Volume 4, Issue 4 (December 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(4): 1-22 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Moazami Godarzi F, Heidari Tabrizi H, Chalak A. (2025). Impact of Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning on Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Skill. IJER. 4(4), 1-22. doi:10.22034/ijer.4.4.5
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-366-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-366-en.html
1- PhD Candidate, Department of English, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2- Professor of Applied Linguistics, epartment of English, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran ,heidaritabrizi@gmail.com
3- Professor of Applied Linguistics, epartment of English, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2- Professor of Applied Linguistics, epartment of English, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran ,
3- Professor of Applied Linguistics, epartment of English, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract: (1770 Views)
Objective: The integration of technology into language education has transformed learning environments, allowing for more individualized instruction. However, limited research has explored the effects of technology-enhanced personalized language learning (TEPLL) on writing skills across different learner characteristics. This study aimed to examine the impact of TEPLL on the writing skills of Iranian EFL learners, considering the moderating effects of proficiency level, age, and gender.
Methods: The study was conducted in Fall 2024 with 120 Iranian EFL learners across three proficiency levels (pre-intermediate, intermediate, and advanced). Participants were randomly assigned to either a TEPLL group, which used Moodle for personalized activities, or a traditional instruction group. Writing performance was assessed before and after the intervention.
Results: Findings indicated that the TEPLL group showed significantly greater improvement in writing skills compared to the traditional instruction group. The positive effects of TEPLL were particularly evident among higher proficiency and adult learners. Gender did not significantly moderate the impact of TEPLL.
Conclusion: TEPLL proves to be an effective approach for enhancing writing skills in EFL contexts, particularly for advanced and adult learners. The results underscore the importance of integrating technology-based personalization and tailoring instructional design based on learner proficiency.
Methods: The study was conducted in Fall 2024 with 120 Iranian EFL learners across three proficiency levels (pre-intermediate, intermediate, and advanced). Participants were randomly assigned to either a TEPLL group, which used Moodle for personalized activities, or a traditional instruction group. Writing performance was assessed before and after the intervention.
Results: Findings indicated that the TEPLL group showed significantly greater improvement in writing skills compared to the traditional instruction group. The positive effects of TEPLL were particularly evident among higher proficiency and adult learners. Gender did not significantly moderate the impact of TEPLL.
Conclusion: TEPLL proves to be an effective approach for enhancing writing skills in EFL contexts, particularly for advanced and adult learners. The results underscore the importance of integrating technology-based personalization and tailoring instructional design based on learner proficiency.
Keywords: English Writing, Iranian EFL Learners, Technology-Enhanced Personalized Language Learning (TEPLL)
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2025/04/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/16 | Published: 2025/12/1
Received: 2025/04/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/16 | Published: 2025/12/1
References
1. Akbari, Z. (2015). Current challenges in teaching/learning English for EFL learners: The case of junior high school and high school. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 394-401. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.524]
2. Åkerfeldt, A. (2014). Re-shaping of writing in the digital age - A study of pupils' writing with different resources. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 9(3), 172-193. [DOI:10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2014-03-02]
3. Awwad, A., & Tavakoli, P. (2019). Task complexity, language proficiency and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60(2), 169-196. [DOI:10.1515/iral-2018-0378]
4. Beese, E. B. (2019). A process perspective on research and design issues in educational personalization. Theory and Research in Education, 17(3), 253-279. [DOI:10.1177/1477878519893963]
5. Birdsong, D., & Vanhove, J. (2016). Age of second language acquisition: Critical periods and social concerns. In Bilingualism across the lifespan: Factors moderating language proficiency (pp. 163-181). American Psychological Association. [DOI:10.1037/14939-010]
6. Blake, R. (2013). Digital literacies and language learning: A multimodal approach. Routledge.
7. Cao, J., Bhuvaneswari, G., Arumugam, T., & Aravind, B. R. (2023). The digital edge: Examining the relationship between digital competency and language learning outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1187909. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909]
8. Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524681]
9. Choi, L., & Chung, S. (2021). Navigating online language teaching in uncertain times: Challenges and strategies of EFL educators in creating a sustainable technology-mediated language learning environment. Sustainability, 13(14), Article 7607. [DOI:10.3390/su13147607]
10. Chrysafiadi, K., & Virvou, M. (2013). Dynamically personalized e-training in computer programming and the language C. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 385-392. [DOI:10.1109/TE.2013.2243914]
11. Education First. (2023). EF English Proficiency Index. Retrieved October 26, 2024, from https://www.ef.edu/epi/
12. Faramarzi, S., Heidari Tabrizi, H., & Chalak, A. (2021). Vodcasting tasks in online L2 classes: Investigating the potentials and challenges in distance language learning. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 13(1), 27-40. [DOI:10.1504/IJTEL.2021.111589]
13. Fauziningrum, E., Sari, M. N., Rahmani, S. F., Riztya, R., Syafruni, S., & Purba, P. M. (2023). Strategies used by English teachers in teaching vocabulary. Journal on Education, 6(1), 674-679. [DOI:10.31004/joe.v6i1.2981]
14. Figueiredo, S. (2019). Competition strategies during writing in a second language: Age and levels of complexity. Languages, 4(1), Article 11. [DOI:10.3390/languages4010011]
15. Giacomo, A., & Puglisi, G. (2020). Technophobia as emerging risk factor in aging: Investigation on computer anxiety dimension. Health Psychology Research, 8(1), 1-7. [DOI:10.4081/hpr.2020.8207]
16. Hartono, W. J., Sari, M. N., Rasmita, R., Devi, P. D., & Uktolseja, L. J. (2023). Multilingualism in the English classroom: A literature review on strategies and benefits. Jurnal Review Pendidikan dan Pengajaran (JRPP), 6(4), 2732-2741.
17. Hashemnejad, F., Zoghi, M., & Amini, D. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy and writing performance across genders. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 1045-1052. [DOI:10.4304/tpls.4.5.1045-1052]
18. Hwang, W. Y., Chen, H. S., Shadiev, R., Huang, R. Y. M., & Chen, C. Y. (2014). Improving English as a foreign language writing in elementary schools using mobile devices in familiar situational contexts. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(5), 359-378. [DOI:10.1080/09588221.2012.733711]
19. Isaac, J. E., & Michael, W. B. (1995). Handbook in research and evaluation (3rd ed.). EDITS Publishers.
20. Jalili, S. (2020). Vocabulary learning in the mobile-assisted flipped classroom in an Iranian EFL context. Teaching English with Technology, 20(4), 82-95. http://www.tewtjournal.org
21. Jung, Y., Kim, Y., Lee, H., Cathey, R., Carver, J., & Skalicky, S. (2019). Learner perception of multimodal synchronous computer-mediated communication in foreign language classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 23(3), 287-309. [DOI:10.1177/1362168817731910]
22. Klímová, B., Al-Obaydi, L., Tawafak, R. M., & Pikhart, M. (2023). The design features of digital games and their impact on language learning for EFL college students [Version 1]. Research Square. [DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3078695/v1]
23. Kuddus, K. (2018). Emerging technologies and the evolving roles of language teachers: An overview. Language in India, 18(6), 81-86.
24. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2008). Connecting learning, technology and change: A new framework for understanding the potential of learning technologies. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 771-784.
25. Leshchenko, M., Lavrysh, Y., Halatsyn, K., Feshchuk, A., & Prykhodko, D. (2023). Technology-enhanced personalized language learning: Strategies and challenges. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 18(13), 120-136. [DOI:10.3991/ijet.v18i13.39905]
26. Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and concerns. Language, Learning & Technology, 1(1), 1-15. [DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198236320.003.0001]
27. Lian, A.-P., & Sangarun, P. (2017). Precision language education: A glimpse into a possible future. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 17(4), 1-15. [DOI:10.17576/gema-2017-1704-01]
28. Lu, O., Huang, A., Huang, J., Lin, A., Ogata, H., & Yang, S. J. H. (2018). Applying learning analytics for the early prediction of students' academic performance in blended learning. Educational Technology & Society, 21(2), 220-232.
29. Mahgoub, K. M., & Alwi, N. A. (2023). The effect of task complexity and gender differences on EFL learners' writing performance. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 20(1), 840-858. [DOI:10.30574/wjarr.2023.20.1.2131]
30. Mellati, M., & Khademi, M. (2015). The impacts of distance interactivity on learners' achievements in online mobile language learning: Social software and participatory learning. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 10(3), 19-35. [DOI:10.4018/ijwltt.2015070102]
31. Moazemi Godarzi, F., Heidari Tabrizi, H., & Chalak, A. (in press). EFL learners' stance towards technology-enhanced personalized language learning (TEPLL) for developing productive skills: A self-determination theory perspective. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research (IJFLTR).
32. Muharom, F., Nugroho, A., & Putra P., H. R. (2022). Self-directed use of digital devices for out-of-class English learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST), 10(1), 257-271. [DOI:10.46328/ijemst.2245]
33. Ningsih, P. E. A., & Sari, M. N. (2021). Are learning media effective in English online learning? The students' and teachers' perceptions. Tarbawi: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 17(2), 173-183. [DOI:10.32939/tarbawi.v17i2.1012]
34. Nugroho, A., & Atmojo, A. E. P. (2020). Digital learning of English beyond the classroom: EFL learners' perception and teaching activities. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 7(2), 219-243. [DOI:10.30762/jeels.v7i2.1993]
35. Ortikov Khudoyberdi, U. (2024). The impact of technology-enhanced language learning methods. Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, Educational, Natural and Social Sciences, 4(3), Article 162. https://www.oriens.uz
36. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/9781009024532]
37. Sari, M. N. (2021). Shaping young learners' character through teacher questioning in English classroom activities. Pendekar: Jurnal Pendidikan Berkarakter, 4(1), 14-19.
38. Sari, M. N., & Ningsih, P. E. A. (2022). An analysis of students' motivation and anxiety on learning English at SMA Negeri 6 Kerinci. Pendekar: Jurnal Pendidikan Berkarakter, 5(3), 181-188. [DOI:10.31764/pendekar.v5i3.10994]
39. Sari, M. N., Ningsih, P. E. A., & Novita, A. (2023). An analysis of English classroom interaction pattern at eleventh grade of SMKN 4 Kerinci based on El Hanafi theory. Jurnal Sosial Humaniora Sigli, 6(1), 105-115. [DOI:10.47647/jsh.v6i1.1452]
40. Saslow, J. M., & Ascher, A. (2006). Top Notch fundamentals A. Pearson Education.
41. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2010). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach (5th ed.). Wiley.
42. Sitopu, J. W., Pitra, D. H., Muhammadiah, M. U., Nurmiati, A. S., Purba, I. R., & Sari, M. N. (2023). Peningkatan kualitas guru: Pelatihan dan pengembangan profesional dalam pendidikan. Retrieved from https://repository.unibos.ac.id/xmlui/handle/123456789/9943
43. Stanley, L., & Lehman, C. (2015). Why greatness cannot be planned. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-15524-1 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-15524-1]
44. Stockwell, G. (2010). Cognitive perspectives on language learning. Continuum.
45. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in higher education: A supplement to the national education technology plan. https://tech.ed.gov/netp/
46. Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Appraising research on personalized learning: Definitions, theoretical alignment, advancements, and future directions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(3), 235-252. [DOI:10.1080/15391523.2020.1747757]
47. Warschauer, M. (1996). Technology and second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 80(4), 503-515.
48. Warschauer, M., & Meskill, C. (2013). Technology and second language learning. In J. C. Richards (Ed.), The handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 121-146). Routledge.
49. Yang, J. (2023). The effect of digital literacy on enhancing self-regulation in training reading skills among EFL students. International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science, 6(6), 119-128. [DOI:10.54922/IJEHSS.2023.0615]
50. Yang, S. J. H. (2019, December). Precision education: New challenges for AI in education [Keynote speech]. 27th International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE), Kenting, Taiwan. https://youtu.be/VKmUE1Hnaro
51. Zulfikhar, R., Mustofa, M., Hamidah, E., Sapulete, H., Sitopu, J. W., & Sari, M. N. (2024). Dampak integrasi teknologi dalam pembelajaran terhadap prestasi akademis mahasiswa perguruan tinggi. Journal on Education, 6(4), 18381-18390. [DOI:10.31004/joe.v6i4.5787]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
