Exploring English Language Teachers’ Perceptions and Practices of Digital Lesson Planning Using Planboard: A Qualitative Study in a Private School in Seremban

The digitalization of educational practices has intensified the need for effective Digital Lesson Planning Platforms (DLPPs), yet empirical evidence regarding their implementation in Malaysian private schools remains limited. This study investigates the effectiveness of Planboard, a DLPP, in enhancing instructional planning among English language teachers at a newly established private school in Seremban, Malaysia. Although digital tools are increasingly integrated into education, the use of DLPPs in Malaysian private schools, particularly in ELT, remains underexplored. Addressing this gap, the study aims to evaluate Planboard’s usability, usefulness, and influence on lesson quality, structure, and efficiency, while identifying challenges encountered during its integration. Guided by the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, a qualitative methodology was employed through five months of classroom observations and semi-structured interviews with two English teachers. Findings indicate that Planboard improved lesson organization, time management and curriculum alignment, particularly when used by digital literate teachers. However, technical challenges such as internet reliability, data retention and limited digital fluency were significant barriers. The study contributed to the understanding of DLPP adoption in underrepresented educational contexts and underscores the importance of infrastructure, training and instructional support for effective implementation. These insights highlight the potential of digital platforms to enhance lesson planning when integrated thoughtfully into pedagogical routines.

Digital Lesson Planning Platforms, English Language Teaching

1. Acquah, B. Y. S., Arthur, F., Salifu, I., Quayson, E., & Nortey, S. A. (2024). Preservice teachers’ behavioural intention to use artificial intelligence in lesson planning: A dual-staged PLS-SEM-ANN approach. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100307. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Adnan, E. F., Darus, N. M., Faizal, S. N. F., Mohamad, M., & Kamarudin, R. (2024). Benefits and Challenges of Differentiated Learning in Malaysian Classrooms: Literature Review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(8). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ait Ali, D., El Meniari, A., El Filali, S., Morabite, O., Senhaji, F., & Khabbache, H. (2023). Empirical Research on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework in Health Professions Education: A Literature Review. Medical Science Educator, 33(3), 791–803. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Amemasor, S. K., Oppong, S. O., Ghansah, B., Ben-Bright Benuwa, & Mathias Agbeko. (2025). The influence of digital professional development and professional learning communities in the relationship between school digital preparedness and digital instructional integration. PLoS ONE, 20(7), e0328883–e0328883. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Ansari, M., Waris, S., & Zara, C. (2024). Barriers to Educational Technology Adoption: Navigating Challenges in Integration. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3), 240-247. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Basister, M. P., Petersson, J., & Baconguis, R. D. (2025). Educational innovations for an inclusive learning environment: Insights from the teachers' collaboration through Lesson Study. In Frontiers in Education, 10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Batool, H., Al-Otaibi, S., & Khan, M. (2025). Decision making model for evaluation of TPACK knowledge constructs as critical success factors for language learning classes. Heliyon, 11(2), e42061. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bouncken, R. B., Czakon, W., & Schmitt, F. (2025). Purposeful sampling and saturation in qualitative research methodologies: recommendations and review. Review of Managerial Science, 1-37. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Busetto, L., Wick, W., & Gumbinger, C. (2020). How to Use and Assess Qualitative Research Methods. Neurological Research and Practice, 2(1), 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Choi, L. J., & Chung, S. J. (2025). Preparing Technologically Competent EFL Teachers: A TPACK-based Approach. SAGE Open, 15(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Chua, N. A., Soon, G. Y., Ibrahim, M. Y., Che Noh, C. H., Mansor, N. R., Zaid, C. M., Abdul Rashid, R., & Shen, M. (2021). VIRTUAL DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN MANDARIN TEACHING: A REVIEW. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 6(2), 231–249. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dennison, D. V., Ahtisham, B., Chourasia, K., Arora, N., Singh, R., Kizilcec, R. F., Nambi A., Ganu T., & Vashistha, A. (2025). Teacher-AI Collaboration for Curating and Customizing Lesson Plans in Low-Resource Schools. arXiv: 2507.00456, 1. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Duqing Z., Liang Y, Ziyan C., & Longkai W. (2024). Rethinking UTAUT in teacher technology adoption research: A quantitative meta-analysis based on a one-stage meta-analytic structural equation model. Modern Educational Technology , 34 (9). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. El Bedewy, S., Lyublinskaya, I., & Lavicza, Z. (2024). Supporting transdisciplinary STEAM practices: Integrating architectural modelling into mathematics education through a cross-cultural dynamic lesson plan (DLP) tool. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 20, 008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Fan, H., Chen, G., Wang, X., & Peng, Z. (2024). LessonPlanner: Assisting novice teachers to prepare pedagogy-driven lesson plans with large language models. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, 1, 1-20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Feng, J., Yu, B., Tan, W. H., Dai, Z., & Li, Z. (2025). Key factors influencing educational technology adoption in higher education: A systematic review. PLOS Digital Health, 4(4), e0000764. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Großmann, L., & Krüger, D. (2023). Assessing the quality of science teachers’ lesson plans: Evaluation and application of a novel instrument. Science Education, 108(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Guo, C., Chen, X., & Chen, J. (2025). Enhancing Prospective Teachers’ Professional Development Through Shared Collaborative Lesson Planning. Behavioral Sciences, 15(6), 753–753. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Gurl, T. J., Markinson, M. P., & Artzt, A. F. (2024). Using ChatGPT as a Lesson Planning Assistant with Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 11(1), 114-139. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3(1), 275–285. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Hase, A., & Kuhl, P. (2024). Teachers’ use of data from digital learning platforms for instructional design: a systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(4), 1925-1945. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Hizam, S. M., Akter, H., Sentosa, I., & Ahmed, W. (2021). Digital competency of educators in the virtual learning environment: a structural equation modeling analysis. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 704(1), 012023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Hoem, T. F., Bugge, H. E., Fuglestad, U., Mangen, A., Hanne Egenæs Staurseth, Hildegunn Støle, Margrethe Sønneland, Sæbø, J. U., & Billington, M. G. (2024). The Collaborative Development of an Online Planning Tool for Teachers in Norway: Study Protocol for DigUp. Nordic Journal of Literacy Research, 10(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Hrastinski, S. (2021). Digital tools to support teacher professional development in lesson studies: a systematic literature review. International Journal for Lesson & Learning Studies, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 10(2), 138-149. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Humaera, I., Salija, K., Amin, F. H., Sakkir, G., Nasrullah, N., & Ramdani, A. (2025). The TPACK Framework in English Language Education Practice: A Bibliometric Analysis. The Eastasouth Journal of Learning and Educations, 3(01), 56–63. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Iqbal, Md. H., Siddiqie, S. A., & Mazid, Md. A. (2021). Rethinking theories of lesson plan for effective teaching and learning. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 4(1), 100172. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Jia, L., Qi, C., Wei, Y., Sun, H., & Yang, X. (2025). Fine-Tuning Large Language Models for Educational Support: Leveraging Gagne's Nine Events of Instruction for Lesson Planning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09276. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Jung, J., Choi, S., & Fanguy, M. (2024). Exploring Teachers’ Digital Literacy Experiences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(2), 41–59. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Karpouzis, K., Pantazatos, D., Taouki, J., & Meli, K. (2024). Tailoring Education with GenAI: A New Horizon in Lesson Planning. OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Kloker, S., Bukoli, H., & Kateete, T. (2024). New Curriculum, New Chance--Retrieval Augmented Generation for Lesson Planning in Ugandan Secondary Schools. Prototype Quality Evaluation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.07542. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Lee, G.-G., & Zhai, X. (2024). Using ChatGPT for Science Learning: A Study on Pre-service Teachers’ Lesson Planning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Leek, J., Rojek, M., Dobińska, G., & Kosiorek, M. (2024). Navigating the power of time in classroom practices: teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Educational Review, 1(1), 1–23. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Liu, J., Aziku, M., Qiang, F., & Zhang, B. (2024). Leveraging professional learning communities in linking digital professional development and instructional integration: evidence from 16,072 STEM teachers. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Lixia W. & Choi L. J. (2024). TPACK and EdTech Integration in Teaching and Learning Process: A Systematic Literature Review (2014-2024). Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis, 31(7s), 487–505. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Lo, N. (2023). Digital learning and the ESL online classroom in higher education: teachers’ perspectives. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 8 (1), 1–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Mark Lester Gesta, Lozano, L., & Patac, A. V. (2023). Teachers’ Perceived Barriers to Technology Integration during Online Learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 7(3), 415–430. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Mohammadi, E., König, T., & Zimmermann, B. (2025). Multi-layered sampling strategy for qualitative interviews: methodical reflections on sampling interviews with the European Research Council review experts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. My Dashboard | Chalk. (n.d.). App.chalk.com. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Ndihokubwayo, K., Byukusenge, C., Byusa, E., Habiyaremye, H. T., Mbonyiryivuze, A., & Mukagihana, J. (2022). Lesson plan analysis protocol (LPAP): A useful tool for researchers and educational evaluators. Heliyon, 8(1), e08730. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Neale, B. (2020). Qualitative Longitudinal Research : Research Methods. Bloomsbury Academic. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Pannullo, L., Böttinger, T., & Winkelmann, J. (2025). Inclusive and Digital Science Education—A Theoretical Framework for Lesson Planning. Education Sciences, 15(2), 148. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Pesina, R. (2025). Mentoring Software in Education and its Impact on Teacher Development: An Integrative Literature Review. International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education, 14(1), 29–38. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Rees, C. E., & Ottrey, E. (2024). “Lives and times”: The case for qualitative longitudinal research in anatomical sciences education. Anatomical Sciences Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Saliya Nugawela, & Darshana Sedera. (2022). Status Quo Bias in Users Information Systems (IS) Adoption and Continuance Intentions: A Literature Review and Framework. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Samuel, A., & Jerusalem Merkebu. (2025). Exploring Sampling Strategies to Maximize Qualitative Research Studies in Adult Education. Adult Learning. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Tan, C. K. (2022). A PROTOTYPE SYSTEM FOR GENERATING LESSON PLANS FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS. International Journal on E-Learning Practices (IJELP), 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Tan, C. K., & Kiflee, D. N. (2022). DIGITAL LESSON PLAN GENERATION AND ITS USEFULNESS FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 7(47), 481–492. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Teo Woon Chun, & Melor Md Yunus. (2023). Exploring teachers’ technology acceptance during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review (2020-2022). International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 12(2), 956–956. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Thompson, G., Creagh, S., Stacey, M., Hogan, A., & Mockler, N. (2023). Researching teachers’ time use: Complexity, challenges and a possible way forward. Australian Educational Researcher, 51(4), 1647-1670. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User Acceptance of Information technology: toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Wafa Naif Alwakid, Nisar Ahmed Dahri, Humayun, M., & Ghadah Naif Alwakid. (2025). Exploring the Role of AI and Teacher Competencies on Instructional Planning and Student Performance in an Outcome-Based Education System. Systems, 13(7), 517–517. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Yulin, N., & Danso, S. D. (2025). Assessing Pedagogical Readiness for Digital Innovation: A Mixed-Methods Study. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.15781. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Zainal, A. Z., & Zainuddin, S. Z. (2020). Technology adoption in Malaysian schools: An analysis of national ICT in education policy initiatives. Digital Education Review, 37(37), 172–194. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Zhang, Y. (2022). Developing EFL teachers' technological pedagogical knowledge through practices in virtual platform. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 916060. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Zou, Y., Kuek, F., Feng, W., & Cheng, X. (2025). Digital learning in the 21st century: Trends, challenges, and innovations in technology integration. Frontiers in Education, 10(10). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar