Exploring Iranian University Students’ Expectations and Technology Use for Out-of-Class English Language Learning

Zeitounly, M.; Ghorbani, M.R.; Robatjazy, M.A.

doi:10.22061/tej.2025.11598.3170

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Research Paper-English Issue

Authors

Department of Foreign Languages, Faculty of Humanities, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2025.11598.3170

Abstract

Background and Objectives: This study examines the expectations and actual use of technology by Iranian university students for out-of-class English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning. It explores the factors influencing technology use, barriers encountered, and students' recommendations for enhancing technology-driven language learning. The research aims to provide insights into how students adapt to technological barriers in Iran, such as internet filtering, high costs, and low-speed connections. The study is guided by the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Expectation-Disconfirmation Theory (EDT), which posit that satisfaction arises when actual experiences meet or exceed expectations.
Materials and Methods: Using a sequential exploratory mixed-methods design, the study consisted of both qualitative and quantitative phases. The qualitative phase involved semi-structured interviews with 24 senior English students (11 males, 13 females), while the quantitative phase included a survey of 48 undergraduate TEFL and English Literature students (7 males, 41 females). The research was conducted during the 2024–2025 academic year.
Findings: Students were generally satisfied with their technology use for language learning, as their actual experiences closely aligned with their expectations. Despite infrastructural and political constraints, such as low internet speed, filtering of websites requiring VPNs, and high costs, students demonstrated resilience and resourcefulness in utilizing digital tools for language acquisition. Key factors influencing technology use included time flexibility, accessibility, cost efficiency, and teacher support. However, students reported significant challenges, including lack of teacher guidance and distractions associated with technology use. Quantitative analysis revealed no significant differences between students' expectations and their actual use of technology. Additionally, there were no notable gender-based differences in either expectations or usage patterns, indicating that male and female students face similar challenges and opportunities. These findings align with TAM and EDT, suggesting that students’ satisfaction arises from the alignment between their expectations and actual experiences. Students emphasized the importance of teacher guidance in improving the effectiveness of technology use, highlighting the need for educators to provide direction on selecting appropriate tools and strategies. They proposed practical recommendations, including reducing internet filtering, incorporating gamified learning tools, establishing consistent study routines, and focusing on high-quality resources to optimize their learning experiences.
Conclusions: This study underscores the critical role of technology in facilitating out-of-class EFL learning in restrictive contexts like Iran. It highlights students' ability to overcome challenges, leveraging available resources for language acquisition. Policymakers are encouraged to reconsider restrictive measures, such as internet filtering, as students have demonstrated responsible and effective use of technology for educational purposes. Teachers are urged to guide students in utilizing technology more effectively, ensuring personalized and structured learning experiences. Despite its contributions, the study faced limitations, including a small sample size restricted to English-major students at two universities, which may limit the generalizability of findings. Future research should expand to include students from diverse academic disciplines, educational levels, and geographical regions. Incorporating teacher perspectives and conducting comparative studies across different cultural contexts would provide a more comprehensive understanding of technology's role in EFL learning. By addressing barriers and leveraging teacher support, this study highlights how technology can further enhance autonomous learning experiences. Policymakers and educators are encouraged to foster a more supportive environment for technology integration, ensuring equitable and effective access to digital resources for all learners.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Technology-based learning environments

COPYRIGHTS
© 2025 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

References

[1] Dashtestani R. Moving bravely towards mobile learning: Iranian students’ use of mobile devices for learning English as a foreign language. Computer-Assisted Language Learning. 2015;29(4):815–32. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1069360

[2] Moorhouse BL, Wong K, Li L. Teaching with technology in the post-pandemic digital age: Technological normalisation and AI-induced disruptions. RELC Journal. 2023;54(2):311–20. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231176929

[3] Ahmadi MR. The use of technology in English language learning: A literature review. International Journal of Research in English Education. 2018;3(2):115–25. Available from: https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.3.2.115

[4] Duong TM, Tran TQ, Nguyen TTP. Non-English majored students’ use of English vocabulary learning strategies with technology-enhanced language learning tools. Asian Journal of University Education. 2021;17(4):455. Available from: https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v17i4.16252

[5] Kaur N, Gopal K. An assessment of students’ intention of technology acceptance for online education. Journal of Positive School Psychology. 2022;6(3):3410–24.

[6] Mede E, İnceçay G, İnceçay V. Fostering learner autonomy through extensive reading: The case of oral book reports. ELT Research Journal. 2013;2(1):16–25.

[7] Lai C. Perceiving and traversing in-class and out-of-class learning: Accounts from foreign language learners in Hong Kong. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching. 2014;9(3):265–84. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2014.918982

[8] Lai C, Zhu W, Gong G. Understanding the quality of out-of-class English learning. TESOL Quarterly. 2014;49(2):278–308. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.171

[9] Lai C. Modeling teachers’ influence on learners’ self-directed use of technology for language learning outside the classroom. Computers & Education. 2015;82:74–83. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.005

[10] Kolhar M, Kazi RN, Alameen A. Effect of social media use on learning, social interactions, and sleep duration among university students. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 2021;28(4):2216–22. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.01.010

[11] Essex G. Educational technology behaviors and expectations of students entering three dental programs; a bi-coastal survey [dissertation]. University of San Francisco; 2009. Publication No. 3388381. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

[12] Churchill GA, Surprenant C. An investigation into the determinants of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research. 1982;19(4):491. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.2307/3151722

[13] Elkhani N, Bakri A. Review on “expectancy disconfirmation theory” (EDT) model in B2C E-Commerce. Journal of Information Systems Research and Innovation. 2012;2(12):95–102.

[14] Algubaisi BA. Exploring and understanding of administrator’s, teachers', and students' expectations and actual use of technology-enhanced language learning in a Saudi tertiary context [dissertation]. Indiana University of Pennsylvania; 2017. Publication No. 10640342. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

[15] Miniawi HE, Brenjekjy A. Educational technology, potentials, expectations and challenges. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015;174:402–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.777

[16] Shukla A, Kirmani MN. Effect of internet addiction on aggression and attention span in adolescents: Empirical investigation. International Journal of Humanities & Social Science Studies. 2023;9(5):154–63. Available from: https://doi.org/10.29032/ijhsss.v9.i5.2023.154-163

[17] Richards JC. The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal. 2015;46(1):5–22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214561621

[18] Gholaminejad R, Raeisi-Vanani A. English language teaching in Iranian mainstream schools: Pedagogical, societal and government policy environments. Issues in Educational Research. 2021;31(1):111–29.

[19] Altun M, Ahmad HK. The use of technology in English language teaching: A literature review. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies. 2021;8(1):226–32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v8i1p226

[20] Lai C, Gu M. Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 2011;24(4):317–35. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.568417

[21] Banihashemi P. International law and the right to global internet access: Exploring internet access as a human right through the lens of Iran's Women-Life-Freedom movement. Chicago Journal of International Law. 2023;24:31.

[22] Chaw LY, Tang CM. The voice of the students: Needs and expectations from learning management systems. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Learning. 2017.

[23] Ozturk E. Students’ expectations from mobile devices for mobile learning. International Journal of Mobile Communications. 2019;17(4):409–21. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMC.2019.100496

[24] Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems. 1989;13(3):319. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

[25] Oliver RL. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research. 1980;17(4):460–79. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/3150499

[26] Afshari M, Ghavifekr S, Siraj S, Duan J. Students’ attitudes towards computer-assisted language learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013;103:852–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.407

[27] Bhattacherjee A, Premkumar G. Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test. Management Information Systems Quarterly. 2004;28(2):229. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/25148634

[28] Cohen A, Soffer T, Henderson M. Students’ use of technology and their perceptions of its usefulness in higher education: International comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022;38(5):1321–31. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12678

[29] Creswell JW. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 4th ed. Pearson; 2012.

[30] Dörnyei Z. Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford University Press; 2007.

[31] Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 5th ed. SAGE Publications; 2018.

[32] Desta MA, Workie MB, Yemer DB, Denku CY, Berhanu MS. Social media usage in improving English language proficiency from the viewpoint of medical students. Advances in Medical Education and Practice. 2021;12:519–28. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S310181

[33] Lee C, Yeung AS, Ip T. Use of computer technology for English language learning: Do learning styles, gender, and age matter? Computer Assisted Language Learning. 2016;29(5):1035–51. Available from:

https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1140655