An Analysis of Primary School English Teachers"™ Proficiency in Technolgy Using Bloom"™s Digital Taxonomy Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26418/jeep.v6i2.93364Keywords:
Bloom"™s Digital Taxonomy, teachers"™ proficiency, TPACKAbstract
This study aimed to reveal the extent of the proficiency level of Primary School English Teachers in integrating technology into instructions based on Bloom"™s Digital Taxonomy and to examine the factors influencing it. The researcher employed an explanatory sequential mix method research design where the first phase was quantitative and the second phase was qualitative. In this study, 20 different primary schools in North Denpasar, Indonesia. were the sample with a total of 21 English teachers as the subjects. The data were collected through several means covering questionnaire, semi-structured interview, observation, and document analysis. The results of the questionnaire were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the semi-structured interview, observation, and document analysis were analyzed through data condensation, data display, and data interpretation. This study found that primary school English teachers"™ proficiency level incorporating technology into instructions based on BDT framework assessment is at the C3-Applying. Therefore, the factors influencing it are classified into external and internal factors. The external factors are facilities offered by the school, heavy workloads, digital training, students' factor, curriculum demand, and â collaborative factors. Then, the internal factor is teachers"™ willingness to learn. Additionally, teachers fully utilize technology for TPACK components. Thus, this study suggests further researchers to conduct study about analyzing the application of TPACK and BDT in teaching in various subjects at different levels of education or examine the impact of the use of TPACK and BDT in the classroom on the learning experience of students with special needs.References
Abalkheel, A. (2021). Amalgamating bloom’s digital taxonomy and artificial intelligence to face the challenges of online EFL learning amid post-covid-19 in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 11(1), 16–30. https://doi.org/10.18488/5019.v11i1.4409
Afroz, R., Islam, N., Rahman, S., & Zerin Anny, N. (2021). Students’ and teachers’ attitude towards online classes during COVID-19 pandemic: A study on three Bangladeshi government colleges. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478), 10(3). https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v10i3.1155
Afutor, P. (2020). ICT Infrastructure, ICT competencies, and teachers’ workload: Critical factors that influence Social Studies teachers’ integration of technology in the Kwahu West Municipality of Ghana. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(14), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.7176/jep/11-14-08
Ahyanuardi, A., Rahmadhani, S., Suryati, L., & Zuryana, Z. (2022). Realization of vocational high school curriculum based on work culture. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v12i1.44243
Ajayi, O., & Salma, A. A. (2021). Comparative assessment facilities provision in public and private primary schools in Irepodun Local Government of Kwara State. Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu Sosial, 30(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.17509/jpis.v30i1.63315
Amin, H., & Mirza, M. S. (2020). Comparative study of knowledge and use of Bloom’s digital taxonomy by teachers and students in virtual and conventional universities. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(2), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-01-2020-0005
Astuti, F. K., Ellianawati, E., Masturi, M., Wiyanto, W., & Sumarni, W. (2023). Central java teachers’ perspective on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) learning. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v12i1.53846
Churches, A. (2012). Bloom digital taxonomy. European University Institute, 2, 2–5.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third ed). Los Angeles: Sage Publication.
Erbas, İ., Çipuri, R., & Joni, A. (2021). Impact of technology on teaching and teaching English to elementary school students. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S3), 1316–1336. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5ns3.1815
De Souza, R., Parveen, R., Chupradit, S., Velasco, L. G., Arcinas, M., Tabuena, A. C., & Ventayen, R. J. M. (2021). Language teachers’ pedagogical orientations in integrating technology in the online classroom: Its effect on students motivation and engagement. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(10). https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i10.5268
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Eight ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research (Seventh Edition). Boston.
Gay, L.R. & Diehl, P. L. (1992). Research methods for business and management. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Haryani, E., Cobern, W. W., Pleasants, B. A. S., & Fetters, M. K. (2021). Analysis of teachers’ resources for integrating the skills of creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving, collaboration, and communication in science classroom. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(1). Https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i1.27084
Jie, Z., & Sunze, Y. (2023). Investigating pedagogical challenges of mobile technology to English teaching. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(5), 2767–2779. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1903933
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(3), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300303
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, Punya. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.
Kopcha, T. J., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Jung, J., & Baser, D. (2014). Examining the TPACK framework through the convergent and discriminant validity of two measures. Computers and Education, 78, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.003
Kozikoğlu, İ., & Babacan, N. (2019). The investigation of the relationship between Turkish EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge skills and attitudes towards technology. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.547594
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28, 563–575. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Lie, A., Tamah, S. M., & Gozali, I. (2023). Appropriating TPACK in preparation for hybrid learning: Innovations in teaching practices. MEXTESOL Journal, 47(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.61871/mj.v47n3-1
Mahapatra, S. K. (2020). Impact of digital technology training on english for science and technology teachers in India. RELC Journal, 51(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220907401
Matore, M. E. E. M. (2021). RaschModel assessment for Bloom digital taxonomy applications. Computers, Materials and Continua, 68(1), 1235–1253. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2021.016143
Mercader, C., & GairÃn, J. (2020). University teachers’ perception of barriers to the use of digital technologies: The importance of the academic discipline. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0182-x
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook (Third Edition). Sage Publication.
Mu’awanah, N. (2021). Using Zoom to Support English Learning during COVID-19 pandemic: Strengths and challenges. Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar, 5(2), 222–230. https://doi.org/10.23887/jisd.v5i2.35006
Nava, C. M. E., Cortezano, G. P., Yazon, A. D., Manaig, K. A., & Tesoro, J. F. B. (2022). Lived experiences of English teachers in integrating Bloom’s digital taxonomy on their differentiated instruction practices: A phenomenological study. Journal of English as A Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2(2), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.31098/jefltr.v2i2.1109
Nuangchalerm, P. (2020). TPACK in ASEAN perspectives: case study on Thai pre-service teacher. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(4), 993–999. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20700
Poudel, A. P. (2022). Information and communication technology in English language teaching: Some opportunities and challenges. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 14(4), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v14i4.3874
Rodrigues, A. L. (2020). Digital technologies integration in teacher education: The active teacher training model. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 16(3), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135273
Ronguno, S. K., & Ejore, P. (2019). School management and academic performance: A comparison of public and private Schools in Wareng District, Kenya. The International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies, 7(5). https://doi.org/10.24940/theijhss/2019/v7/i5/hs1905-054
Salandron, R. Jr. L., Razonable, M. C., & Franca, G. C. (2023). Attitudes on ICT integration among SPAMAST instructors in the new normal. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 48(4). https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2023/v48i41081
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. In Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
Shah, N. H., Nazir, N., & Arshad, M. (2021). Integration of ICT in early childhood education: A comparative study of public and private school teachers of Pakistan. PJER, 4(4), 553-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.52337/pjer.v4i4.399
Shi, L., & Jiang, L. (2022). How EFL teachers perceive and self-evaluate the knowledge components in forming Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 5(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v5i1.5914
Siang, W. E. W., & Mohamad, M. (2022). Factors affecting the behaviour in integrating Google Meet among Malaysian primary ESL teachers during COVID-19 pandemic. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(3), 565–576. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1203.17
Sulaimani, A. O., Sarhandi, P. S. A., & Buledi, M. H. (2017). Impact of CALL in-house professional development training on teachers’ pedagogy: An evaluative study. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1355646
Sulasmi, E. (2022). Primary school teachers’ digital literacy: an analysis on teachers’ skills in using technological devices. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 3(2), 140–145. https://doi.org/10.46843/jiecr.v3i2.81
Suryati, L., Ambiyar, & Jalinus, N. (2023). Evaluation of the implementation of the independent curriculum with a technology-based learning model. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengembangan Pendidikan, 7(3), 438–447. https://doi.org/10.23887/jppp.v7i3.66635
Tseng, J.-J. (2014). Investigating EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge: Students’ perceptions. Proceedings of the 2014 EUROCALL Conference, 379–384. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2014.000249
Wang, X., & Zhang, W. (2022). Improvement of students’ autonomous learning behavior by optimizing foreign language blended learning mode. SAGE Open, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211071108
Yeh, Y. F., Chan, K. K. H., & Hsu, Y. S. (2021). Toward a framework that connects individual TPACK and collective TPACK: A systematic review of TPACK studies investigating teacher collaborative discourse in the learning by design process. Computers and Education, 171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104238
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of English Education Program
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright aims to protect the specific way the article has been written to describe an experiment and the results. Journal of English Education Program (JEEP) is committed to its authors to protect and defend their work and their reputation and takes allegations of infringement, plagiarism, ethical disputes, and fraud very seriously. Under the terms of the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), author(s) retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication (online and print) with the work simultaneously. We use the ShareAlike (SA) component in addition to the Attribution (BY) and NonCommercial (NC) components, as follows:
BY (attribution): Users are allowed to share, distribute, and redistribute the published article in any medium or format, with identification of the authors and its initial publication in this journal. Authors are encouraged to post and distribute their articles immediately after publication (e.g., institutional or public repositories, personal websites). Authors are allowed to enter into additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published article and an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
NC (non-commercial): Users are not allowed to use the article commercially without the permission of the authors. Authors agree explicitly that the published article is indexed worldwide in databases, repositories, and indexation services, even if these services operate on a commercial basis. Authors grant Journal of English Education Program (JEEP) explicit the right to include the published articles in databases, repositories, and indexation services.
SA (ShareAlike): If user(s) remix, transform, or build upon the material, they must distribute their contributions under the same license as the original (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
