This qualitative study explored the acceptance and knowledge base of English language teaching (ELT) student teachers regarding the incorporation of virtual reality (VR) into oral tasks to promote learner engagement within the framework of task-based language teaching (TBLT). Twenty-six ELT student teachers, pursuing their Master of Arts degree at a university in Hong Kong, were interviewed about their acceptance of VR oral tasks and assessed on their knowledge of task engagement and VR. Content analysis, guided by the technology acceptance model and the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) framework, was conducted to analyse their interview data. The findings indicated their acceptance of VR-based oral tasks, based on their overall positive perceptions of VR, and confirmed their existing pedagogical knowledge of task engagement. However, their concerns regarding the effectiveness of VR-based oral tasks were influenced by their insufficient TPACK. The findings highlight their urgent need for professional training, not only to enhance VR experiential opportunities but also to learn how to develop teaching materials that integrate VR.
AubreySKingJAlmukhaildH (2022) Language learner engagement during speaking tasks: a longitudinal study. RELC Journal53(3): 519–533.
2.
AubreySPhilpottA (2023) Second language task engagement in face-to-face and synchronous video-based computer-mediated communication modes: performances and perceptions. System115: 103069.
3.
BaiXGuoRGuX (2024) Effect of teachers’ TPACK on their behavioral intention to use technology: chain mediating effect of technology self-efficacy and attitude toward use. Education and Information Technologies29: 1013–1032.
4.
BowerMDeWittDLaiJWM (2020) Reasons associated with preservice teachers’ intention to use immersive virtual reality in education. British Journal of Educational Technology51(6): 2215–2233.
5.
ChenJ (2016) The crossroads of English language learners, task-based instruction, and 3D multi-user virtual learning in second life. System102: 152–171.
6.
ChenMChaiCJongMS (2023) Actualization of teaching conceptions in lesson design: how teaching conceptions shape TPACK regarding spherical video-based virtual reality-supported writing instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development71: 2321–2344.
7.
ChenQWrightC (2017) Contextualization and authenticity in TBLT: voices from Chinese classrooms. Language Teaching Research21(4): 517–538.
8.
DavisFD (1986) A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
9.
EllisR (2012) Language Teaching Research and Language Pedagogy. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
10.
Gonzalez-LloretMRockK (2022) Tasks in technology-mediated contexts. In: ZieglerNGonzalez-LloretM (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition and Technology. New York: Routledge, pp. 36–49.
11.
HuangFTeoT (2020) Influence of teacher-perceived organisational culture and school policy on Chinese teachers’ intention to use technology: an extension of technology acceptance model. Educational Technology Research and Development68: 1547–1567.
12.
JangJKoYShinWS, et al. (2021) Augmented reality and virtual reality for learning: an examination using an extended technology acceptance model. IEEE Access9: 6798–6809.
13.
JewittCChubinidzeDPriceS, et al. (2021) Making sense of digitally remediated touch in virtual reality experiences. Discourse, Context and Media41: Article 100483.
14.
Kaplan-RakowskiRGruberA (2019). Low-immersion versus high-immersion virtual reality: definitions, classification, and examples with a foreign language focus. In Proceedings of the innovation in language learning international conference 2019.Pixel, pp. 552–555.
15.
KhukalenkoISKaplan-RakowskiRAnY an, et al. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of using virtual reality technology in classrooms: a large-scale survey. Education and Information Technologies27: 11591–11613.
16.
LaiWLopez-OziebloRShenDJ, et al.Engaging the digital learner: navigating learning landscapes in the metaverse. In: Mesquita A, Abreu A, Carvalho JV, et al. (eds) Perspectives and Trends in Education and Technology: Selected Papers from ICITED 2024. Singapore: Springer.
17.
LambertCZhangG (2019) Engagement in the use of English and Chinese as foreign languages: the role of learner-generated content in instructional task design. The Modern Language Journal103(2): 391–411.
18.
LiuYRenW (2021 online) Task-based language teaching in a local EFL context: Chinese university teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research.
19.
MillsN (2021). Engagement and immersion in virtual reality narratives. In: HiverPAI-HoorieAHMercerS (eds) Student Engagement in the Language Classroom. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 202–223.
MishraPKoehlerMJ (2006) Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record108(6): 1017–1054.
22.
NguyenMXNCDaoPIwashitaN, et al. (2023) Teacher learners theorizing from practice: a case of the concept of learner engagement in interactive second language learning tasks. Teaching and Teacher Education129: 104151.
23.
PhilpJDuchesneP (2016) Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics36: 50–72.
24.
QiuX (2024) Revisiting the cognition hypothesis: the impact of task complexity on L2 learner engagement in task performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face communication. Computer Assisted Language Learning37(7): 2028–2050.
25.
RobinsonP (2011) Second language task complexity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
26.
SchererRSiddiqFTondeurJ (2019) The technology acceptance model (TAM): a meta-analytic structural equation modelling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education128: 13–35.
27.
SelviAF (2019). Qualitative content analysis. In McKinleyJRoseH (eds), The routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics. Routledge, 440–452.
28.
ShiJSitthiworachartJHongJ-C (2024 online) Supporting project-based learning for students’ oral English skill and engagement with immersive virtual reality. Education and Information Technologies.
29.
ShulmanLS (1986) Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher15(2): 4–14.
30.
SkehanP (2014) Processing Perspectives on Task Performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
ThohirMAAhdhiantoEMasulaS, et al. (2023) The effects of TPACK and facility condition on preservice teachers’ acceptance of virtual reality in science education course. Contemporary Educational Technology15(2): ep407.
35.
VenkateshVDavisFD (2000) Theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science46(2): 186–204.
36.
YorkJShibataKTokutakeH, et al. (2021) Effect of SCMC on foreign language anxiety and learning experience: a comparison of voice, video, and VR-based oral interaction. ReCALL33(1): 49–70.
37.
ZhengC, Yu M, Guo Z, et al. (2022) Review of the application of virtual reality in language education from 2010 to 2020. Journal of China Computer Assisted Language Learning2(2): 299–335.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
