University Students’ Perceptions towards the Effects of Technology-Enhanced Language Learning on Their Learning Experiences

Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (TELL) has become increasingly common in ESL classrooms as its benefits for language learning are evident. TELL can enhance student engagement, provide access to authentic learning materials, facilitate individualized instruction, and support collaborative learning environments. Nevertheless, some students may still perceive TELL as having negative effects due to lack of exposure or familiarity with digital tools. TELL may be considered intimidating, distracting, or even unnecessary as compared to traditional classroom instruction. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the university students’ perceptions towards the effects of TELL on their learning experiences. Gender and fields of study can also be the factors that can influence students’ views of TELL. This research employed a quantitative causal-comparative research design using a questionnaire to collect data. A simple random sampling technique was employed to select 400 respondents as the participants of the study. Findings revealed that undergraduate students perceived TELL as having a positive effect on their learning experiences. Gender appeared not to influence their perceptions, but fields of study did, though no interaction between the two factors was observed. Since technology in teaching and learning advances rapidly, continuous improvement in the educational landscape is paramount in ensuring students develop their technological skills. Such efforts are encouraged to prepare students to thrive in the future, which is shaped by evolving digital tools.

Keywords

TELL, perceptions, learning experiences, gender, fields of study

Downloads

PDF JATS XML

References

1. Ahmad, N., Alias, F.A., Hamat, M. & Mohamed, S.A. (2024) Reliability analysis: Application of Cronbach’s Alpha in Research Instruments. In Pioneering the Future: Delving into e‐Learning’s Landscape (pp. 114-119). Unit Penerbitan Jabatan Sains Komputer & Matematik. https://appspenang.uitm.edu.my/sigcs/2024-2/Articles/e-Book_SIGCSe-LearningVol8_2024.pdf#page=121 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ahmad, S., Wasim, S., Irfan, S., Gogoi, S., Srivastava, A., & Farheen, Z. (2019). Qualitative vs. quantitative research: A summarized review. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine and Healthcare, 6(43), 2828–2832. https://doi.org/10.18410/jebmh/2019/587 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almohideb, N.A. (2025). Exploring the use of Technology-Enhanced Language Learning tools in ESL classrooms in the KSA. Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics, 10(1), 2025, 43-60. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21462/jeltl.v10i1.1502 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Andrade, C. (2020). The limitations of online surveys. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 42(6), 575–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620957496 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Anthonysamy, L. (2020). Digital literacy deficiencies in digital learning among undergraduates. DOI:10.1201/9780367814557-33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Azalea, I. (2022). Causal-comparative research (ex post facto research). 10.31237/osf.io/r63f9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bannister, N. A., & Newton, P. M. (2012). Using technology to support individualized learning in higher education: Case studies and perspectives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 415-429. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cohen, A., Soffer, T., & Henderson, M. (2022). Students’ use of technology and their perceptions of its usefulness in higher education: International comparison. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12678 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Dehalwar, K. & Sharma, S. (2024). Exploring the distinctions between quantitative and qualitative research methods. Think India. 27. 7-15. 10.5281/zenodo.10553000. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Emelogu, N. U., Nwafor, C. K., Chigbu, G. U., Okoyeukwu, N. G., & Eze, K. O. (2022). Awareness, proficiency, and challenges in the use of emerging technologies by ESL university lecturers in the post-COVID-19 era. Cogent Education, 9(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2022.2084962 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Ghanizadeh, A., Razavi, A., & Jahedizadeh, S. (2015). Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (TELL): A review of resources and upshots. International Letters of Chemistry, Physics, and Astronomy. 54. 73-87. DOI:10.56431/p-z6sj8g. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Gundala, U., Reddy, V., & Dwivedi, P.S. (2019). Competence and confidence through Technology-Enhanced Language Learning: The impact of technology among rural and semi-urban undergraduates of engineering in India: A study. IEEE 19th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). 261-262. doi: 10.1109/ICALT.2019.00084. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hasumia, T., & Chiu, M.S. (2024). Technology-Enhanced Language Learning in English language education: Performance analysis, core publications, and emerging trends. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2346044 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Hilao, M. P., & Wichadee, S. (2017). Gender differences in mobile phone usage for language learning, attitude, and performance. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 6. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1145218.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hou, Y. (2019). Gender difference in language learning with technology. In P. Zaphiris & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Learning and collaboration technologies: Designing learning experiences (pp. 256–265). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_19 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Huang, H., & Kurata, N. (2024). Learning from the pandemic and looking into the future – the challenges and possibilities for language learning. Language Learning Journal, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2024.2370600 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2021). Investigating students’ study values across disciplines. In P. Zaphiris & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Learning and collaboration technologies: Designing learning experiences (pp. 3–15). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77850-6_1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Iberahim, A., Yunus, M. M., & Sulaiman, N. A. (2023). A review on Technology-Enhanced Language Learning (TELL). International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 13(2), 1509 – 1519. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i2/16496 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Ironsi, C. S. (2022). Navigating learners towards technology-enhanced learning during post-COVID-19 semesters. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 29, 100-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2022.100189 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Israel, G.D. (1992). Determining sample size. University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences, EDIS. https://www.psycholosphere.com/Determining%20sample%20size%20by%20Glen%20Israel.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Johnson, A., Jacovina, M., Russell, D., & Soto, C. (2016). Challenges and solutions when using technologies in the classroom. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED577147.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kularatne, W. D., Dissawa, L. H., Ekanayake, & Ekanayake, J. B. (2021). Developing and delivering a remote experiment based on the experiential learning framework during COVID-19 pandemic. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2107.02777 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kolb, D. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson FT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kunze, A., & Rutherford, T. (2019). Students’ discipline-specific perceptions of learning practices. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 31(2), 390–409. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Lau, J. H. (2016). Exploring the digital divide in education: A study of gender and academic disciplines. Computers & Education, 102, 16-30. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Li, Z., & Zhou, Z. (2026). How we learn language collaboratively through technology: A systematic review. Journal of Computers in Education, 13(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-026-00385-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Mangarin, R. A., & Climaco, J. L. T. (2024). Exploring contributing factors on poor digital literacy of students: A review of existing studies. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science, 9(9), 582–588. https://doi.org/10.51584/ijrias.2024.909051 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Marek, M. W., & Wu, W.-C. V. (2021). Motivational affordances of the novelty effect in TELL. International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 14, 268–269. https://doi.org/10.1109/icalt52272.2021.00086 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Mcleod, S. (2024). Kolb’s learning styles and experiential learning cycle. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. McLoughlin, C. E., & Luca, J. (2002). Keeping an anchor watch: Industry partnership a basis for learning. Winds of Changing in the Sea of Learning, Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE). 441-449. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221093699_Keeping_an_anchor_watch_industry_partnership_a_basis_for_learning [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Nimmo, F. (2024). Student perceptions of the effectiveness of technology-enhanced learning in blended learning contexts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 179–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66241-6_8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Nurmala, I., Irianto, S., Franchisca, S., Amsa, H., & Susanti, R. (2023). Technology-Enhanced Language Learning: A meta-analysis study on English language teaching tools. Journal on Education. 6. 2188-2195. 10.31004/joe.v6i1.3221. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Othman, S. (2025). The impact of technology on English language learning. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Comprehensive Research. 4. 81-85. 10.54660/IJMCR.2025.4.3.81-85. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Perez Peguero, Lisset. (2024). The impact of Technology-Enhanced Language Learning on bilingual education. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management (IJSRM), 12(4), 3340-3350. DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v12i04.el05. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Qu, Y., Xin, M., & Wang, J. (2024). Disciplinary differences in undergraduate students’ engagement with generative artificial intelligence. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00341-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Raikhan, B., Gabithanuly, K., Tursynali, Z. (2025). A brief overview of gender differences in international languages. Forum For Linguistic Studies. 7(8), 619–628. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i8.985 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Ramadan, A., & Jember, B. (2024). A step toward effective language learning: an insight into the impacts of feedback-supported tasks and peer-work activities on learners’ engagement, self-esteem, and language growth. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-024-00261-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Richmond, A. S., & Cummings, R. (2005). Implementing Kolb’s learning styles into online distance education. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 45-54. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Saifuddin, M. Z., Zamri, A. A., Kamarulzaman, M. H., Zakaria, S. F., & Mat Rani, N. L. (2021). Exploring students’ perceptions on online learning environments across disciplines. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. 9. 32-52. DOI: 10.24191/ejssh.v9i1.5445. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Schenck, J., & Cruickshank, J. (2014). Evolving Kolb. Journal of Experiential Education, 38(1), 73–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825914547153 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Shi, W., Malachowsky, S., El-Glaly, Y., Yu, Q., & Krutz, D. E. (2020). Presenting and evaluating the impact of experiential learning in computing accessibility education. ArXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2002.06445 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R. (2013). Analysing and interpreting data from Likert-type scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/jgme-5- 4-18 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Taj, I., Ali, F., Sipra, M., & Ahmad, W. (2017). Effect of technology-enhanced language learning on vocabulary acquisition of EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature. 6 (3). 262. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.3p.262. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Vo, M. H., Zhu, C., & Diep, A. N. (2020). Students’ performance in blended learning: disciplinary difference and instructional design factors. Journal of Computers in Education, 7(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00164-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Yang, S., & Chen, Y.J. (2007). Technology-enhanced language learning: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior. 23. 860-879. 10.1016/j.chb.2006.02.015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Zainuddin, N. (2022). Technology-enhanced language learning research trends and practices: A systematic review (2020–2022). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1388518.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Zboun, J.S. & Farrah, M. (2021). Students’ perspectives of online language learning during corona pandemic: Benefits and challenges. Indonesian EFL Journal, 7(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v7i1.3986 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Zrineh, A., Al-Usta, M., & Alwawi, A. (2026). Sampling methods and sample size determination in clinical research: An educational review. Journal of General and Family Medicine, 27(1), e70096. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgf2.70096 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

University Students’ Perceptions towards the Effects of Technology-Enhanced Language Learning on Their Learning Experiences

Authors

Article Information

Publication Timeline

Abstract

Keywords

Downloads

References

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles