). Crosscultural analysis: The science and art of comparing
the world’s modern societies and their cultures. London, England: Sage Publications.
Patrick, H., Anderman, L. H., & Ryan, A. M. (2002). Social motivation and the classroom social
environment. Goals, goal structures, and patterns of adaptive learning, 85-108.
Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of
classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational
Researcher, 38(2), 109-119.
Pishghadam, R., Firooziyan Pour Esfahani, A., & Firooziyan Pour Esfahani, A. (2020).
Introducing cherophobia cultuling: A close look into the discursive functions of death-
oriented terms in Persian. Culture-Communication Studies, 21(49), 181-206.
Pishghadam, R. (2013). Introducing cultuling as a dynamic tool in culturology of language.
Language and Translation Studies, 45, 47-62.
Pishghadam, R. (2020). 101 educational concepts [101 mafhoom-e amoozeshi]. North Carolina,
USA: Lulu Press.
Pishghadam, R., & Attaran, A. (2014). A sociological comparison of speech act of swearing: A
case study of Persian and English languages. Language and Translation Studies, 46(4),
-50.
Pishghadam, R., Firooziyan Pour Esfahani, A., & Vahidnia, F. (2015). A sociological look into
speech act of cursing: A comparison of Persian and English languages. Language and
Translation Studies, 47(2), 45-72.
Pishghadam, R., & Vahidnia, F. (2016). Uses of praying in Persian and English movies in the
light of Hymes’ model. Language Related Research, 6(7), 53-72.
Pishghadam, R., & Noruz Kermanshahi, P. (2016). Relationship between language, religion, and
culture: Research and analysis of the functions of the Hajji and related terms in Persian
language. Journal of Language Research, 8(20), 27-51.
Pishghadam, R., & Attaran, A. (2016). Discourse analysis of “Qesmat” in Iranian culture and
language. Culture Communication Studies, 17(35), 129-149.
Pishghadam, R., & Firooziyan Pour Esfahani, A. (2017). A sociolinguistic analysis of the
discourse functions of “I don’t know” in Persian language: Hymes’ SPEAKING model.
Culture-Communication Studies, 37(18), 7-35
Pishghadam, R., Firooziyan Pour Esfahani, A., & Tabatabaee Farani, S. (2018). Examining the
concept of nāz and its related vocabulary items in Persian language in light of
emotioncy. Culture-Communication Studies, 18(39), 67-96
Pishghadam, R., & Ebrahimi, S, (2020). Introducing cultuling: A study into Iranians’ cultural
memes. Iran, Mashhad: Mashhad University Press.
Pishghadam, R., Ebrahimi, S., Naji Meidani, E., Derakhshan, A. (2020). An Introduction to
Cultuling Analysis (CLA) in Light of Variational Pragmatics: A Step Towards
Euculturing. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics 11 (2), 44-56
Reza Pishghadam, R. Ebrahimi, Sh., Derakhshan, A. (2020). Cultuling Analysis: A new
methodology for discovering cultural memes. International journal of society, culture
and language, 8(2). p. 30
Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. J. (1998). Academic and emotional functioning in
early adolescence: Longitudinal relations, patterns, and prediction by experience in
middle school. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 321–352
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Sadaf, A., & Johnson, B. L. (2017). Teachers’ beliefs about integrating digital literacy into
classroom practice: An investigation based on the theory of planned behavior. Journal of
Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(4), 129-137
Sarfo, E. (2011). Variations in ways of refusing requests in English among members of a college
community in Ghana. African Nebula, 3, 1-13.
Saville-Troike, M. (2003). The ethnography of communication: An introduction. London,
England: Blackwell.
Schneider, D. (2004). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: The Guilford Press.
Schneider, K. P. (2017). Pragmatic competence and pragmatic variation. In R. Giora & M.
Haugh (Eds.), Doing pragmatics interculturally: Cognitive, philosophical, and
sociopragmatic perspectives (pp. 315-333). Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schneider, K. P., & Barron, A. (2008). Where pragmatics and dialectology meet: Introducing
variational pragmatics. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.). Variational pragmatics:
A focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages (pp. 1-32). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins Publishing Company
Schneider, K. P., & Barron, A. (Eds.). (2014). Pragmatics of discourse. Berlin and New York:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Schneider, K. P., & Barron, A. (2008). Where pragmatics and dialectology meet: Introducing
variational pragmatics. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.), Variational pragmatics: A
focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages (pp. 1-32). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Son, J.-B., Robb, T., & Charismiadji, I. (2011). Computer literacy and competency: A survey of
Indonesian teachers of English as a foreign language. CALL-EJ, 12(1), 26–42
Spires, H., & Bartlett, M. (2012). Digital literacies and learning: Designing a path forward.
Friday Institute White Paper Series. NC State University.
Taga, H.A. (1999). Sociology: An introduction. Lahore, Pakistan: Ismail Brothers Publishers.
Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Cox, M., Knezek, D., & ten Brummelhuis, A. (2013). Under which
conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action.
Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 29(1), 4–14. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Presidents and Fellows of Harvard
College.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell
Wentzel, K. R. (1999). Social-motivational processes and interpersonal relationships:
Implications for understanding motivation at school. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 91, 76–97
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought and reality: Selected writings. London, England:
Chapinaon & Hall.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2022 Hamed Ghaemi, Mashiya Ataei
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright is a property right, which exists to protect the expression of ideas and the use of works by authors and publishers of various types of works, including literary (e.g. books, newspapers, magazines and journals), artistic works (including photographs, paintings, sculptures, diagrams), musical works, sound recordings, films and broadcasts.
Copyright is one of several intellectual property (IP) rights that exist, including, amongst others, trademarks, patents and designs. Intellectual property is a fundamental right, as set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Article 17(2)).
Like with other types of property, copyright can be sold, purchased, licensed, transferred, or violated. However, owning a copyright protected work, such as a book for example, has to be distinguished from ownership of the copyright: buying the book does not mean that you then own the copyright in the book.
In this journal, the author(s) has/have got the copyright. The author(s) may share their works by reffering to this journal. If the author(s) do/ does not reffer to this journal then the author(s) is/are viewed as plagiator.
