Degree Thesis M

(1)

Degree Thesis

Master’s Level

Crisis online teaching during COVID-19

Swedish upper secondary English teachers’ perspectives

Author: Sasha Nicole Stjernberg Supervisor: Jeanette Toth Examiner: Zita Farkas

Subject/main field of study: Degree Thesis in English for Master of Arts in Education, Upper Secondary School

Course code: AEN25J Credits: 30 hp

Date of examination: 2021-01-15

At Dalarna University it is possible to publish the student thesis in full text in DiVA.

The publishing is open access, which means the work will be freely accessible to read and download on the internet. This will significantly increase the dissemination and visibility of the student thesis.

Open access is becoming the standard route for spreading scientific and academic information on the internet. Dalarna University recommends that both researchers as well as students publish their work open access.

I give my/we give our consent for full text publishing (freely accessible on the internet, open access):

Yes ☒ No ☐

Dalarna University – SE-791 88 Falun – Phone +4623-77 80 00

(2)

Abstract:

During March 2020, Swedish upper secondary schools switched from traditional teaching to crisis online teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a lack of research on crisis online teaching, but there is research on online teaching and English online teaching. The fundamental difference between online teaching and crisis online teaching is choice, as crisis online teaching is mandated due to external factors beyond the teachers’ control. Transition from traditional teaching to crisis online teaching forces teachers to rely on their Technical Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). This was an instrumental case study using a semi- structured in-depth interview with a non-probability purpose sample that examined how three experienced English teachers in Western Sweden modified their teaching as well as the challenges and opportunities they experienced during crisis online teaching. Time was found to be a factor that affected crisis online teaching because the teachers interviewed reported that they were given two days to prepare in which they also had professional development to learn new platforms. In regard to professional development, teachers needed more and differentiated professional development due to teachers’ different levels of TPACK. The professional development also needed to explicitly show teachers to integrate the digital tools and platforms into their English teaching.

Keywords: Crisis online teaching, online teaching, distance teaching, distance learning, TPACK, language teacher cognition, English teaching, professional development

(3)

1. Introduction

When students cannot attend traditional in-person classes, one solution is distance learning. In early 2020 many countries went into “lockdown” and closed schools due to a novel coronavirus, COVID-19. On March 18^th, 2020, all upper secondary schools and universities in Sweden cancelled all in-person classes and moved to distance learning following the Swedish Public Health Agency’s recommendations (Folkhälsomyndigheten, 2020). This sudden shift from traditional in-person classes to crisis online teaching was a new experience for most teachers.

Some teachers may have never taken an online class or have limited experience being an online learner so they would have had limited or no experience to draw on. Some teachers in Sweden had to navigate online teaching for the first time during this period of crisis online teaching. It was also the first time that some students experienced online learning.

Crisis online teaching is different from online teaching, which is further explained in section 2.2.2. During my time student teaching I noticed that even though some teachers taught at a 1:1 school, where every student receives a computer from the school, some teachers still felt uncomfortable using technology. Furthermore, I noticed that even though teachers perhaps felt uncomfortable using technology they did integrate different digital tools, such as the Google Suite (Google Classroom, Google Documents, Google Meets, Google Hangouts, Google Slides, Google Spreadsheet, and Google Drive), TED talks, Kahoot!, and Padlet, into their teaching.

The Swedish National Agency for Education (SNAE) (Skolverket) breaks teaching English into reception skills and production and interaction skills. English teachers in Sweden continued to develop these skills when moving from a traditional classroom setting to crisis online teaching.

This thesis looked at three English teachers at one upper secondary school in Western Sweden, how their English teaching practices changed during crisis online teaching, and the opportunities and challenges that they reported. It also examined what types of support were offered to them during the switch to crisis online teaching.

1.1. Aim and research questions

This section presents the aim and the research questions for this thesis.

1.1.1. Aim

Spring 2020 was the first time that all upper secondary teachers in Sweden were required to teach online. Crisis online teaching gave an opportunity to find out how prepared teachers were to be flexible in their teaching. This thesis aims to highlight the experiences of Swedish upper secondary English teachers in crisis online teaching during the spring of 2020 compared to traditional in-person teaching.

1.1.2. Research questions

How did Swedish upper secondary school teachers report modifying their English teaching to accommodate the online teaching format?

What challenges and opportunities do Swedish upper secondary English teachers describe regarding the switch from traditional in-person teaching to crisis online teaching?

(6)

2

What types of support were given to English teachers when switching from traditional in-person teaching to crisis online teaching?

2. Background

This section contains information on Swedish steering documents for English, online and remote teaching. It also includes terminology associated with online learning.

2.1. Steering documents

This section will present what the Swedish Education Act says about online teaching as well as the English curriculum in Sweden.

2.1.1. Swedish Education Act regarding remote teaching

The Swedish Education Act includes remote teaching but not distance teaching. However, both the Swedish Education Act and the Swedish National Agency for Education (SNAE) define remote teaching (fjärrundervisning) as interactive teaching using technology where the student and teacher are separated geographically, but not in time (my translation) (Skollag, 2010, pp.

Ch 1, 3§; Skolverket, 2020) while only SNAE defines distance learning as teaching where the teacher uses technology, but the teacher and student can be separated in time as well as geographically (Skolverket, 2020). Only SNAE differentiates between remote teaching and distance learning.

2.1.2. English Curriculum in Sweden

SNAE states “teaching of English should aim at helping students to develop knowledge of language and the surrounding world so that they have the ability, desire and confidence to use English in different situations and for different purposes” (Skolverket, n.d., p. 1). This aim is applied to all upper secondary English courses, English 5, English 6, and English 7, in Sweden.

The curriculum goes on to state that:

Teaching in the subject of English should give students the opportunities to develop:

1) Understanding of spoken and written English, and also the ability to interpret content.

2) The ability to express oneself and communicate in English in speech and writing.

3) The ability to use different language strategies in different contexts.

4) The ability to adapt language to different purposes, recipients, and situations.

5) The ability to discuss and reflect on living conditions, social issues and cultural features in different contexts and parts of the world where English is used. (Skolverket, n.d., p. 2)

The English language learning opportunities are categorized into the fields reception, covering listening and reading skills, and production and interaction, covering oral and writing skills (Skolverket, n.d., p. 1). Teachers in Sweden are supposed to follow the SNAE’s curriculum and give assignments and activities that correspond to the core content in the course that they are teaching.

English 5, 6, and 7, each cover specific core content, as well as some common aspects between courses. Each course has course content pertaining to the spoken language. Table 1 shows some of the differences in the core content in English. Although all English courses read literature, the types of literature, texts, and types of writing expected from students change with every

(7)

3

course. The specific literature read by the students is chosen by the English teacher. Writing and oral skills are written into each course as well in the production and interaction section.

Table 1: Table of core content for English

English 5 English 6 English 7

Reception

Spoken language, also with different social and dialect features, and texts that instruct, relate, summarise, explain, discuss, report and argue, also via film and other media.

Spoken language, also with different social and dialect features, and texts, including complex and formal texts, which relate, discuss, argue, report and provide descriptions, also via film and other media.

Spoken language, also with different social and dialect features, and texts, including complex and formal texts which relate, discuss, argue, report, describe and investigate, also via film and other media.

Coherent spoken language and conversations of different kinds, such as interviews

Coherent spoken language and conversations of different kinds, such as debates, lectures and interviews.

Coherent spoken language and conversations of different kinds, such as debates, in-depth reports and lectures

Literature and other fiction Contemporary and older literature, poetry, drama and songs

Contemporary and older literature and other fiction in various genres such as drama.

Texts of different kinds and for different purposes, such as manuals, popular science texts and reports.

Texts of different kinds and for different purposes, such as formal letters, popular science texts and reviews.

Texts of different kinds and for different purposes, such as agreements, in-depth articles and scientific texts

Production and interaction

Oral and written production and interaction of various kinds, also in more formal settings, where students instruct, narrate, summarise, explain, comment, assess, give reasons for their opinions, discuss and argue.

Oral and written production and interaction in different situations and for different purposes where students argue, report, apply, reason, summarise, comment on, assess and give reasons for their views.

Oral and written production and interaction in different situations and for different purposes where students argue from different perspectives, apply, reason, assess, investigate, negotiate and give reasons for their views

2.2. Terminology

This section presents the terminology associated with online learning.

2.2.1. Online learning terminology

E-learning, online learning, distance learning, remote learning, and blended learning are just a few terms connected with online learning. E-learning is where all learning takes place through various web-based technologies (Alqahtani & Rajkhan, 2020, p. 2). Online learning is defined as learning that happens in synchronous or asynchronous environments that can use various internet-capable devices (Dhawan, 2020, p. 7). Synchronous environments allow real-time interactions, for example having live lectures or meetings in Zoom, Google Meet, Skype, etc., while asynchronous environments have no real-time interactions, for example prerecorded lectures, forums, Google Docs, etc. (Alqahtani & Rajkhan, 2020, p. 4; Dhawan, 2020, p. 7;

Gonzalez-Lloret, 2020, p. 263). Moore, Dickson-Deane, and Galyen (2011) also mention that distance learning allows students access to classrooms that are geographically distant, while

(8)

4

online learning is a newer version of distance learning that also allows for interactions (Moore, Dickson-Deane, & Galyen, 2011, pp. 129-130).

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a sudden switch to online teaching, not only in Sweden but in other parts of the world. This sudden switch has led to new terms that discern a sudden switch to online teaching and between “traditional” online teaching. Gacs, Goertler and Spasova (2020) have referred to this switch as crisis online teaching, triage online teaching and emergency online teaching while Kaden (2020) and Kozimor (2020) only refer to it as emergency online teaching. To have consistency in this thesis, I choose to use the terms online learning/teaching and crisis online learning/teaching.

2.2.2. Planned online teaching versus crisis online teaching

When Swedish upper secondary schools switched to online teaching, it was not planned online teaching, it was crisis online teaching. Kozimor (2020) states that crisis online teaching is not the same as planned online teaching (pp. 181-182). Crisis online teaching is when teachers are mandated to switch from traditional in-person teaching to online teaching. Planned online learning/teaching has a different outlook for two main reasons: students’ choice and teacher preparation.

Planned online teaching has students who choose to learn online. Crisis online teaching is when the students are forced to learn digitally. According to Russell (2020), crisis online learning can lead to negative feelings towards digital learning due to the fact that students did not choose to learn online, were not prepared to learn online, and lack the motivation to learn online (p. 339).

Teachers who start with planned online teaching already have learning objectives and a syllabus that accounts for the content they know students will be able to cover, but the tasks sometimes vary from traditional classrooms. During crisis online teaching, teachers, regardless of experience, will have to address what content can be covered from the syllabus as well as understanding what is possible to do during crisis online versus traditional teaching (Gacs, Goertler, & Spasova, 2020, p. 383; Payne, 2020, p. 246). There are some tasks and content that might not translate as well for online teaching. It is for this reason that Gacs, Goetler and Spasova (2020) argue that crisis online teaching contains elements of planned online teaching, but has gaps that need to be addressed if teachers should switch to crisis online teaching again (pp. 389-390). The gaps in crisis online teaching are a result of teachers having to switch, in a relatively short time frame, how they had planned on teaching, from in-person to online, and therefore may have to change their original plans.

3. Previous Research

This section will look at the practices, beliefs, and support for English as a foreign language (EFL) online teaching. The practices section deals with English teaching with textbooks verus authentic materials as well as presenting research only on listening activities. The beliefs section includes the challenges and opportunities of online EFL. Support will deal with resources as well as training and professional development. Finally, this section has a brief look at what some researchers have found so far with crisis online learning.

(9)

5

3.1. Teachers’ practices in EFL teaching

This section will discuss the use textbooks versus authentic materials and listening

comprehension activities for the English classroom. The previous research focuses on listening activities because while not seeking, it became apparent from the participants in this study that

listening comprehension activities suffered the most during crisis online teaching.

3.1.1. Textbooks versus authentic materials

One Swedish study involving teachers and textbooks looked at attitudes and notions about textbooks among pre-service (PS) upper secondary English teachers, students in teacher education programs, and in-service (IS) secondary English teachers. The study had 15 IS teachers and 15 PS upper secondary school program students. The PS students had completed one student teaching experience. This study found that most IS teachers had negative associations with textbooks, such as that they were restrictive or were considered to be a crutch, while PS students had positive associations, such as textbooks acting as a facilitator or guide.

Both PS and IS teachers thought positively of ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) tools and resources. IS and PS teachers both thought highly of textbooks in regards to reading although IS teachers worried that there were not enough complex texts in the textbooks. The main finding was that PS teachers had a more positive attitude towards the textbook while IS teachers had a more positive attitude towards digital resources. Allen (2015) suggests that PS teachers have more positive attitudes with textbooks because they have structured chapters and graded reading material and exercises, so therefore are easier for inexperienced teachers who have less experience in finding and judging proficiency levels of different materials (Allen, 2015).

In addition to textbooks, teachers use authentic materials in their teaching. Tevdovska (2018) states that authentic materials are from real-life sources that are not designed for teaching and learning purposes. Some examples are songs, radio interviews, novels, newspaper articles.

Tevdovska (2018) did a survey of 11 English for Specific Purposes (ESP) teachers at South East European University (SEEU) in the Republic of North Macedonia. Tevdovska (2018) discovered that teachers believe that authentic materials need to be relevant and suitable and take into consideration the different levels of the students. Teachers felt that authentic materials should be connected to the specific area that the students are studying (Tevdovska, 2018).

3.1.2. English listening comprehension activities

English teachers use several various activities for listening comprehension, among those is TED Talks. TED Talks are videos on various subjects that are easily available for teachers to integrate into their listening comprehension lessons. Nguyen and Boers (2019) did a study to determine which was a better exercise for vocabulary retention after listening to a TED talk:

answering questions or orally summarizing the TED Talk. The study involved 64 Vietnamese EFL learners in two classes enrolled in a two-year intensive English language training program at a Vietnamese university. The students were divided into two groups, one group orally summarized the TED talk afterwards while the second group only answered questions about the TED Talk. Students in both groups were encouraged to take notes which they could use for either the summaries or the questions. Students took a vocabulary pre-test two weeks before watching the TED Talk, a vocabulary post-test after answering the questions or a discussion about the TED Talk, and then a delayed vocabulary post-test two weeks later. The students were not forewarned about the vocabulary tests. The results showed that the oral summary

(10)

6

group had a better vocabulary retention than the group that just answered questions (Nguyen &

Boers, 2019).

When teachers do listening comprehension activities, they must determine how many times students will listen to video programs or audio tracks. Sanchez and Fernandez-Sanchez's (2016) study looked at the optimization of listening comprehension activities. The study looked to see if the number times a listening activity was played during class had any effect on listening comprehension with Spanish English university students. During class, listening activities were played 1-3 times, depending on the assigned group, sample sizes were 17, 16, 18 students respectively. After the listening activities the students answered multiple choice and fill in the blank questions. They study measured improvement of the students’ listening comprehension through pre- and post-test listening activities which was played three times. Overall, there was not a significant difference between the groups. All groups improved their listening comprehension levels no matter which training they received (Sánchez & Fernández-Sánchez, 2016).

3.2. Teachers’ beliefs about teaching EFL online

This section will present the challenges and opportunities associated with learning English online.

3.2.1. Challenges

Dhawan (2020) mentions some challenges in general associated with online learning, namely lack of community, flexibility of time and location, lack of student engagement, and technical problems. Dhawan also goes on to mention that some challenges teachers have are with their methods due to moving from offline to online teaching (Dhawan, 2020, pp. 8-16), as some teaching methods are not compatible with online learning. Both students and teachers might need extra support and training so that technology is not the reason they fall behind (Gonzalez- Lloret, 2020, p. 267). Flexibility, which is normally seen as a benefit, could be also a challenge because students who are not disciplined can find it hard to find time to do the work (Evans, et al., 2020; Kaden, 2020). Technical problems, such as lack of access to computers or tablets (Evans, et al., 2020; Kaden, 2020), and internet issues, where students had problems with synchronous interactions due to unstable internet connections (Evans, et al., 2020; Gonzalez- Lloret, 2020, p. 267; Kaden, 2020), were self-reported by teachers.

Video conferencing tools, such as Zoom, have allowed teachers to have synchronous interactions. However, there are weaknesses with video conferencing tools. Two weaknesses are “Zoom fatigue” and the lack of basic conversational etiquette. Zoom requires more focus and energy than face-to-face interactions because of the unnatural flow of the conversations and the inability of being able to read body language (Gonzalez-Lloret, 2020, p. 267). This is why students get “Zoom fatigue”. Video conferencing also has conversational etiquette issues because it is challenging to have conversations with more than 4-6 people and taking turns, for example knowing when someone is done and natural flow of conversations (Payne, 2020, p.

246).

3.2.2. Opportunities

There are many opportunities with online learning. Online learning can be more student- centered and can allow students to have a more flexible schedule (Alqahtani & Rajkhan, 2020, p. 2; Dhawan, 2020, p. 13). Dhawan states that online learning also allows students the

(11)

7

opportunity to enhance their problem-solving skills, critical thinking abilities and their adaptability. During crisis online teaching, teachers were able to develop and practice with new digital tools. Teachers used these new digital tools in order to better help students, such as prerecording lectures, so that students had the flexibility to watch them multiple times (Dhawan, 2020, pp. 13-15). Crisis online teaching, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is allowing students and teachers to be more adaptable by going from traditional learning to online learning and learning via online resources. Teachers and students are adapting by teaching and learning through new digital tools.

3.3. Support for online EFL teaching

This section will present resources available to online English teachers as well as discussing professional development for teachers.

3.3.1. Resources

In modern times, most traditional classroom teachers have some online platform component, for example a website that is used to communicate with parents and students, a place where students can hand in work online, or where teachers can report grades. Nichols and LeBlanc point out that platforms can refer to both the infrastructure on which apps are built as well as the websites that are used (Nichols & LeBlanc, 2020, p. 103). Dhawan (2020) explains what is needed from platforms for online learning. She states that teachers would need video conferencing abilities, discussions that can be organic with students, good internet connections, lectures that are accessible across various devices, the possibility of watching previously recorded lectures, and somewhere students can turn-in assignments as well as get feedback (Dhawan, 2020, p. 7). The major difference is that with online teaching, teachers rely on these platforms more to interact with students, give assignments, and give feedback. Online students use online platforms daily not only to get assignments and attend lectures but learn and practice their skills.

Online platforms can assist teachers with creating a virtual community by facilitating social interactions through breakout rooms, discussion boards, and chat features. Lomicka (2020) explains that a virtual language community has a certain spirit, trust, interaction, and common expectiations (p. 307). Some common activities that teachers can do in both traditional and online classrooms are think/pair/share, debates, scavenger hunts, concept mapping, polls, class presentations, warm-ups, show-and-tell, and more (Gonzalez-Lloret, 2020, pp. 264-265;

Lomicka, 2020, pp. 309-310). It is the implementation of these activites that can be problematic in the online classroom but different digital tools, for example Padlet, Kahoot, Quizlet, can help facilitate synchronous and asynchronous interactions (Lomicka, 2020, p. 310; Tran, 2018, p.

97). Payne (2020) explores the idea that teachers should build their online communities with the help of sychronous and asynchronous tools. Payne (2020) emphasises that teachers should understand the limitations of video conferenceing tools and work with and around them.

Furthermore, Payne (2020) suggests that teachers should avoid answering all threads in discussion forums and only monitor and request clarifications. Discussion forums should be a conversational space for students otherwise it can turn into a one-on-one conversation with the teacher. Finally, teachers should try and acknowlege forum contributions in synchronous chats or discussions so that the students see value in the forums and futher promote participation in the forums (Payne, 2020, pp. 246-248). It is the online platforms that allow for the synchronous and asychronous interactions that teachers need knowledge in so that they can implement the plaforms use during online teaching.

(12)

8

3.3.2. Training and professional development

There are issues when teachers integrate ICT in their teaching. Anggeraini’s (2020) study, a questionnaire to 33 high school English teachers in Indonesia, that found lack of training and lack of time were the main issues when using digital tools in their teaching (Anggeraini, 2020).

Ekberg and Gao’s (2018) study interviewed four Swedish secondary education teachers in various subjects to determine the challenges they experience with using ICT in the classroom.

This study found that teachers have issues in teaching, teaching preparation, ICT training, attitude and knowledge. Teachers found it time consuming to find digital tools and integrate them into their classroom. Teachers also noted that it takes more planning time as they must have back up lessons in case of technical issues. Teachers also stated that they received basic training when the school received new ICT applications but would have liked more in-depth training as to how to integrate the applications into their teaching (Ekberg & Gao, 2018). These studies show that teachers need more professional development and time for planning to effectively integrate digital tools into their teaching.

However Koehler, Mishra and Cain (2013) point out that teachers often receive “one-size-fits- all” professional development with regards to technology, which overlooks teachers’ previous technological knowledge and the context that they would integrate it into their teaching. They go on to say that there is no “one best way” to integrate technology (Koehler, Mishra, & Cain, 2013, p. 14). This seems in line with Paesani (2020) who recommends that professional development should be engaging with hands-on experiece with online tools, connect technology to pedagogical and content knowledge, draw on teachers’ previous experiences and knowledge, reflect on teaching practices and experiences, and provide ongoing support through workshops, peer mentoring, and online communities. She goes on to state that teachers need differentiated professional development based on the needs of the teachers (Paesani, 2020, pp.

294-296). Overall the Kohler, Mishra and Cain study, the Paesani study, and the Ekberg and Gao study point out that teachers need more differentiated and detailed professional development in regards to technology based on the teachers’ previous knowledge and experiences.

3.4. COVID-19 crisis online teaching experiences

The COVID-19 pandemic has allowed researchers to examine how teachers experienced switching to crisis online teaching. Evans et al. (2020) describe how they themselves have experienced remote teaching in the UK during the lockdown. Goa and Zhang (2020) interviewed three Northern Chinese teachers who taught English at university. Kaden (2020) did a case study of a rural Alaskan teacher. In all three studies teachers reported how the social element of English teaching is not easily transferable to online teaching (Evans, et al., 2020, pp.

244-247, 251; Gao & Zhang, 2020, pp. 7-8; Kaden, 2020, p. 11). Teachers also reported an increased workload due to online teaching and increased planning time, the amount of content that was able to be taught, and how difficult it was to engage their students (Gao & Zhang, 2020, pp. 7-9; Kaden, 2020, pp. 8-11). Kaden (2020) states that blended learning should be included for older students because it gives them more flexibility, with where and when they study, allowing students more access to content while also allowing them to pursue their own interests (Kaden, 2020, p. 11). Teachers in both Kaden (2020) and Gao and Zhang (2020) studies reported that there was a learning curve associated with switching to online teaching and that although some problems were solved over time, (Gao & Zhang, 2020, pp. 8-12; Kaden, 2020, pp. 7-11) the one problem that was out of their control was internet connection issues.

(13)

9

4. Theoretical perspectives

In this section the theoretical framework, language teacher cognition (LTC) and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), are presented.

4.1. Language teacher cognition (LTC)

LTC refers to what language teachers know, believe, and think. This means that language teachers’ schooling, professional coursework, contextual factors and classroom practice affects their teaching (Borg, 2003, pp. 81-82).

LTC starts with teachers’ own experiences in school, as their experiences as students shape their own cognitions and ultimately the pedagogical decisions that they make later. Teachers’

initial beliefs about learning and teaching languages may remain with them, and can even continue throughout their entire professional career (Borg, 2003, pp. 86-88).

Another factor that can affect LTC is teacher education programs. Borg (2003) mentions that there are studies that show that teacher education programs can have an impact on teacher’s cognitions, but this impact varies from person to person. He even noted that teacher education programs did not significantly change teacher cognitions from the start of the program to when teachers were finished with their program (Borg, 2003, pp. 88-91).

Classroom practice cognitions are considerations teachers have, what teaching elements and tools they are trying to implement, their pedagogical knowledge and their personal practical knowledge (PPK). PPK is best seen when comparing novice teachers and experienced teachers.

Borg (2003) mentions Numan’s (1992) study which found that experienced language teachers showed more attention to language issues than novice teachers who were more focused on classroom management (Borg, 2003, p. 95). Further, Borg (2003) also mentions Richard’s (1998) study, which found that experienced teachers improvised more than novice teachers (Borg, 2003, p. 95). Classroom practices are also seen with the lesson plans, or what the teacher is planning to do, but sometimes are better seen when teachers deviate from these lesson plans.

Teacher cognition views deviations from lesson plans as a strength that is due to interactions between students and teachers’ pedagogical choices based on the teachers’ own observation of the instruction of those students at that time (Borg, 2003, pp. 91-94).

There are also other contextual factors that can affect teacher cognition. Some of those factors include parents, the school, the classroom, curriculum mandates, standardized tests, and availability of resources. Borg (2003) states that some of these factors can cause teachers to adopt practices that are against their own beliefs: for example workloads and working conditions can affect what teachers can do and how they can teach (pp. 94-96).

LTC was chosen because I believe that how teachers teach depend on their previous school experiences as a student. Other factors can also affect their teaching, and I do believe that, for better or for worse, the national tests in Sweden do affect teacher practices of English teachers.

LTC will be used to analyze if any differences in the participants schooling affected their crisis online teaching.

(14)

10

4.2. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)

TPACK has three main areas pertaining to teachers’ knowledge: content, pedagogy, and technology. Content knowledge (CK) is the teacher’s knowledge about the subject that is taught. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) is the knowledge teachers have about how to teach their subject. Technological knowledge (TK) is an ever-evolving knowledge of technology because technology is itself always evolving, thus the teacher’s knowledge must evolve with it (Koehler, Mishra, & Cain, 2013, pp. 14-15). Teachers do not use just one area of knowledge at a time and thus there are interactions within these three areas. Figure 1 shows how CK, TK, and PK interact with one another to form TPACK.

Figure 1: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org.

The interactions with TK, PK, and CK are: technological content knowledge (TCK), pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK). TCK is how the technology and the content influence each other while PCK is knowing the methods and practices of how to teach the content area that the teacher teaches. TPK is knowing how to teach using technologies that are available. Sometimes that means being able to use software that was built for non-educational purposes in the classroom (Koehler, Mishra, & Cain, 2013, pp. 15-16). TCK, TPK, and PCK are all interrelated in TPACK.

TPACK is more than just an understanding of TK, PK, and CK. TPACK requires understanding the methods and practices of how to teach (PCK), understanding of the concepts that use technology (TCK), pedagogical techniques that use technology in a constructive way (TPK), knowledge of why concepts are difficult or easy to learn and how technology can help students (TPACK). (Koehler, Mishra, & Cain, 2013, pp. 16-17). With TPACK, teachers must understand how technology can affect their content area.

TPACK was chosen because it incorporates the technical knowledge, which is not fully incorporated in LTC. TPACK incorporates not only PK and CK that teachers receive during formal educational opportunities but also includes teachers TK. Teachers can improve their TK on their own or through formal settings, either with classes or professional development. Due

(15)

11

to crisis online teaching dependency on technology, it was important to look at each participant’s TK, and therefore TPACK was chosen in addition to LTC.

5. Material and method

This section will discuss the method of data collection, selection of informants, implementation, method of analysis, validity and reliability, and ethical aspects.

5.1. Method

This is an explorative instrumental case study which examines how three experienced English teachers in Western Sweden modified their teaching when switching from traditional teaching to crisis online teaching during the spring of 2020. This study also looked at the challenges and opportunities these teachers reported and the support that was given to them during crisis online teaching. As an explorative study, it does not seek to support any theory in particular. An instrumental case study is when a researcher examines a particular case to gain insight into a theory or issue (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2018, pp. 378, 818, 833). This case study will examine the issue of teachers switching from traditional teaching to crisis online teaching.

The method chosen was semi-structured in-depth interviews. The semi-structured interview protocol allows the interviewer to ask follow up questions so that the interviewee can elaborate on answers but still maintained some consistency in some of the questions (Cohen, Manion, &

Morrison, 2018, pp. 508-516, 535). The protocol questions were designed to be open-ended.

McKay (2006) states that truly open-ended questions allow the participants to respond on their own terms. She mentions to avoid yes/no questions because they do not allow the participants to elaborate their answers. Finally, McKay suggests to think about how the questions are phrased so that the participants understand them and will give responses that are on-topic for the research that is being conducted (McKay, 2006, pp. 52-53). As a result, the wording of questions was considered. Although some questions were of yes/no nature so as to not make assumptions, there were follow-up questions listed to be asked based on the response.

5.2. Selection of informants

A non-probability purposive sample was employed. A non-probability sample means that it does not represent the wider population while a purposive sample means that the participants were hand chosen by the researcher (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2018, pp. 217-218). The selection of informants came from one upper secondary school in Western Sweden. Six English teachers from different programs were invited through e-mail; three teachers accepted. The six teachers who were contacted all taught English during spring 2020. Due to having had access to the school in previous terms, I knew the teachers were from different programs. Teachers with varying years of experience were invited, but only teachers with extensive experience chose to participate.

Table 2: Information about participants.

Teacher Upper Secondary classes taught

National programs taught Degree year

Years Teaching

Teacher A English 5 Vocational preparatory 2005 15

Teacher B English 5, 6, 7 College preparatory 2000 20 Teacher C English 5, 6, 7 Vocational and college preparatory 1998 22

(16)

12

5.3. Implementation

Before interviewing the informants, a pilot study was performed with two teachers who did not meet the criteria for my study: Teacher D and E. Due to location of the teachers, the pilot study was conducted over Zoom. Teachers D and E both switched to distance teaching during the spring but did not teach upper secondary English. Teacher D teaches mother tongue English for grades 1-9 at a school in Central Sweden and Teacher E is a middle school English teacher in the USA. Teacher E had some similar issues as those found in this study. After the pilot study, some questions were added, while some questions were reworded or removed.

Each teacher who agreed to participate was able to choose their own time and place for the interview. Interviews were conducted at their school. Teacher A’s interview was midmorning and in a student study room. Teacher B’s interview took place in an empty classroom in the morning before classes. Teacher C’s interview was directly after lunch and took place in an empty conference room in their office area.

Each interviewee was e-mailed the consent letter (see Appendix 1) beforehand and signed a copy before the interview. Once signed, the recording was started and followed the interview protocol (see Appendix 2). The interview protocol was printed out and each item or question was checked off as to not miss a question. In each interview, I asked extra follow-up questions for clarification.

5.4. Method of analysis

Each interview was transcribed. The transcription included timestamps and only notes verbatim what was said, as it was the content that was to be analyzed, not how it was said. Each interviewee was anonymized through a given letter of A-C. I, identified as Speaker 1 in all transcriptions, was the only one who knew the identity of the informants.

After the interviews were transcribed, they underwent a case versus cross-case analysis.

McKay (2006) explains that a case analysis means writing a case study for each person interviewed while a cross-case analysis involves organizing responses according to the topics raised. According to McKay it is possible to combine these two approaches (McKay, 2006, pp.

56-57). The analysis started by identifying a few key themes that emerged during crisis online teaching, such as teachers having fewer discussions and their lack of TPACK. When these themes appeared in multiple teachers, they were compared to find commonalities.

5.5. Validity and reliability

Validity in interviews comes from face validity, which can be understood as whether the questions asked measure what they claim that they measure. Overstating or understating true values can cause invalidity due to bias. Researcher bias that can affect the interview include attitudes, opinions, and expectations of the interviewer; tendency for the interviewer to seek answers that support their theory; and misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the interviewer (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2018, pp. 271-272). To overcome these biases, the informants were asked follow-up questions to avoid misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

Reliability with interviews can be affected by transference or counter-transference.

Transference is when informants project their feelings, fears, needs, and attitudes onto the interviewer, while counter-transference is when the interviewer projects their feelings, fear,

(17)

13

needs, and attitudes onto the informant. Reliability can also be affected by biases, for example inconsistent coding of responses, poor prompting and biased probing, changes to wording of questions, and selective or interpreted recording of data/transcripts. Leading questions, where researchers make assumptions about interviewees, can also affect reliability in interviews (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2018, pp. 272-273). In order to avoid assumptions, yes/no questions were asked with a list of follow-up questions based on the informant’s answer. The other questions that were asked were as open as possible to allow the informants to provide their own wording.

5.6. Ethical aspects

The Swedish Research Council also describes the data protection directive and the handling of personal data (Swedish Research Council, 2017, pp. 71,73). This was done with a self- implemented checklist (etisk egengranskning) provided by the University as well as by notifying the University of how personal information (in this case, voice recordings) were going to be handled, in accordance with The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Interviews were recorded and the audio recordings were kept securely until approval and publication of the thesis, whereupon all material was deleted.

Other ethical aspects that were taken into consideration were that each informant was given a consent form to sign. All informants were anonymized by assigning each informant a letter, A- C. The school and municipality were not named as to further allow anonymity to the informants.

The final way I gave the informants anonymity was to name the type of programs they taught instead of stating which specific program they teach in. Each informant was notified in writing and orally that they could withdraw consent to participate as well as being recorded and being cited in the paper at any time and not have to give a reason. All informants agreed to participate, be recorded, and allow their responses to be cited in this paper. Informants were also notified that all recordings would be deleted once this thesis was approved, could withdraw at any time, and that they could receive a link to the thesis once approved and available online.

6. Results

This section presents the findings from the analyzed interview data, including teachers’ reported practices during crisis online teaching as well as the challenges and opportunities described. In addition to this, the different support and resources available to the teachers are presented.

6.1. Crisis online teaching practices in EFL

Each teacher was either working with the textbook or with different authentic materials and doing different activities with each of their classes when they had to switch to crisis online teaching.

6.1.1. Rediscovering the benefits of textbooks

All three teachers were using authentic materials in at least one of their English classes.

Teachers use their PCK to choose authentic materials to use in their classroom. The difference is how each teacher proceeded with those materials during crisis online teaching. Teacher A was reading a novel in their classes and continued reading the novel. With one class teacher B was doing debates and examining rhetoric in former President Obama’s inaugural speech while teacher C was watching Pride and Prejudice or another film with their classes. Both teacher B

(18)

14

and C did not continue with these assignments and moved on. Teacher B stated “[I] just dropped it. Completely dropped it. We started reading poetry.” Teacher C stated “we had to just end very abruptly. We actually didn't continue that [the movies] at all because we just ended it right there and didn't continue.” Both teacher B and C had planned other activities with the authentic materials but chose to just move on and start a new unit when switching to crisis online learning.

All three teachers use their textbooks normally but supplement the textbooks with other authentic materials. When working with the textbook all of the teachers use their PCK when choosing texts. These teachers reported that they routinely skip texts that they do not like or that contain content that they consider inappropriate for their students. Teacher B gave this example of an inappropriate text: “For instance, we had people coming from Syria who were exposed to war and there are chapters about war and you obviously skip those chapters because you know that would be inappropriate.” During crisis online teaching all three teachers used their textbooks. Teacher C reported that they used their textbook more while crisis online teaching:

I returned to the textbooks and I used them more than I have ever done before because it was easier for most of the students. They [the students] had the books and they had the text and the words and the exercises. So, I discovered new texts that I had never used before. I realized that the [text]books are even better than I actually thought. I usually get so tired of the books, so I just ignore the second half of the book, but I realized that the [text]books are very good.

Teacher C removed assignments that they planned and used the textbook more. In the process of using the textbook more, teacher C discovered that their textbook was better than they thought. Teacher B was working in their textbook with some classes. It was easier, according to teacher B, to switch to crisis online teaching when using the textbook rather than authentic materials. This was seen when teacher B stated “we were working very traditionally in the book. So, it was just kind of a smooth transition. We just kept on doing what we did in the classroom.”

6.1.2. Changes in group discussion activities

In addition to their textbooks, all three teachers supplemented the textbook with novels. Teacher A and B normally choose the novels that their students read while teacher C sometimes allows the students to decide. Teacher A modified the assignment they do with the novel and the implementation of it. Teacher A stated:

They [the students] actually had to be more prepared because I would see them one at a time and I would talk to them in small groups, not in a whole class, and so they couldn't really hide behind other students in the same way. So I think they were more prepared. … I made it more and I had more words from the chapters. ….. Then I recorded the chapter because I normally read it aloud in class, and they could listen to it at home. Then they [also] had questions afterwards. So then we would discuss after every chapter and then they would do that in small groups of two or three. ... Shy students or students that haven't actually read, they can just hide behind the students [normally], but now they are here in front of me so they have to say something. So I think they prepared more.

During crisis online teaching, teacher A modified the discussions so that students had to be more prepared because their students were in smaller groups and had specific time slots for discussions with teacher A. While discussions were an integral part of teacher A’s activities with their novel, teacher B removed all book discussions activities. Teacher B, who chose a novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, that was available as a pdf online, normally does small group book discussions but stated “You couldn't do all those small groups talking without creating

(19)

15

breakout rooms, and if I create breakout rooms, I lose control over some of the kids they go do other things. So I did have to adjust.” These adjustments were having the students read independently and having class discussions, where teacher B would question them one at a time during lectures.

Teacher C had students choose a novel before switching to crisis online teaching and had their students continue reading the novels that they choose. The assignment that was associated with the novel was a podcast. This was modified so that some students could work on their own instead of being a group assignment because some students were uncomfortable working online in small groups.

Teachers B and C both did English listening assignments by sending the students links to CNN10 and TED Talks. Both teachers B and C normally have discussions after watching these programs but modified this during crisis online teaching by eliminating these discussions.

Teacher B asked questions to the students as a class while teacher C sent questions to the students answer and return. Both teachers noted that listening assignments were problematic during crisis online teaching because they could not show the clips or films on Google Meet due to technical or connectivity issues.

All three teachers stated that normally they try and do some speaking activity in English each lesson and try to build a classroom where the students feel comfortable to speak English in class and be able to ask any question. All these teachers normally give topics to the students to discuss in English every lesson.

Only teacher A reported that English speaking exercises were easy while doing crisis online teaching. Despite this, they also did say that it was more time consuming due to the fact that they scheduled time with the students both in groups and individually to speak in English with them. It was the planning and scheduling with the students that was more time consuming. The speaking assignments that their students did were speaking about the novels they read and what was happening in society.

Teachers B and C both did fewer English oral assignments. Both eliminated the English warm- up exercises that they normally do. Instead, each teacher did a small group assignment that students had to record themselves in English. Teacher B did a travel show, where students discussed an English-speaking country, while teacher C did podcasts, where students discussed the novels they were reading. With both teacher B and C, when the students met and worked was left up to the students and the teachers did not know the progress of the assignments until they were turned in.

Teacher A did mention that students had problems with basic English conversational etiquette.

They stated:

You don't have the person next to you. It's harder to speak in front of a computer, I think, but maybe it's harder for them in a group where they can't really have their body language and things like that. It's more like OK now it's my turn then it's your turn and then it's your turn instead of having a conversation as they have normally.

This lack of conversational etiquette was compounded when students turned off their cameras and body language, eye contact, and other English conversation etiquette and context clues were lost.

(20)

16

6.1.3. Changes associated with writing assignments in EFL during crisis online teaching

Each teacher normally does a similar writing process. Students write a draft, receive peer edits, revise, receive teacher feedback, then revise once again before handing in a final draft. The teachers sometimes will skip peer edits or give feedback multiple times, depending on the assignment. Teacher A does at least one writing assignment per month while teachers B and C do two large writing assignments each term as well as lots of smaller assignments throughout the term. All of these teachers normally have their students write about themes they are reading about or what is happening in society.

Teachers A and B did not modify their writing assignments. Teacher A normally does the entire writing process, including feedback, on Google Documents (Google Docs), and continued to do so during crisis online teaching. Teacher A’s writing assignments were focused on practicing for the English writing national tests. Teacher B did two different writing assignments: a COVID capsule and an assignment where students wrote about where they would be in 10 years. Teacher C did not do any larger writing assignments, instead students wrote smaller assignments every lesson.

How students received feedback did not change for teachers A and C, as both teachers already gave feedback through Google Docs. Teacher B did change how they gave feedback, changing from hand-written feedback to feedback in Google Docs. The amount of feedback teacher A and B gave did not change, although teacher C did give less feedback throughout crisis online learning due to amount of student work handed in.

6.1.4. Assessment

As the switch to crisis online teaching happened in late March, most teachers were at that time starting to prepare their students for the English national tests. There are some assignments that all of these teachers normally do with their students, such as using their English textbook listening assignments and using old English national tests. These teachers also integrate authentic assignments as well. Table 3 lists some of the English listening comprehension assignments these teachers normally do with their students. During crisis online teaching a lack of assessment occurred in regards to listening comprehension due to a potential lack of TPACK.

In order to assess students listening comprehension skills students were required to come into the school.

Table 3: Listening comprehension activities normally done in each teacher's classroom.

Teacher A Teacher B Teacher C

Textbook X X X

Old national tests X X X

TED Talks X X

News channels¹ X X

Reading novels aloud X

Teacher A reported that they still did most assignments that prepared students for the English national tests, such as listening to older tests. Teacher A’s listening assignments did not change much during crisis online teaching because they had their students come into school for them.

1 Examples of news channels are CNN10, NBC, Fox News, and BBC.

(21)

17

All three teachers reported that they used old English national tests to determine students’

grades during crisis online teaching due to the national test being cancelled. Teacher A stated that they used old English national tests and students came in to take old English national tests just as they would have done if the national tests would have not been canceled. Teachers B and C based their grades on previous old national tests students had taken, but had students came into school if their grades were borderline to help better determine students’ grade.

Teachers B and C also stated that the one section that they could easily do online was speaking skills, but some students did come in for that section as well.

All three teachers stated that grades were based on old national tests that they gave either right before switching to crisis online teaching or old national tests that students came into school and took while crisis online teaching. Teacher C did say that they were not proud of the grades that were given last year and has even heard students say that they cheated on some online tests last year. Teacher B also mentioned that they were “very lenient when it came to grading”.

Teacher C believes that the grades from last year were very questionable.

6.2. Teacher’s perspectives on crisis online learning in EFL

This section presents challenges and opportunities that these teachers noted with crisis online teaching in their EFL classes.

6.2.1. Crisis online teaching challenges

There were two main challenges that these teachers noted: workload and motivation. Teacher A found crisis online teaching challenging because it took more time and energy in terms of planning. Planning took longer because they had to plan where, in school or online, students were going to meet as well as when, due to having students meet in smaller groups.

Teacher A and C both felt like they had a higher workload while crisis online teaching. Teacher A felt that crisis online teaching was more of reading and marking so that it was more work with marking. Overall teacher A thinks that they worked 1.5 hours a day more while crisis online teaching. Teacher C stated that their workload increased during crisis online teaching because they were always online and working. They were constantly online to answer questions and give feedback. The following quote was from teacher C when asked how crisis online teaching affected their workload:

If I was working from home, I never turned off the computer. I was always there, even if I had been here in school, I would have turned it off and got out into my car and would have ended my day. Perhaps I would have worked when I come home as well, but I never turned off the computer.

I just kept on working and the students kept on asking questions and there was so much to always correct and comment on and help people with so. I was constantly online, constantly working.

This showed that not only did the workload increase, teacher C had a hard time balancing work and home life. Teacher B reported that they felt the workload was about the same while crisis online teaching but work was more stressful.

Teachers’ PK is seen through how they motivate their students. Motivation is one issue that teachers deal when choosing activities in their classroom. Teachers B and C stated their

(22)

18

challenges were more with motivation, both from their students and themselves as teachers.

Teacher B noted the challenges by saying:

They [students] lost motivation. Some of them didn't have breakfast, some of them didn't even get dressed you [the teachers] had to tell them to get dressed, at least put on a t-shirt and get out of bed. People weren't happy. You could tell, and that was a big challenge. Just motivating yourself.

You just wanted it all to end [so that] you could have summer because it was so terribly boring.

Teacher C echoed that there was a lack of motivation, not only with students but with teachers:

The best part about being a teacher is, of course, the students, to meet them every day in school and that's also the worst part, perhaps and so frustrating at times. But that's actually what gives you energy to be in the classroom and have the students and to meet them there. To be able to see their how they develop and when they understand things and help them so on. But to just work with a computer and printing, is like doing office work, [it] is not being a teacher. So that was the most difficult part because they [the students] disappeared. They weren't there as they would have been if we hadn't been here in school.

This lack of motivation with students was compounded because teachers had also lost motivation. There were issues, such as students not getting dressed and staying in bed, that teachers had never had to deal with before. These teachers expressed that they were not as motivated because they were not happy and did not feel like teachers.

Teacher B mentioned that the Google Meet videoconferencing platform did not allow the students, themselves, to change the background. Due to this, they decided for socioeconomic issues, students did not have to have their videos on. Teacher B said:

You can't demand that they [students] keep their cameras on due to the social economic question too. I mean, we had instances for kids, not that I know of my students, but in other in other classes, where kids would sit in the bathroom because there were so many people at home, mom and dad were working from home, siblings were working from home, grandma was staying with them, and just to get some peace and quiet. So you can't demand that they have their cameras on, and that provides a problem because you have no idea if they're not [present].

Teacher B’s point was that some students did not want to show their backgrounds and let others into their living situation. This lack of camera usage, made it difficult to know if students were focused on school or doing other things, according to both teacher B and C.

Teacher A did state that doing crisis online teaching went well but if they were going to continue to do online teaching 100% then they would leave the profession. Teacher B and C stated that they would never want to do crisis online teaching again. Overall, Teacher C’s reflection was that they survived. Teacher C thinks that it only worked well because it was March and that all the teachers knew their students and does not think it would have worked as well if it had been August or September.

6.2.2. Crisis online teaching opportunities

Each teacher mentioned different opportunities that crisis online teaching revealed. Teacher A stated that they noticed that students with anxiety disorders were “better” with crisis online learning. Crisis online learning helped the weaker students because they had to focus more and be more prepared because they were not able to sit and hide in the back of a classroom.

Another opportunity that was mentioned was the freedom; one could have class outside in the sun. Teacher B stated that they enjoyed sitting outside in the sun to grade papers. Teacher B