Author's Copy Educational Research for Policy and Practice https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-021-09291-z ORIGINAL ARTICLE Integrating technology in English language teaching through a community of practice in the Sultanate of Oman: implications for policy implementation Tahani Al‑Habsi1 · Saleh Al‑Busaidi2 · Ali Al‑Issa3 Received: 17 May 2019 / Accepted: 31 December 2020 © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. part of Springer Nature 2021 Abstract Much has been written, published, and presented about the important role and uses of tech‑ nology in English language teaching (ELT) today and the effect it can have on students’ learning. The present qualitative study is an intervention, which attempted to explore the integration of technology among 11 public school English language teachers in the Sultan‑ ate of Oman through the use of community of practice (CoP). As the first in the region, this qualitative study triangulated data using a focus group interview and reflective jour‑ nals. Three themes emerged from the data analysis. Despite certain challenges, the findings were generally positive and encouraging, and revealed that if a CoP is effectively utilized to the fullest to integrate technology in ELT, it can facilitate policy implementation and Sec‑ ond Language Teacher Education (SLTE) in the Sultanate of Oman, the neighboring Gulf Cooperation Council countries, some Asian and Far Eastern countries, and beyond. Keywords Technology · English language teaching · Community of practice · Policy · Second Language Teacher Education 1 Introduction This study investigates the perceptions of 11 school teachers about the integration of tech‑ nology in English language teaching (ELT) through a community of practice (CoP) in the Sultanate of Oman and the implications this has for policy implementation. Throughout the world, different aspects of ELT have undergone significant changes. These changes have made it essential to pursue reform in the educational systems that value English as a tool of communication and empowerment. One of the most fundamental elements of any educa‑ tional reform is the teacher. In fact, developing teachers’ effectiveness and enabling them to * Ali Al‑Issa
[email protected]1 Ministry of Education, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman 2 Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman 3 Sultan Qaboos university, P.O. Box 3058, 112 Ruwi, Sultanate of Oman 13 Vol.:(0123456789) Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. keep pace with new changes and developments has been a priority for many reform plans worldwide. Accordingly, there have been varied approaches, either top-down or bottom-up, to teachers’ professional development. Top-down professional development is mandated by central experts or administrators and cascaded by facilitators or trainers to mostly passive participants (Farrell 2013). It is basically a tool through which educational policy mak‑ ers deliver information, visions, and guidance to teachers. On the contrary, the bottom-up approach views teachers as consultants, trainers, and decision makers (Farrell 2013) and can be undertaken individually or collaboratively to facilitate the role of teachers as profes‑ sional agents of change (Day 1999). Hence, this calls for the need for new innovations in the field of teachers’ professional development. Policy makers need to develop different approaches to Second Language Teacher Education (SLTE) in a way that can create genuine changes in teacher practice and improve student achievement. Engaging teachers in effective professional development can help them build strong relationships with each other, thus sustaining lifelong learning and encouraging inquiry-based learning. 2 Integrating technology in English language teaching In the post-method era, integrating or grounding technology in ELT not only narrowed the digital divide, but also “guided a shift from the cognitive view of communicative teach‑ ing to a more social and socio-cognitive view” (Al-Kadi 2018, 7). Hence, more and more English language teachers are trying to integrate different technologies in their teaching practices due to its numerous advantages for teaching and learning. Trinder (2017) investigated students’ informal and deliberate learning with technolo‑ gies in Austria. She found that students opted for TV/radio/video clips/series and social networking as most potentially useful for improving their English language communicative competence. The author concluded that the wide spread availability of digital resources in the globalization era has empowered students to become more self-directed and that such transformation and evolution in students’ engagement with technology has important implications for teachers’ instructional plans about promoting optimal use of technology for English language learning in- and outside the classroom. In addition, Emara (2020) analyzed the discourse of four experienced Egyptian Eng‑ lish teachers and three students and found that teachers used videos, visuals, and short movies mainly downloaded from YouTube to increase students’ engagement, motivation, autonomy, agency, and confidence. They also enhanced students’ vocabulary learning and fluency. Teachers further used PowerPoint, audio recordings, and WhatsApp to improve learners’ four skills, pronunciation, and expand their vocabulary repertoire. The author fur‑ ther found that the use of Internet-based applications helped students enhance their writ‑ ing, increased their confidence and motivation, improved their language acquisition, and provided them with opportunities to practice the language incidentally and informally. The author argued that today’s students are not only motivated to use technology, but also capable of personalizing and customizing it for their learning experience and goals, which necessitates that teachers work hard to reinforce these e-skills. Significantly, Ulla et al. (2020) found that the integrating mobile and Internet-based applications in Thai ELT class‑ room made teachers feel more comfortable, excited, and fluid. 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… Integrating technology in ELT further affected curriculum re-orienting, re-creating, and re-appropriating to meet students’ needs and interests (Al-Kadi 2018; Gönen 2019), provided flexibility in delivering course content to meet teaching objectives (Siefert et al. 2019), and gave students voice (Alqahtani 2019). It also affected knowledge and informa‑ tion sharing with different stakeholders involved in ELT education (Amin 2019). More specifically, it can be used to “bridge home and school for culturally and linguistically diverse students” (Siefert et al. 2019, 13) for tapping English learners’ “funds of knowl‑ edge” to help strengthen connections between learning, teaching, and parents. Integration of technology in ELT also impacted on creation of opportunities for language teaching, assessment, and research (Al-Kadi 2018), student and teacher identity construction (Emara 2020), and teachers’ self-efficacy (Bozdoğan and Özen 2014; Gönen 2019; Lailiyah and Cahyano 2017). Bozdoğan and Özen (2014) recommend that pre-service teachers’ prepa‑ ration for technology use should align technology integration in ELT theory and practice, provide access to resources, provide collaboration and feedback on integrating technology in ELT, and provide authentic reflection opportunities to directly influence teachers’ in- class behaviors and practices. However, for successful integration of technology in ELT to materialize, it is important that teachers are aware of their roles as guides and facilitators (Mollaei and Riasati 2013) and have positive perceptions about students’ digital competence to use technology for autonomous learning (Emara 2020). According to Amin (2019), integration of technology into the ELT classroom requires first pre-set objectives to facilitate proper implementation. Second, teachers should have the knowledge and awareness about the uses and values of technology in the society. This is particularly important for “digital immigrant” teachers, or those coming late into the world of technology (Abunowara 2014). Last but not least, teachers need to analyze and understand students’ expectations and work hard to meet them. Al-Kadi (2018) suggests that technology is complex and diverse and its integration in ELT requires perspectives and theory beyond what is traditionally known and used. Today, teachers in different contexts perceive themselves as technologically competent and project positive attitudes about the integration of technology in their ELT practices due to their technological pedagogical content knowledge (Emara 2020). However, stud‑ ies from different parts of the world showed that while teachers possessed technological knowledge and pedagogical knowledge, they experienced difficulties striking a balance between technological knowledge and pedagogical knowledge and knowing how to con‑ nect technology, pedagogy, and content, which is a key for successful and effective integra‑ tion of technology in ELT and achieving student-centeredness (Emara 2020; Mollaei and Riasati 2013; Siefert et al. 2019; Yang 2011). The authors held the different SLTE pro‑ grams round the world responsible for providing sufficient opportunities for teachers to dis‑ cuss and reflect on how technology can be integrated in ELT to enhance their confidence. Thus, Gönen (2019) suggested a five-step model that provided 95 Turkish ELT pre- service teachers with opportunities for a situated learning experience in real classrooms to integrate technology to bridge the theory–practice gap in an ELT classroom to create “space for hands-on experiences and reflective practices” (182) and policy implementa‑ tion. The five steps start with familiarity with technology and knowledge about integrating technology into ELT. The second step is observing technical availability and administra‑ tive regulations and limitations. This is followed by selecting the appropriate technological tools and aligning them with the aspired local learning outcomes and students’ motivation. The fourth step is associated with applying the technological tools. The last step in the model is using diaries, students, or peers to reflect on the whole process. Nevertheless, the author stressed that active reflection as well as hands-on experience was carried out 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. throughout the implementation process and allowed the study participants not only to criti‑ cally evaluate their integration of technology into their practices, but also created technol‑ ogy-minded teachers and stimulated their motivation about overcoming certain challenges and designing technology-enhanced classrooms, which facilitated the use of activities that cultivated student collaboration. They achieved this via receiving feedback from their stu‑ dents during the practicum, who helped to shed more light on integrating technology in ELT classrooms. Nonetheless, despite their willingness to integrate technology into their practices to achieve differentiated instruction to meet their mixed-ability students’ diverse needs in each class and cater for their language development, Siefert et al. (2019) found that their four pre-service teachers in the USA faced “first-order barriers” and “second-order barri‑ ers,” which impeded their use of technology and contribute to their lack of digital literacy. While the former was associated with a lack of time and resulted in some of the prospec‑ tive teachers struggling to devote time to their students to practice, the latter was associated with a lack of preparedness and resulted in some of the prospective teachers feeling nerv‑ ous due to a lack of understanding of how to integrate technology in their ELT practices, which was found more difficult to overcome and affected their beliefs about accepting and using digital learning tools. Siefert et al. (2019) additionally found that while in the complex and constantly evolving era of globalization technology can be used to “design purposeful learning experiences” (12) to achieve student-centeredness, the four pre-service teachers in their study used it for “substitution and enhancement levels” (12) and failed to use it for “modification and redefi‑ nition” (12), where technology is used to engage students in problem-solving activities, as a tool for self-diagnosing and fixing one’s learning gaps, and for conducting cooperative activities (Emara 2020). Siefert et al. not only warned that such uses can have negative implications for students’ English language learning both in and out of the classroom, but were also critical about the knowledge, skills, and attitudes teacher educators hold about technology integration in ELT. Therefore Siefert et al. (2019) recommended better preparation of pre-service teach‑ ers, where more time is allocated to subject-specific practice with technology. Further, they recommended that not only pre-service SLTE should provide “immersive profes‑ sional development opportunities” (12), but professional development should be also more “geared toward meeting teachers’ specific needs, as well as providing specific and practi‑ cal applications of technology in the classroom” (11). Besides, rather than the insufficient stand-along technology courses offered in many SLTE programs today, English language teacher educators should themselves model student-centeredness via using technology to help “promote positive attitudes about integrating technology into instructional design” (4). The authors advocated “online collaborative experiences in which they may grow digi‑ tal proficiency concomitantly with students” and “can deepen their understanding about differentiating instruction to meet the needs of all learners while learning how to produc‑ tively collaborate and communicate with colleagues” (4). This is bound to increase their familiarity with and confidence about using of technology and finding ways to overcome any perceived barriers and help their students to acquire higher-order thinking skills. In fact, the authors suggested that schools, as important sites for situated professional devel‑ opment, can support and encourage teacher collaborative learning, where “technologically savvy teachers can serve as mentors for less experienced peers” (3). As far as in-service SLTE is concerned, Çelik and Aytın (2014) found that their six Turkish English teachers not only showed confidence and enthusiasm about using tech‑ nology and enjoyed it and were aware of its impact on students’ motivation and language 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… learning and long-term retention, but also had sufficient competence in digital literacy, especially when it comes to using digital teaching tools such as the interactive SMART Boards. They further did not think that a lack of training in using computer resources was a problem, since they believed they could learn the skills on their own. Conversely, they considered a lack of access to computers and the Internet, as in governmental restrictions on Internet resources, as posing a significant hurdle. The authors recommended teachers’ needs to help them make more effective use of the existing tools. Thus, integrating technology in ELT has its numerous disadvantages too. Nova (2017) found that his 30 Indonesian experienced teachers listed several limitations of integrating videos in ELT. Those were a lack of facilities at school, lack of technical support at school, difficulties in finding suitable videos, a lack of skills in editing videos, and less focus on studies by students. The author recommended that teachers should be trained better on technology integration in ELT and that schools should support such integration. In addition, in a study that elicited the views of 26 pre-service and eight in-service English teachers in Hong Kong concerning integrating technology in ELT, Yang (2011) found that teachers continued to use PowerPoint. The author criticized such practice and described it as being traditional and a teaching resource that does not motivate students. 3 Context of the problem English in Oman is highly valued. It is a fundamental tool for achieving multiple pur‑ poses. ELT is thus planned centrally by the Omani government. The government pursued ELT education reform in 1997 via introducing the Basic Education System (BES) as a nationwide innovative project. As part of the paradigm shift the field has been witness‑ ing recently, most schools are equipped with different state-of-the-art technological aids to facilitate ELT policy implementation. In addition, in the Omani educational context, technology is emphasized in the curric‑ ulum throughout the different grade levels. “The Ministry of Education (MoE) employs a comprehensive set of recommendations for technology-assisted instruction across the entire national curriculum at all grades and levels of education” (Oxford Business Group 2017). The MoE (2017) asserts that “teaching and learning technology [are] considered the most important factors that contribute to achieving effective learning using appropriate conductive teaching aids along with appropriate education strategies and good employment and timing to achieve refinements goals” (1). The Omani philosophy of education is thus based on 10 main sources and has 16 princi‑ ples, the last of which is “life-long learning” (The Education Council 2017). This principle views learning as a continuous process that never ends. Therefore, the expectation is that people will continue to refresh their knowledge and skills. Based on the philosophy of edu‑ cation, this principle can be achieved through the following: 1. Reinforce opportunities for life-long learning. 2. Develop positive life skills. 3. Develop independent learning and life-long learning skills. 4. Develop long-term planning skills. 5. Promote the role of cultural centers and public libraries for learners and wider society. (The Education Council 2017, 28). 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. Hence, in response to these problems and to help prepare effective teachers, the MoE established the Specialized Institute for Professional Training of Teachers (SIPTT) in 2014. SIPTT aims to develop teachers’ skills by “providing sustained, intensive and accredited professional development” (Al-Shabibi and Silvennoinen 2017, 11). It is also responsible for equipping the teachers with the twenty-first-century skills, improving the educational process and ensuring the prominence of research. SIPTT offers a number of training pro‑ grams for teachers: The New Omani Teachers’ Program, Arabic Language, Mathematics and Science Expert Programs. The New Omani Teachers’ Program aims to develop teach‑ ers’ capacities and enable them to be creative and effective in their teaching. Nonetheless, the program mainly follows a top-down approach that is based on the MoE’s beliefs in teachers’ needs. Furthermore, “it does not address the mentoring aspect of induction, nor does it expect the school to play a significant role in the induction process” (Al-Barwani 2016, 165). Despite all the efforts by the MoE to provide effective professional development for teachers, Omani English teachers still face many difficulties and challenges regarding their school-based professional development (Al-Bulushi 2016; Al Balushi 2017; Al-Lamki 2009). As far as professional development in the field of technology integration is con‑ cerned, the number of training workshops and courses is extremely limited. For instance, the training on incorporating new technologies in teaching teachers in the New Omani Teachers Program is marginalized in the regional training centers. This situation neces‑ sitates that Omani teachers are exposed to other effective forms of professional develop‑ ment especially collaborative school-based training activities. Although Omani teachers believe that one of the most effective activities is participating in professional discussions with other teachers in a school setting, they continue to face several challenges (Al-Bulushi 2016; Al-Hamdiyah 2014). More generally, Omani and Saudi teachers engage in very few collaborative learning activities compared to teachers in Qatar and Bahrain (Akiba and LeTendre 2017). More specifically, despite the fact that the vast majority of schools in Oman are equipped with technological aids, teachers hardly use them for reasons associ‑ ated with time constraints, teachers’ lack of familiarity with sophisticated educational tech‑ nology, teachers’ training and cultural backgrounds, and teachers’ hidden agendas, percep‑ tions, and philosophies about ELT, which are largely affected by the rigidly centralized and textbook- and examination-based system (Al-Issa and Al-Bulushi 2012). Al-Issa (2020) found that the occurrence and persistence of these problems is a result of a lack of adopting a constructivist and learner-centered approach by the pre- and in-service SLTE agencies for over four decades, which have created tension between ELT policy and practice. Therefore, Al-Lamki (2009) and Al-Shabibi and Silvennoinen (2017) recommended developing cluster groups and cooperative professional development activities for teach‑ ers to consider their needs and perceptions, promote autonomous and innovative lifelong professional development to bridge the gap between the system and teachers’ beliefs, and spread good practice. Al-Barwani (2016) additionally described some holistic approaches to professional development, namely “the redesign of teacher education programs, continu‑ ous professional learning, new partnership arrangements between teacher educators and the schools, and collaborative professional development at the school setting” (168). Regionally, Al-Issa (2012) proposed that introducing a culture of CoP to the ELT con‑ text in Oman and the other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries at the pre-service and in-service teacher education levels would make education systems more flexible and decentralized in those countries. He further argued that this approach would potentially help develop teachers’ critical theoretical and practical knowledge through adopting critical structured reflection. It would also prepare them to be creative and innovative practitioners 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… and responsible drivers for their own professional development, thus achieving the set goals and objectives underlying the formulated ELT policies. Significantly, Al-Issa (2009) found in his intervention at the in-service level that despite the fact the heavy teaching load teachers were assigned and other technical and administra‑ tive responsibilities, engaging in a peer collaboration and knowledge sharing experience promoted and enhanced the participant-teachers’ critical reflective practice and helped them pay attention to the small and big pictures. It additionally helped them see their stu‑ dents’ core qualities and assume personal responsibility for their actions and performance, instead of blaming their students. The author recommended that one of the most effective ways of practicing reflection is through a CoP and invited the MoE to consider this sug‑ gestion for planning in-service SLTE to help teachers understand classroom realities, share and exchange ideas, and make decisions. Nonetheless, Al-Issa (2012) acknowledged that the introduction of CoP in any ELT education system is a radical change and has multiple challenges. Al-Issa discussed differ‑ ent organizational, financial, technical, and coordination challenges. Al-Issa argued for the complementary role pre- and in-service should play to incorporate a CoP in the ELT edu‑ cation system in the GCC countries. At the macrolevel, he saw that it was the responsibility of the MoE to encourage and supervise the implementation of a CoP and cultivate it at the in-service level. On the other hand, at the micro- or pre-service level, he held higher educa‑ tion academic institutions responsible for the introduction of a CoP. 4 Significance of the study The aforementioned observations show that it is essential to investigate CoP as an alter‑ native strategy for teachers’ professional development. The current study focuses on the importance of incorporating a CoP into the professional development of Omani ELT teach‑ ers, explores how teachers promote the effective use of technology in the classroom and beyond through participating in a CoP, and investigates teachers’ perceptions regarding their participation in a CoP. There is an evident dearth of studies that pursue achieving such aims. Moreover, a thorough review of the pertinent literature suggests that this study is one of the first in the region, and beyond, as it triangulates different sources of qualitative data to investigate teachers’ perceptions about using a CoP as a tool to integrate technology in ELT and the potential implications for policy implementations and SLTE emerging from such endeavor. English today is a global lingua franca and different international contexts such as Cambodia (Keuk and Kimura 2015) started to reform their ELT education via adopt‑ ing CoP as a life-long teacher professional development approach and strategy. Meantime, authors like Murugaiah et al. (2012) advocate CoP as a solution for the multiple challenges and problems emerging from the existing gap between ELT literacy practices in schools and higher education academic institutions in a country like Malaysia and how this can affect preparing students as competent users of English and thus translate policies into practices for the demanding and challenging job market in the twenty-first century. Therefore, this study attempts to contribute to the relatively limited but steadily emerg‑ ing and growing literature on CoP through reporting an intervention at the ELT microlevel in the Sultanate of Oman. The authors discuss the implications of such intervention for the BES policy implementation. The significance of this study is expected to stretch beyond the Omani ELT context to include international contexts like Malaysia (Murugaiah et al. 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. 2012; Samuel and Abu Bakar 2006), South Korea (Taie 2015), and Taiwan (Chern 2010), which attempted to adopt a top-down approach to the incorporation of technology into their ELT system and reached results largely similar to those reached by the Omani ELT system. 5 Community of practice as a concept The term “community of practice” is rooted in different social learning theories and appli‑ cable to various contexts. It was first used by Lave and Wenger (1991) to describe situ‑ ated learning in which the learning process is not simply the acquisition of propositional knowledge and skills, but rather occurs through certain forms and types of partnership and social co-participation and with the aid of certain mutual experience of practice as a learn‑ ing resource, which shape people’s learning trajectories and their professional identities. CoP is a concept and approach to knowing and learning from those positioned as masters through the process of apprenticeship (Lave and Wenger 1991). Identities of members of a CoP become transformed as they generate dynamic, explicit, tacit, social, and individual knowledge, share information and experience, and help each other solve problems (Wenger et al. 2002). Therefore, knowledge and practice are linked. In other words, knowledge becomes part of members’ knowledge area, and their knowledge area, in turn, becomes part of their iden‑ tity. Identities in a CoP can interlock due to thinking together and sharing the same lived practice and tacit knowledge, which guides members of a CoP to guide each other and share their insights to help them see their own situation better. Pyrko et al. (2017) conclude that thinking together “defines the core and scope of a CoP” (405). Just like a CoP, think‑ ing together also requires cultivation rather than management. Thinking together regularly, as Pyrko et al. suggest, stretches beyond knowledge acquisition, transfer, and replication. It influences knowledge re-development and re-creation and subsequently facilitates learning. Furthermore, Wenger (1998) contends that engaging in a CoP involves a process of meaning negotiation, which requires converging two complementary processes: participa‑ tion and reification. While the former involves acting and interacting, the latter involves producing artifacts. Examples of the latter are theories, concepts, documents, and so on. Hence, members of a CoP collaborate by working in close proximity to one another and interacting face-to-face to support each other by making up for the limitations of one another. Interestingly, knowledge generation in CoP is a rapid process through which good ideas and new practices are pushed to new levels and implemented quickly (Lave and Wenger 1991; Wheatley and Frieze 2007). Several factors contribute to a CoP’s sustainability (Snyder and Wenger 2010; Wenger 2010). First, it is important to have an effective CoP facilitator and core group. Second, the objectives should be clear to all members to encourage them to participate actively and effectively. Third, members of a CoP should have a problem or topic they are passionate about and is considered a part of their identity. Fourth, there should be regular and con‑ tinuous meetings and interactions, which lead to shared understanding of the domain and practice. Last but not least, members of any CoP are in fact practitioners who develop a shared repertoire of resources, which includes all knowledge, experience, stories, and tools. This, Wenger suggests, not only allows members to produce things collaboratively, reflect on their roles, and align their actions with the CoP’s common goals, but offers newcomers 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… possibilities for engagement and participation in a CoP. This way, newcomers gain new identities and gradually become experienced members. A CoP functioning this way, according to Wenger et al. (2011), can additionally cre‑ ate excitement, relevance, and value to policy design and practice, application of shared knowledge to new contexts, and reflection on how skills and knowledge gained as a result of participating in a CoP made a difference in a member’s ability to achieve important goals. It can further redefine success through involving those who organize learning and those who realize it in order to shape and empower the community and the individual. 6 Community of practice as a tool for professional development One of the most fundamental elements of any educational reform is the teacher. In fact, developing teachers’ effectiveness and enabling them to keep pace with new changes and developments must be a priority for any reform plan (El-Bilawi and Nasser 2017; Nasser 2017; Zimmerman et al. 2016). As a core element of any educational reform, teachers need to be professionally well-prepared to lead any reform effectively and tackle existing chal‑ lenges in the teaching and learning processes (Dayoub and Bashiruddin 2012; Tang 2011). However, they need to do it “innovatively” to help “create real changes in teacher prac‑ tice and improve student achievement” (Gulamhussein 2013, 2). One of the most effective forms of bottom-up teachers’ professional development is the incorporation of a CoP (Al- Issa 2009, 2012; Wenger 1998). A CoP has been increasingly used for teachers’ profes‑ sional development and has started to influence new thinking about the role of educational institutions and the design of learning opportunities (Wenger 2012). Fullan (2007) acknowledges that whereas most educational institutions do not provide teachers with life-long learning opportunities, a CoP can be the alternative strategy by providing a regular and supportive learning environment. If employed effectively, a CoP can address many concerns in the educational context. A CoP affects the educational sec‑ tor along three different dimensions of learning: internal, external, and life-long learning (Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Taryner 2015). Internally, participating in a CoP helps in the organization of educational experiences in actual practice. External learning refers to link‑ ing learners’ experiences with real practice by being a member of communities outside the school. Organizing CoP around topics of interest to members helps sustain life-long learning. Mitchell and Mitchell (2008) established a CoP called The Project for Enhancing Effective Learning (PEEL) in 1985 and found that the participant teachers in the commu‑ nity became interdependent innovators. They could reflect on their practices, share con‑ cerns, create and develop new teaching ideas, and share failure and successes. Nurturing a CoP in the school context not only has many benefits for students (Vescio et al. 2008), but it can also help teachers change their teaching practice through the actual application of knowledge, tools, and social relationships (Abigail 2016). Individual teach‑ ers might give up when they come across repeated failure in classroom practices. However, the support provided by the CoP members enables teachers to gain confidence, keep work‑ ing hard, and achieve success (McDonald and Cater-Steel 2016). Members of any CoP share ideas and resources to form a shared repertoire of good practice (Wong 2010). Many problems and concerns encountered by novice teachers might be dealt with in a CoP (Al- Issa 2012). In fact, effective involvement in a CoP not only helps experienced teachers, but also enables new teachers to overcome the isolation they may face in the school environ‑ ment (McDonald and Cater-Steel 2016). 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. A CoP can be additionally used to design a new unit, develop assessment practices, implement an intervention, and create, develop, and use tools to improve instruction (McLaughlin and Talbert 2008). One very important tool for improving instruction is the integration of instructional technology, which can be emphasized and enhanced through participating in a CoP (McDonald and Star 2006). Research revealed that a CoP can enhance the exchange of knowledge related to current instructional technology (Attwell et al. 2008; Cifuentes et al. 2011). Darling-Hammond (1994) thus listed some character‑ istics of successful collaboration among school teachers. These characteristics are a com‑ mon goal, mutual respect, clear focus, commitment, effective communication, collective decision-making, practical plans, and continuous support. 7 Method 7.1 Research questions 1. What were the participants’ perceptions about integrating technology in their ELT classes before and after experiencing a CoP? 2. How did the participants integrate technology in their ELT classes before and after experiencing a CoP? 8 Research design This is a qualitative “single case with embedded units” (Baxter and Jack 2008, 550). It is “explanatory” (Baxter and Jack 2008) since it links integrating technology in ELT classes through a CoP with the effects this may have on ELT policy implementation in Oman. Furthermore, guided by Fusch et al. (2018), this study combines an ethnographic case study, a narrative case study, and a phenomenological approach. This type of triangulation design helped us to obtain rich and thick data. We studied 11 female English language teachers’ perceptions about integrating technol‑ ogy in their ELT classes through a CoP. The study is built upon two premises. First, it is associated with the close collaboration between the first author of this study and the study participant-teachers to enable the participant-teachers to describe their perceptions about integrating technology in their ELT classes through a CoP. Second, it is more concerned with helping the researchers of this study to better understand the participant-teachers’ actions. The choice of case study design was made to answer “why” and “how” questions (Bax‑ ter and Jack 2008) about the integrating technology in ELT through a CoP and the condi‑ tions that govern such integration. To help achieve this, an intervention was implemented in a form of conducting a one-hour workshop and handing in a guidebook to familiarize the participant-teachers with the concept of CoP. The content of the workshop and guide‑ book included aspects like learning objectives, CoP definition, CoP characteristics, CoP activities, CoP values, and quick tips for a CoP member. This was followed by collecting qualitative data through focus group interviews and reflective journals. This triangulation of data allowed for transferability of the findings to other contexts reviewed above, look at the data from multiple perspectives to mitigate bias, and enhance the study construct valid‑ ity (Fusch et al. 2018). 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… 9 Research participants The participant-teachers of the study were 11 English language female teachers who held a Bachelor of Education degree and taught in a governmental school from grades 1–10. The teaching experience of the participants ranged from 1 to 11 years. Interestingly, most of the teachers received no training regarding technology integration. Table 1 presents more information about the participant-teachers including their teaching load, responsibilities, and grade level. We used pseudonyms to protect the participant-teachers’ identities. 9.1 Data collection procedures This study is based upon a postgraduate thesis completed by the first author and aimed at exploring Omani English language teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of their par‑ ticipation in a CoP in promoting technology integration. First, the research materials and instruments were validated by a group of 11 experts representing the MoE, SIPTT, and the higher education institution the first author was affiliated to. Choice of the members of the jury was purposive and due to their diverse backgrounds. While some of them con‑ ducted research about CoPs, others had experience in training teachers, designing materi‑ als, and conducting workshops about CoPs. A third category was English language faculty, who were selected to validate the language used in the instruments. The reviewers pro‑ vided some feedback and recommendations that helped improve the study instruments and materials. Next, piloting of the CoP training workshop took place at a school with six English teachers. The objective was to ensure that all the content and activities were clear and engaging. It also aimed to ensure the flow and effectiveness of the activities and strate‑ gies used in the workshop. The feedback provided by the teachers in the pilot study helped improve the workshop time and short-term and long-term values of the CoP task. Then, a selection of participants from the same school was made. It was based on con‑ venience. The school was nominated by a regional ELT supervisor. The school had a good number of English teachers, who expressed their willingness to participate in the study. Finally, the first author of this study conducted a workshop for the participant-teachers to introduce the study and the concept of a CoP. The workshop introduced and explained the idea of a CoP and its principles to the participant-teachers, the roles and responsibilities of the members, and the activities to be implemented. By the end of the workshop, the par‑ ticipant-teachers were expected to identify the purpose of the study, their roles, and rights, understand the meaning of a CoP, identify the structural elements of CoP, appreciate the value of a CoP for individual teachers and the school community, identify their roles and responsibilities as members of a CoP, and propose some CoP activities. In the following meeting, the participant-teachers selected their CoP facilitator, identi‑ fied their needs, and prepared a suggested schedule for the remaining CoP meetings. The schedule was flexible and slight changes were made based on the participant-teachers’ needs. The duration of each session ranged from 20 to 40 min depending on the topic. The activities involved presentations, discussions, problem-solving activities, school vis‑ its, classroom visits, and many other activities. In each session, the participant-teachers introduced a technological application or program of their own choice. The selection of the programs was determined by the participant-teachers’ needs, presenters’ knowledge, and experience, and the availability of resources. The participant-teachers further discussed the 13 13 Table 1 General information about the participants Teachers Teaching experience Teaching load periods/ Other responsibilities Grade level Technology integration PD per week Batool 3 year 14 Head of the health society Grade 1 No Fatma 8 years 14 Grade 4 No Hawra’a 3 years 17 Grade 1 + 7 No Khadija 7 years 21 Head of photography society Grade 3 No Masooma 11 years 15 Grade 9 + 10 A conference about using technology in teaching Rabab 3 years 17 Head of the voluntary work society Grade 1 + 8 Intel course Ruqaya 8 years 17 Grade 2 + 6 No Sukaina 7 years 14 Grade 4 No Tahra 1 year 21 Quran society Grade 2 No Author's Copy Zahra’a 2 years 14 Photography society Grade 3 No Zainab 6 years 17 The voluntary work society Grade 5 + 1 Active teaching workshop T. Al‑Habsi et al. Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… opportunities of using the discussed technological programs in teaching the different lan‑ guage skills and the possible challenges of using them in practice. At the beginning of any session, teachers who applied any of the previously discussed programs could share their experience with the group. This helped the members to gain better understanding of the new technologies and their effectiveness in practice. The participant-teachers engaged in a total of 10 CoP meetings during which they were also asked to write a reflective journal to reflect on their experience in the CoP. Each teacher implemented one technology application in their classrooms. It is noteworthy that only some classes had projectors and that there was one smart board in the entire school. Besides, there was a Learning Resource Centre, where there was one projector and a num‑ ber of desktop computers used for teaching Information Technology. The participant-teach‑ ers had to use their own laptop computers and a projector, which was designated for the English teachers only. At the end of the intervention, the first author interviewed the participant-teachers to collect data about how they integrated technology into their ELT and their perceptions about such integration. Further, the focus group discussions took place in the school. The first author had a meeting with the participant-teachers at the end of the intervention period in which she asked them some questions about their experience in the CoP. The teachers shared and exchanged their feelings and opinions about the meetings they had during the intervention period. Sometimes, some of the answers led to other questions and more note- taking, which extended the discussion. This “within-method triangulation” of data in this case study is to allow for saturation of data, enhance the study validity and reliability, and account for inherent flaws and deficiencies within one method, and in-depth understanding of the phenomenon under study (Fusch et al 2018). For phenomenological studies, like the one under investigation, Creswell (1998) recom‑ mends 5–25 interviews and Morse (1994) suggests at least six. Due to time restrictions, the second and third author recommended conducting 11 interviews and reflective accounts. However, to ensure data saturation, the second and third author examined the data and felt that they were sufficiently thick and rich and could answer the research questions (Fusch et al. 2018). It is noteworthy that data collection took approximately one semester, which is equiva‑ lent to 12 weeks. This type of data triangulation was an ongoing process, where, according to Fusch et al. (2018), “each data represented different data of the same event; discovering commonalities within dissimilar events” (22). All data were recorded and archived in a special folder in the first author’s laptop computer. 9.2 Data analysis Framework analysis (FA) was used to analyze the qualitative data retrieved from the reflec‑ tive journals and the focus group interview. FA is flexible, dynamic, systematic, and com‑ prehensive that aims to generate themes (Srivastava and Thomson 2009). It is a rigorous method used to undertake qualitative data analysis and enhances credibility of the findings (Firth 2011). Moreover, Firth found that FA is suitable for researchers engaging in quali‑ tative research for the first time, as it provides a route map for the journey and facilitates both a case- and theme-based approach to data analysis. It is additionally applied to policy research to assess policies and procedures. Srivastava and Thomson assert that FA is better adapted to research that has “specific questions, a limited time-frame, a pre-designed sam‑ ple, and a priori issues” (73). 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. The first author actively involved the participant-teachers in the management of their situa‑ tion, valued their expertise, and worked collaboratively with them. This empowered the partic‑ ipant-teachers to take control of their needs, better understand the relationship between tech‑ nology and CoP, and solve problems related to technology integration through CoP. FA is a qualitative data analysis approach that consists of five interconnected but distinct stages (Ritchie and Spencer 1994). In the familiarization stage, the first author made field notes and transcribed the audio recording of the interview. She then read the reflective jour‑ nals and transcripts with the field notes, to familiarize herself with the content of each inter‑ view and obtain a broad overview of the participant-teachers’ responses. In addition, she made notes on each journal and transcript, jotting down any topics and ideas that were interesting or significant. She also noted her thoughts in a reflective diary, which allowed her to reflect on each stage of the research and her role in the study (Hackett and Strickland 2018). This stage enabled her to immerse herself in the data, which is crucial in ensuring that the labels devel‑ oped in the next stage were supported by the data. In the identifying or constructing a thematic framework stage, she reviewed the list of top‑ ics and ideas that emerged during the first stage, while remaining cognizant of the aims of the study and the topics in the interview topic guide, as these reflected the research questions. Subsequently, and guided by Hackett and Strickland (2018), she noted the topics and ideas on Post-it Notes and arranged these on flip-chart paper in order of relevance to the topic guide and similarity of ideas emerging during the interviews and in the reflective journals. In the indexing and sorting stage, and once the index had been compiled, she applied it to the reflective journals and transcripts. She reread the reflective journals and transcripts and applied labels to each reflective journal and transcript. She saved copies of each transcript as Microsoft Word documents. In the data summary and display stage, and guided by Hackett and Strickland (2018), the first author arranged the data that were indexed in the previous stage by placing them in charts. She then reread the transcripts and listened again to the audio recordings to ensure further immersion in the data. In the final mapping and interpretation stage, the first author developed the main themes. She moved backward and forward across the themes developed initially to immerse herself in the data and make sense of it leading to a better understanding of the participant-teachers’ perceptions and experiences. Three main themes emerged from the data. Those were benefits of using technology, ways of using technology, and challenges of using technology. To ensure the trustworthiness of the study, it was important that the names assigned to the themes and sub-themes reflected the voices of the participants, and that the themes gave voice to the par‑ ticipants-teachers’ perceptions of their experiences (Hackett and Strickland 2018). Being a postgraduate thesis, with the first author the student and the other two authors are her thesis supervisors, we discussed the codes, themes, and data interpretation several times until we had reached a consensus. This process of “investigator triangulation” mitigated data bias and enhanced objectivity, truth, and validity (Fusch et al. 2018). 10 Findings 10.1 Benefits of using technology through a CoP Under this theme, different CoP members reflected on how they perceived their teaching before and after joining a CoP to discuss technology integration in their ELT practices and 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… how such integration led to implementing differentiated instruction at the content, pro‑ cess, product, and learning environment levels and promoted fair, flexible, challenging, and engaging curriculum. This was evident in the statement made by Fatma, who not only seemed to be digitally literate, but was also aware of how to use which technological tools to modify and redefine the rigid curriculum to motivate her students to use vocabulary in context. She implied that the CoP members made a collective decision and prepared a practical plan probably to find, download, and edit some relevant videos from YouTube and use the interactive SMART Board to activate students’ informal and deliberate lan‑ guage learning to tackle their low motivation problem. She believed. Technology motivates and encourages students to learn more. For example, they learn new vocabulary or new items by the videos or by the active SMART Board. We also motivate them and encourage them to learn new vocabulary and to recognize some new meanings. Perhaps co-partnering with Fatma, Zahra’a, who has limited teaching experience, appeared to have analyzed the needs and expectations of her students and reshaped and reconceived the use of technology to motivate the slow learners to enhance their learning. She asserted “especially for the slow learners, we motivate them to participate in these lessons.” Similarly, joining the CoP members seemed to have helped Tahra, who has one-year teaching experience, to redesign and reanalyze the uses of the available videos, visuals, and interactive SMART Board probably to help her students to improve their four skills, pronunciation, and vocabulary repertoire. She acknowledged. Technology makes teaching easy because I can choose for example different colors using one marker. It also attracts students’ attention. I also loved to use the sounds instead of taking my CD player. There are ready sounds, videos, and pictures in the board. So, I can use them directly. More attempts to amend and revise the use of technology were found in the statement made by Rabab, who has only three-year teaching experience and who used technology as a tool for providing fair assessment probably to make the right supplementary material selection to improve her students’ learning. She asserted “before I participated in a CoP, I always used technology for presenting the lessons. After the experience, I learned different ways of using technology to assess students and to cater for individual differences.” Like the previous member, Hawra’a, who has only three-year teaching experience, per‑ haps learned from Rabab, how to re-create the curriculum to enhance her students’ active language learning and their reflective skills via designing and using activities that differ‑ entiated product and learning environment. She stated “I started to use technology more effectively to improve their different language skills. I always tried to make sure that the students collaborated in their learning and worked together.” Integrating technology in ELT seemed to have helped Batool, who also has only three- year teaching experience and seemed to have learnt from Rabab how to change and read‑ dress her teaching. She substituted her teacher-centered approach with a more student-cen‑ tered approach perhaps to create more opportunities for incidental and informal language practice. She asserted “in the past, I was controlling everything in the classroom. However, now I learned to use technology for more purposes that help students improve their learn‑ ing. The new technology helps and encourages my students to participate.” Perhaps due to the first-order barriers those days, Masooma, who has 11-year teach‑ ing experience, appeared to have had internalized beliefs about integrating technology in 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. ELT for differentiated product and learning environment. She acknowledged “previously, I was mainly using PowerPoint and the interactive SMART Board.” However, those beliefs, which she might have developed as a result of attending a conference about using technol‑ ogy in teaching and/or a failure of in-service SLTE to provide her with life-long learning opportunities and a regular and supportive learning environment, obviously changed due to her collaboration and communication with the other members of the CoP. She explained “I learned many new programs after I met with my colleagues. I learned different programs like Plickers, Rolate, Pinterest and VideoScribe. I feel more confident that I know many new technologies.” Unlike all members discussed above and prior to joining the CoP, Tahra, who has one- year teaching experience, held powerful negative internalized beliefs about integrating technology in ELT, which was due to attending a stand-alone technology course, which affected her teaching. She acknowledged. To be honest with you, I hated technology. I actually had a course in the univer‑ sity about technology which is Educational Technology, but I didn’t like it. When it comes to using technology and making projects, I hated them. Even when I came to the school my first time, I hated to use technology especially when we didn’t have the materials. It was really very hard for me to organize my teaching. However, joining a CoP and collaborating and communicating with the other CoP members and practicing the use of technology appeared to have helped her to change her internalized beliefs and gave her confidence. It helped her first to substitute and enhance her students’ learning before thinking of altering and rethinking the use of the interactive SMART Board probably to engage them in collaborative activities to self-diagnose and fix their own language learning gaps. Obviously, this work gave her a feeling of comfort, excitement, and fluidity about her teaching. Tahra continued. But then, I decided to use the interactive SMART Board in my classrooms. I started to use technology almost in every lesson. The students really like it and it makes life easy for me. Then, I started to think about things beyond just presenting in the class because technology helped me to discover more things about teaching. Using tech‑ nology makes the students active and they like to study in the active classroom more than in their classroom. 10.2 Ways of using technology through a CoP Many members of the CoP reflected on how participating in the CoP helped them to adopt different ways of using technology in their classes as a reflection of good practice. For example, Khadija, who has seven-year teaching experience, suggested one way of using the interactive SMART Board as a tool to substitute the traditional board in order to identify her students’ writing preferences and understanding and help them to develop as active writers. She maintained “I think it depends on the teacher and how she uses technology in her classes. When you use the interactive SMART Board, you can give them a chance to write on the board and they like writing.” Almost similarly, Zainab who has six-year teaching experience seemed to have been enjoying using the interactive SMART Board as a tool for using visuals to reinforce a les‑ son on sports to help them view and absorb the target grammar, vocabulary, and the lan‑ guage skills embedded in the lesson content. She asserted. 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… It’s very enjoyable for the students and makes the things that they are studying easy to remember. For example, rules of grammar, rules of vocabulary, everything is easy to remember. I used the interactive SMART Board and they are learning different types of sports and until now my students remember the pictures with the sounds and words. So, it heher three-year teachinglped them to remember everything! Despite her 11 years of teaching experience and attending a conference about using technology in teaching, and prior to engaging in the CoP, Masooma experienced difficul‑ ties with implementing grammar differentiated instruction in her mixed-ability classes perhaps due to coming late into the world of technology and the failure of her in-service SLTE program to professionally prepare her to address such challenge. She stated “it was hard for me to teach students of different levels.” However, working with technologically savvy colleagues, who share the same problems and concerns, and gearing the intervention toward meeting her technological needs seemed to have helped her to increase her familiar‑ ity with and confidence about using technology to find practical ways to help her students to develop their functional grammar skills. She explained. By using technology now, I can prepare different activities for the students based on their levels. For example, in my grammar lesson about the use of relative clauses, I designed three different activities for three different groups of students using Plick‑ ers. Despite her three-year teaching experience, Rabab seemed to have been passionate about technology and a great believer in its fundamental role in solving her students’ lan‑ guage learning problems. She appeared to have taught herself about a new application to provide flexibility in ELT to meet the teaching objectives. She further trained her students on using the application perhaps not only to meet the curriculum objectives, but also to facilitate their development as self-directed learners and create a safe space for them to work individually to reflect on their learning, enhance their understanding of the textbook content, and eventually improve their own scores. She was not only aware of her role as a guide and facilitator, but also believed in her students’ digital competence to use technol‑ ogy to personalize and customize it to suit their learning experience and goals. Rabab sug‑ gested “using Edmodo is not an easy task especially for Grade Eight students. So, I gave the students two training sessions before the implementation.” Rabab then took her work and effort to the next level by trying to implement a new intervention. She shared information about Edmodo with her students’ parents, who are aware of the key role English plays in their children’s lives, probably to create a new com‑ munity this time beyond the school boundaries to redesign her students’ language learning for communicative and interactive purposes. To achieve this, she probably utilized the wide spread availability and use of WhatsApp in Oman to form groups to involve the parents in their children’s deliberate language learning and diagnosis of their language learning prob‑ lems. This effort obviously made her feel more comfortable, excited, and fluid about her teaching. Rabab continued. I also communicated with the parents by giving them detailed description about Edmodo. It made the connection with the parents and students more effective because I used the virtual classes. It made the connection between me and the parents easy. Interestingly, working in close proximity to one another and interacting face-to-face to support each other appeared to have affected the knowledge of Sukaina, who has seven years of teaching experience and is probably aware of the role of teachers in disrupting 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. ELT policy in Oman, not only to feel excited to share her success about integrating tech‑ nology in ELT with other teachers external to her school, but also to develop an innova‑ tive and informed approach to teachers’ life-long professional development, which would promote those teachers’ autonomy. This would take the shape of creating a new community of teachers beyond her school boundaries, which would aim to raise teachers’ awareness about the values, applications, and benefits of integrating technology in ELT to facilitate more effective ELT education implementation. Sukaina suggested “I think we can publish a booklet that summarizes the features of the technological programs we discussed in our CoP, so that other teachers can benefit from them.” Probably after experiencing the impact of the CoP on her teaching and her students’ learning, Sukaina thought of implementing a similar intervention, where she can model the use of technology for differentiated instruc‑ tion to other teachers and equip them with the necessary tools to take responsibility for their life-long professional development in an attempt to compensate for the persistent fail‑ ure of the pre- and in-service SLTE agencies in Oman. Hawra’a, who has only three years of teaching experience, addressed professional devel‑ opment as well and implied that prior to engaging in the CoP her experience was negative perhaps due to working in isolation and the failure of pre- and in-service SLTE to provide specific and practical applications of technology in the classroom and sufficient opportuni‑ ties to discuss and reflect on how technology can be integrated in ELT, which probably affected her confidence. She stated “I previously used some technology in my teaching, but not all of it was effective.” Nevertheless, committing to participating in the CoP regu‑ larly helped her to learn from the technologically savvy members and appeared to have changed her attitudes and confidence about integrating technology in her teaching. Hawra’a explained. Now, I learned how to use the most effective technology, because my colleagues used their experience and other resources to present new and different types of technol‑ ogy. Some members presented about certain programs and the possible challenges and problems and solutions associated with their use of technology. That was very helpful! 10.3 Overcoming the challenges of technology through a CoP Different participant-teachers in this section critically reflected on and discussed the multi‑ ple challenges they faced during integrating technology in their ELT classes through a CoP. However, their different stories revealed how their passion for the CoP and commitment to its sustainability as a source for life-long teachers’ professional development affected their thinking and behavior. The complexities and challenges of integrating technology in ELT were found in the statement made by Sukaina, who has seven years of teaching experience. She held “I believe that technology development never stops. There is always new technology created every day. We need to stay up-to-date.” While the implication is that Sukaina has positive attitudes about the integration of technology in her ELT practices due to the technological pedagogical content knowledge she had developed from engaging in the CoP, she did not perceive herself as pedagogically competent to integrate the new technologies. Interestingly, the answer to this experienced member’s concern and nervousness was found in the response provided by Tahra, who is a newcomer with one-year experience only. She implied that working collaboratively in close proximity to one another and inter‑ acting face-to-face to actively reflect on the entire experience and probably the successes 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… they have achieved thus far seemed to have helped them to try and strike a balance between the constantly evolving technological knowledge and pedagogical knowledge and knowing how to connect technology, pedagogy, and content to successfully and effectively integrate technology in their ELT practices. Tahra asserted. The discussions help us get rid of some negative feelings and negative thinking, because when we come to teach, we sometimes complain. However, when we share and talk about these things we get rid of these feelings and thoughts. We start to think about new solutions and new ways to overcome problems. Other members discussed time as a constraint and challenge. Zainab, who has six-year teaching experience, seemed to have compared between her pre- and post-CoP teaching experience in relation to the multiple uses and applications of technology and its overall complexity and diversity. She suggested “I think two months was not enough for learn‑ ing all the new technology. We need more time to learn about new technology and how to apply it effectively in our practices.” Interestingly, in spite of her relatively long teaching experience, she appeared to be struggling to solve a first-order barrier like time. Nonetheless, the concern voiced by Zainab was addressed by Zahra’a, who has only two years of teaching experience. She asserted “time was a challenge for us, but we could deal with this challenge. We met and discussed about technology and made time to discuss other things that came from the supervisor and administration.” This feeling of excitement about and relevance of the CoP and commitment to its sustainability and success could be attributed to having an effective facilitator, a core group, clear objectives that encouraged active and effective group participation, choice of a problem or topic that all members felt passionate about and considered a part of their identity, the regular and continuous meet‑ ings and interactions, and the development of resources and sharing of knowledge, experi‑ ence, stories, and tools, which seemed to have shaped and empowered the members’ think‑ ing to align their actions with their CoP’s common goals. A different type of challenge was raised by the next two members and was associated with the Internet signal. Such challenge perhaps almost made them give up, lost confi‑ dence, and develop a sense of failure. Ruqaya, who has eight-year teaching experience, said “I think that one of the challenges is access to the Internet. The signal is very weak in the school. Some programs need strong Internet connection, which makes it really dif‑ ficult.” In addition, Zahra’a, who has two-year teaching experience, acknowledged “as far as I am concerned, I was facing difficulties in dealing with some technical problems. I got frustrated!” One can assume that Ruqaya and Zahra’a were very close to giving up inte‑ grating technology in their ELT practices. However, the confidence was restored due to the support provided by the other CoP members, which enabled them to gain confidence, keep working hard, and achieve success. Such support was the result of shared ideas and resources leading to a shared repertoire of good practice. Put differently, since one of the aims of participating in a CoP is to help its members to grow as interdependent innovators, Zahra’a shared her concern with her CoP team members, who appeared to be experiencing something identical. They supported her with an idea that kept her working successfully. She elaborate “when I discussed the problem with my colleagues, they told me that I could get support from the school technician and the Information Technology teachers.” Hence, good and effective in-service SLTE was coupled with important support from the school. Interestingly, as if the last solution coming from the members of the CoP regarding the technical problems was not enough, Fatma, who has eight years of teaching experience and is more experience than most of the CoP members, pushed the solution to the technical problem to a new and more innovative level. She proposed a practical plan for continuous support that would guarantee the sustainability of the CoP. Fatma said “I think we need 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. to ask some specialists in technology to attend the meetings. Those people can help us to learn better.” Perhaps the relevance of the shared knowledge and skills gained through‑ out the intervention and the difference it made to the members’ ability to achieve impor‑ tant goals seemed to have made Fatma redefine success through involving individuals with more expertise to shape and empower the CoP. 11 Discussion This qualitative study triangulated data using a focus group interview and reflective jour‑ nals, to investigate the perceptions of 11 English language participant-teachers at an Omani school about the integration of technology through a CoP and the implications this has for ELT policy implementation. The results were generally positive and encouraging and showed that the intervention empowered the participant-teachers and was useful for the implementation of the BES in the Sultanate of Oman. More specifically, the findings showed that the new and less experienced participant- teachers largely lacked knowledge about technology such as the videos, visuals, and inter‑ active SMART Board and their significant role in transforming ELT into a student-centered activity. This is in harmony with the findings reported by Emara (2020) and Siefert et al. (2019). The findings also showed that the more experienced members were not only con‑ fident and enthusiastic about using technology and enjoyed it and were aware of its impact on students’ motivation and language learning and long-term retention, but their digital literacy was also high with using videos and the SMART Board. This echoes the findings reported by Çelik and Aytın (2014). More findings revealed that the latter category of the participant-teachers played a key role in educating the former category about integrating videos and the SMART Board in ELT, which clearly attests to the uses and values of the CoP as an effective approach that promotes knowing and learning from those positioned as masters through the process of apprenticeship. Such apprenticeship, which promoted active reflection throughout the CoP implementation process, played a significant role in changing the internalized beliefs and affecting the confidence of the new and less experi‑ enced members about integrating technology in their ELT practices and transformed them into self-efficacious technology-minded teachers and gave them a new professional identity though which they sought to transform their students’ learning and achieve ELT policy implementation. These findings are in harmony with those reported by Gönen (2019). In fact, the findings showed that engaging in the CoP allowed members such as Rabab and Tahra, for example, who are less experienced and a newcomer, respectively, to modify and redefine the purposes of technology to explore more avenues of differentiated instruc‑ tion, which is counter to the findings reported by Siefert et al. (2019), who found that their prospective teachers used technology for substitution and enhancement only. This success in technology re-development and re-creation is perhaps due to the choice of the partici‑ pant-teachers, who represented different teaching experiences and backgrounds. Alterna‑ tively, it could be attributed to the design and implementation of a life-long professional teacher development strategy like the CoP, which had a clear objective that stimulated active and effective participation and communication, a topic which was geared toward meeting the participant-teachers’ specific needs and interests and which the majority of participant-teachers were passionate about, and regular and continuous meetings and inter‑ actions to collectively plan solutions to problems. 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… More findings point in the direction of certain experienced teachers such as Masooma, who had issues with her internalized beliefs and confidence. This is counter to the findings reported by Çelik and Aytın (2014) about their experienced teachers feeling confident and enthusiastic about using technology due to being competent in digital literacy. However, the opportunities of situated learning the CoP provided to Masooma to communicate and collaborate with technologically savvy members to critically reflect on integrating technol‑ ogy a solve students’ ELT problem transformed her identity into a more student-centered teacher. The importance of this study lies in the fact that it provides valuable insights into pre‑ paring Omani English language teachers to reflect on integrating technology in their ELT through a CoP. This reflection included the small as well as the big picture and allowed the participant-teachers, regardless of their years of teaching experience, to see their stu‑ dents’ core qualities and assume personal responsibility for their actions and performance, which not only contributed to a feeling of excitement about and relevance of the experi‑ ence, but also redefined the roles of English language teachers as sources of empowerment to their students and bottom-up reform leaders. These findings echo those reported by Al- Issa (2009). However, one cannot overlook the fact that interestingly and surprisingly some of the more experienced participant-teachers faced different first- and second-order barriers with integrating technology in their ELT and that the less experienced newcomers addressed those concerns effectively. Sukaina, for example, felt nervous. This is counter to the find‑ ings reported by Siefert et al. (2019), who found that their pre-service teachers complained about feeling nervous due to a lack of knowledge about how to integrate technology in ELT. This could be due to the lack of the participant-teachers in this study of training, which is in harmony with the findings reported by Çelik and Aytın (2014). Moreover, Zainab, for example, complained about shortage of time. This is once again counter to the findings reported by Siefert et al. (2019), who found that their prospective teachers complained about a lack of time to integrate technology in their ELT practices. This is perhaps attributed to a lack of provision of opportunities provided by teacher educa‑ tors to their prospective teachers. Furthermore, Ruqaya, for example, complained about the Internet efficiency. This is in harmony with the findings reported by Çelik and Aytın (2014). Nevertheless, the par‑ ticipant-teachers in this study managed to overcome those barriers. More specifically, the newcomers and less experienced members addressed these concerns with positive attitudes and high confidence. This is an important indication of these members gaining a new pro‑ fessional identity and gradually becoming experienced members of the CoP. The time allo‑ cated to the implementation of the CoP, the subject-specific practice with technology, the immersive professional development, and the mutual modeling of integrating technology in ELT by the members seemed to have enabled the participant-teachers to gain confidence, keep working hard, and achieve success. Besides, the data analysis suggested that the school were an important site for those members’ situated professional development and provided the necessary support and encouragement to those teachers’ collaborative learning. This appeared evident in the state‑ ments made by Zahra’a and Fatma. This complements the findings reported by Al-Barwani (2016) about the program conducted by the SIPTT, which promote top-down teacher pro‑ fessional development and the findings reported by Al-Bulushi (2016) and Al-Hamdiyah (2014) about the beliefs of Omani teachers regarding the role of schools in promoting effective professional discussions to help teachers rid themselves from the rigidly cen‑ tralized textbook- and examination-based system, which has been affecting their hidden 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. agendas, perceptions, and philosophies about ELT and consequently affecting students’ preparation for the competitive, demanding, and challenging twenty-first century job mar‑ ket (Al-Issa and Al-Bulushi 2012). 12 Implications One can draw a number of important implications from this study about integrating tech‑ nology in ELT through a CoP for policy implementation. First, at the in-service SLTE level, the discussion showed that the MoE in Oman and other GCC countries such as Bahrain and Qatar and certain Far Eastern countries such as Malaysia, South Korea, and Taiwan have been struggling with the implementation of the student-centered ELT policy, which emphasizes the integration of technology in ELT. This is due to the imposition of top-down practices. However, the findings showed that the way the CoP is implemented in this study pro‑ vides an effective avenue of solving this problem. Incorporating a CoP for situated and supportive learning purposes and as a school-based life-long teacher professional develop‑ ment strategy in the ELT system proved to influence teachers’ thinking and behavior about finding solutions to the different persistent teacher-centered ELT problems. Addressing the organizational, financial, technical, and coordination challenges by the MoE in these con‑ texts, can help teachers make the most of their collaboration and knowledge sharing and exchange to reflect on their practices and change their unsatisfactory teaching practices. Teachers, in this study at least, have shown they are capable of working interdepend‑ ently in their CoP to create and generate new ELT context-specific ideas and implement them quickly and efficiently, which affected their knowledge and identities. They also showed their ability to address all the disadvantages discussed by Nova (2017) and Yang (2011) about integrating technology in ELT to end up as technologically savvy practition‑ ers capable of re-developing and re-creating technology to subsequently facilitate students’ English language learning. In fact, the implications for ELT policy implementation discussed in this point can stretch to include other school subjects too, especially in the Sultanate of Oman. The dis‑ cussion revealed that the MoE established the SIPTT to train Arabic, Maths, and Science teachers. Adopting the CoP, as described in this study, can help the MoE achieve its aims. Second, at the pre-service SLTE level, the findings showed that the new and less experi‑ enced teachers have learnt from the masters at their school about how to incorporate tech‑ nology in their ELT to achieve student-centeredness. This was due to the poor preparation they have received during their respective SLTE programs. The discussion in the literature showed that CoP is applicable to various contexts. Therefore, pre-service SLTE agencies in the aforementioned contexts can revise their ELT education programs specifically and other education program generally to incorporate a CoP during the practicum for situated professional development to support and encourage teacher collaborative learning and sharing and exchange of knowledge between technologically savvy prospective teachers and their less knowledgeable and experienced peers to facilitate student-centeredness. Fur‑ ther, with the current wide spread availability of digital resources, teacher educators are not only required to model the use of technology, but also to help their prospective teachers to engage in online collaborative experiences to increase their familiarity with and confidence about integrating technology in their ELT practices. 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… 13 Conclusion, limitations, and future directions The discussion showed that integrating different commonly used technologies in ELT is a worldwide issues and phenomenon, which has been causing substantial discomfort to ELT policy makers, who have been keen on promoting English language learning for different purposes. The discussion further showed that top-down approaches to solve this issue have largely failed even in the most advanced and sophisticated ELT education systems. None‑ theless, teachers in this small-scale study, which discussed a bottom-up approach to SLTE, proved they can be active participants, sharers and exchangers of information, vision devel‑ opers, guides to their colleagues, critical inquirers, life-long learners, language and content consultants, teacher and student trainers, professional change agents, and informed deci‑ sion makers. This effective engagement in a well-organized and implemented CoP entitles them to be fully trusted with undertaking ELT policy implementation and introducing the aspired change. Nevertheless, this study could have come to somewhat more different results than it did, if it were not confronted with the following limitations. The findings discussed in this study are thus by no means exhaustive. They are additionally suggestive rather than con‑ clusive, as they do not represent all English language teachers. Future studies can benefit from involving more participants. In addition, the choice of the data collection methods can include other techniques like questionnaires, for example, which may yield different results about the topic under investigation. However, regardless of the results reached, we believe this study provides insights into how and why to integrate technology through CoP in ELT. It enriches our knowledge and understanding about how the integration of technology through CoP advances ELT and the implications of this for policy implementation in the Sultanate of Oman and beyond. Appendix A: Focus group discussion questions 1. How do you view your experience of participating in a CoP? 2. How do you view the integration of technology in teaching? 3. How did you contribute to the CoP? 4. Have you achieved what you wanted in the CoP? 5. What things did you like most about the CoP meetings? 6. What things did you like least about CoP? 7. What have you learned? 8. What skills have you gained? 9. Has the CoP helped you build relationships with other members? 10. Did these relationships motivate you to participate? How? Why/why not? 11. How are you currently using technology in your teaching and for what purposes? 12. Has the CoP helped you to integrate technology into your teaching? 13. Has your understanding of how effective technology can be integrated changed? 14. What challenges did you face? 15. How did you deal with the challenges? 16. Do you think you will continue to contribute to the CoP after the study? 17. Do you think you can use technology more effectively in your teaching? 18. What suggestions do you have for improving the CoP? 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. References Abigail, L. (2016). Do communities of practice enhance faculty development? Health Professions Educa- tion, 2(2), 61–74. Abunowara, A. (2014). Using technology in EFL/ESL classroom. International Journal of Humanistic and Cultural Studies, 1(2), 1–18. Akiba, M., & LeTendre, G. (Eds.). (2017). International handbook of teacher quality and policy. New York: Routledge. Al-Barwani, T. (2016). Teacher Quality and stability in Oman: Who’s responsibility is it? In M. Flores & T. Al-Barwani (Eds.), Redefining teacher education for the post-2015 Era (pp. 159–170). New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc. Al-Bulushi, N. (2016). Attitudes of cycle two English language teachers towards the effectiveness of three professional development programs in Muscat. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman. Al Balushi, K. (2017). “…they feel that they have avoice and their voice is heard”: Towards Participatory Forms of Teachers’ CPD in Oman.Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Exeter, UK. Al-Hamdiyah, A. (2014). Investigating the professional development practices of EFL school teachers in Batinah North. Unpublished master’s thesis. Sultan Qaboos University, Sultanate of Oman. Al-Issa, A. (2009). Reflection through peer collaboration: A study from Omani ELT classrooms. Iranian EFL Journal, 4, 169–216. Al-Issa, A. (2012). Re-conceptualizing English language teaching teacher education and development in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: Addressing transformations and challenges. International Jour- nal of Arts and Sciences, 5(5), 537–559. Al-Issa, A. (2020). The language planning situation in the Sultanate of Oman. Current Issues in language Planning, 21(4), 347–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2020.1764729. Al-Issa, A. and Al-Bulushi, A. (2012). English language teaching reform in Sultanate of Oman: The case of theory and practice disparity. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 11(2), 141–176. Al-Kadi, A. (2018). A review of technology research: From CALL to MALL. Language Teaching and Edu- cational Research, 1(1), 1–12. Al-Lamki, N. (2009). The beliefs and practices related to continuous professional development of teachers of English in Oman. Unpublished doctoral thesis. University of Leeds, U.K. Retrieved from http:// etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2146/uk_bi_ethos_515286.pdf Alqahtani, M. (2019). The use of technology in English language teaching. Frontiers in Education Technol- ogy, 2(3), 168–180. Al-Shabibi, A., & Silvennoinen, H. (2017). Challenges in education system affecting teacher Professional Development in Oman. Athens Journal of Education, 5(3), 261–282. Amin, M. (2019). The role of educational technology in the ESL classroom. Global Journal of Archaeology & Anthropology 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.19080/GJAA.2019.11.555801. Attwell, G., Bimrose, J., Brown, A., & Barnes, S.-A. (2008). Maturing learning: Mashup personal learning environments. Paper presented at the Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments - 1st Workshop MUP‑ PLE’08, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. Bozdoğan, D., & Özen, R. (2014). Use of ICT technologies and factors affecting pre-service ELT teachers’ perceived ICT self-efficacy. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 186–196. Çelik, S., & Aytin, K. (2014). Teachers’ views on digital educational tools in English language learning: Benefits and challenges in the Turkish context. TESL-EJ, 18(2), 1–18. Chern, C. (2010). An overview of English language education at primary level in Taiwan. Paper presented at the Open Symposium on Primary School English Education in Asia, Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.iscaspeech.org/archive/L2WS_2010/papers/lw10_S3.pdf Cifuentes, L., Maxwell, G., & Bulu, S. (2011). Technology integration through professional learning com‑ munity. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 59–82. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession. Lon‑ don: Teachers College Press. Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. Educational Change and Devel- opment Series. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED434878.pdf 13 Author's Copy Integrating technology in English language teaching through… Dayoub, R., & Bashiruddin, A. (2012). Exploring English-language teachers’ professional development in developing countries: Cases from Syria and Pakistan. Professional Development in Education, 38(4), 589–611. El-Bilawi, N., & Nasser, I. (2017). Teachers’ professional development as a pathway for educational reform in Egypt. Reflective Practice, 18(2), 147–160. Emara, A. (2020). Identity and technology integration in an EFL context: A study of Egyptian teachers and adult learners. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Nebraska, USA. Retrieved from https://digit alcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1125&context=teachlearnstudent Farrell, T. (2013). Reflective practice in ESL teacher development groups: From practices to principles. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Firth, S. (2011). Qualitative data analysis: Application of the framework approach. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 52–62. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teachers’ learning. Journal for Staff Development, 28(3), 35–36. Fusch, P., Fusch, G., & Ness, L. (2018). Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Social Change, 10(1), 19–32. Gönen, S. (2019). A qualitative study on a situated experience of technology integration: Reflections from pre-service teachers and students. Computer Assisted language Learning, 32(3), 163–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1552974. Gulamhussein, A. (2013). Effective professional development in an era of high stakes accountability. Retrieved from http://www.center forpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Staffi ngstudents/Teaching- the-Teachers-Effective-Professional-Development-in-an-2013Era-of-High-Stakes-Accountability/ Teaching-the-Teachers-Full-Report.pdf Hackett, A., & Strickland, K. (2018). Using the framework approach to analyse qualitative data: A worked example. Nurse Researcher. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2018.e1580. Keuk, C., & Kimura, K. (2015). Communities of practice: Fostering ELT research in a development con‑ text. Language Education in Asia, 6(2), 86–89. Lailiyah, M., & Cahyono, B. (2017). Indonesian EFL teachers’ self-efficacy towards technology integra‑ tion (SETI) and their use of technology in EFL teaching. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(2), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.22158/selt.v5n2p344. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cam‑ bridge University Press. McDonald, J., & Cater-Steel, A. (2016). Communities of practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education. New York: Springer. McDonald, J., & Star, C. (2006). Designing the future of learning through a community of practice of teachers of first year courses at an Australian university. In The First International LAMS Confer- ence: Designing the Future of Learning. Sydney, Australia. McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2008). Developing communities of practice in schools. Retrieved from https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2690 Ministry of Education. (2017). Education system in Oman: Basic education. Retrieved from http://home. moe.gov.om/english/module.php?module=pagesshowpage&CatID=11&ID=17 Mitchell, I., & Mitchell, J. (2008). The project for enhancing effective learning (PEEL): 22 Years of Praxis. In A. Samaras, A. Freese, C. Kosnik, & C. Beck (Eds.), Learning communities in practice. Explorations of educational purpose (Vol. 4). Dordrecht: Springer. Mollaei, F., & Riasati, M. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of using technology in teaching EFL. Interna- tional Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 2(1), 13–22. Morse, J. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. Denizin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Murugaiah, P., Azman, H., Thang, S., & Krish, P. (2012). Teacher learning via communities of practice: A Malaysian case study. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 7(2), 162–174. Nasser, R. (2017). Qatar’s educational reform past and future: Challenges in teacher development. Open Review of Educational Research, 4(1), 1–19. Nova, M. (2017). Utilizing video for technology integration support in Indonesian EFL classroom: Usages and obstacles. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 2(1), 15–28. Oxford Business Group. (2017). The report: Oman 2017. Retrieved from https://oxfordbusinessgroup. com/oman-2017. Pyrko, I., Dorfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: What makes communities of practice work? Human Relations, 70(4), 389–904. Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research by Jane Ritchie and Liz Spencer. In A. Bryman & R. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data (pp. 173–194). London: Routledge. 13 Author's Copy T. Al‑Habsi et al. Samuel, R., & Abu Bakar, Z. (2006). The utilization and integration of ICT tools in promoting English language teaching and learning: Reflections from English option teachers in Kuala Langat district, Malaysia. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communi- cation Technology, 2(2), 4–14. Siefert, B., Kelly, K., Yearta, L., & Oliveira, T. (2019). Teacher perceptions and use of technology across content areas with linguistically diverse middle school students. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1568327. Snyder, W., & Wenger, E. (2010). Our world as a learning system: A communities-of-practice approach. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 107–124). London: Springer. Srivastava, A., & Thomson, S. (2009). Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied research note policy research. JOAAG, 4(2), 72–79. Taie, M. (2015). English language teaching in South Korea: A route to success. Theory and Practice in Lan- guage Studies, 5(1), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0501.19. Tang, S. (2011). Teachers’ professional identity, educational change and neo-liberal pressures on education in Hong Kong. Teacher Development, 15(3), 363–380. The Education Council. (2017). Philosophy of Education in the Sultanate of Oman. Retrieved from https:// educouncil.gov.om/downloads/AZ27826wxDsr.pdf Trinder, R. (2017). Informal and deliberate learning with new technologies. ELT Journal, 71(4), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw117. Ulla, M., Perales, W., & Tarrayo, V. (2020). Integrating Internet-based applications in English language teaching: Teacher practices in a Thai university. Issues in Educational Research, 30(1), 356–378. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning com‑ munities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching & Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91. Yang, C. (2011). Investigating the information technologycourses for pre-service and in-service English teachers in Hong Kong. Profile, 13(2), 43–57. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni‑ versity Press. Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179–198). London: Springer. Wenger, E. (2012). Communities of practice and the social learning systems: The career of a concept. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/09-10-27-CoPs-and-syste ms-v2.01.pdf Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & De Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. The Netherlands: Ruud de Moor Centrum, 202010–2011. Retrieved from http://www.knowledgearchitecture.com/downloads/Wenger_Trayner_DeLaat_Value _creation.pdf Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice: a brief over- view of the concept and its uses. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communitie s-of-practice/ Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to manag- ing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Wheatley, M., & Frieze, D. (2007). Using emergence to take social innovations to scale. The Shambhala Institute for Authentic Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.ohr.wisc.edu/cop/articles/emergence_ wheatley_frieze.pdf Wong, J. (2010). Searching for good practice in teaching: A comparison of two subject-based professional learning communities in a secondary school in Shanghai. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), 623–639. Zimmerman, W., Knight, S., Favre, D., & Ikhlef, A. (2016). Effect of professional development on teaching behaviors and efficacy in Qatari educational reforms. Teacher Development, 21(2), 324–345. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 13