Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Technology Integration on Teaching Writing in the Foundation Phase Classrooms in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa

Written By

Pretty Thandiswa Mpiti and Bulelwa Makena

Submitted: February 10th, 2022 Reviewed: February 11th, 2022 Published: March 28th, 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.103666

Chapter metrics overview

22 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Teachers play a significant role in developing writing. They are responsible for teaching the younger generations exposed to technology through various gadgets. This study aims to better integrate technology in teaching writing in the Foundation Phase (FP). The premise for this study is the need to integrate technology in the Foundation Phase in order to attain educational goals. A qualitative case study was conducted that involved semi-structured interviews and the draw and talk/write method to gain in-depth knowledge of integrating technology to develop writing skills. For this study, the cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML) and sociocultural theory of learning were used as a theoretical framework. The participants were four Grade 3 teachers and 12 learners from two primary schools. This study indicated the importance of integrating technology in teaching writing, which subsequently led to more positive learning experiences for the FP learners. The study’s key finding is that FP teachers are technologically illiterate. As a result, it is suggested that a set of curriculum guidelines based on the interests of this generation of learners be produced to enable teachers and students in successfully integrate teaching and technology in the FP.


  • technology
  • teaching/learning
  • writing
  • foundation phase
  • township school

1. Introduction

The teaching of writing skills is very important in the Foundation Phase (FP) classroom. It emphasizes developing tactics needed by learners to write effectively in a variety of contexts and disciplines. Learners must master this skill in order to free themselves from the shame and shackles of illiteracy. Since writing skill remains the most common form of communication. It is one of the foundation principles in understanding the content. More significantly, writing allows learners to communicate their thoughts and feelings about a topic as well as demonstrate their understanding of certain content needless to say, this is a difficult task for learners, as seen by their writing, which contains numerous grammatical and spelling errors, as well as a lack of suitable and relevant terminology to communicate their thoughts [1]. Department of Basic Education [2] states that most learners struggle to write. Teachers therefore, provide practical and methodological assistance in engaging learners in clean writing. From the Grade 1 writing class, learners should be confident that their writing is working correctly. Hence, teaching strategies need to be well matched to learners’ needs [3]. According to Gadd et al. [4] effective teaching involves understanding and recognizing learners’ perspectives and responding to their needs. In the context of this study, the term “need” refers to learners who are technology conscious. As a result, teachers are expected to use a variety of resources, such as films, computers, the classroom, and technology, to enhance writing abilities.

Technology has a remarkable impact on the modern education environment and its positive influences on teaching and learning have been recognized around the globe. Today’s technology integration has resulted in inventions that have transformed our societies, affecting people’s thinking, working, and living habits [5]. Numerous studies suggest that the use of technology by various user groups is expanding on a daily basis. Gialamas, Kalas et al. [6, 7, 8] advocate for the use of technology to aid in the learning and development of young children. Teachers in South Africa (SA) have been asked to incorporate technology into their curriculum. The government has provided technical tools to schools as well as training for teachers on how to use them. The Khanya Project, for example, was launched by the Western Cape Department of Education in 2001 with the goal of “promoting learning and maximizing teachers’ capability to employ relevant, accessible, and inexpensive technology throughout curriculum delivery” [9]. In most cases, the Department of Basic Education was also in charge of supplying computers and, more recently, tablets to schools. The primary purpose of delivering tablet computers to schools was to keep learners current with new technology. The focus has changed away from traditional curricula and toward technology-integrated curricula that support learning and teaching experiences [10]. Therefore, technology must be included in the curricula of schools and other educational institutions that are responsible for training learners to live in “information society” [11].

Zevenbergen [12] points out that today’s youth are so tech-savvy that even their toys are considered “high-tech,” and that they like e-chatting, computer games, high-tech phones, DVDs, pay television, Mp3, and a variety of other technology. As a result of the global technological boom, young children are now born into a “wired” or “connected” environment that includes the Internet, social media (like Facebook and Twitter), instant messaging (like WhatsApp), and always-on digital devices. The latest advancements in modern toys have caused FP teachers to rethink how they teach writing. Prensky et al. [13] highlights this point by arguing that learners have changed as a result of the introduction and quick spread of digital technology in the later eras of the twentieth century, as well as its progression into the twenty first century. The rapid advancement of information and communication technology (ICT) has resulted in significant changes in the twenty first century [14]. Prensky et al. [15] also refers to the present generation of learners as “digital natives,” meaning to those born during or after the introduction of digital technology, and “digital immigrants,” referring to those born before this period. According to Prensky et al. [13], two-thirds of the world’s population owns a cellphone. Teachers are under pressure to adopt and use technology in their schoolrooms as a result of the growing adoption of technology. Therefore, FP schools must be abreast with the need of the community they serve. In other words, technology teaching is a need for the twenty first century generation. Hence, the study is focusing on the integration of technology in teaching writing in the FP classrooms.

Nevertheless, some teachers perhaps fall outside the category of digital populaces. Therefore, they must evaluate and align their teaching methods in order to provide more relevant and effective learning experiences for their learners, referred to as the “digital population.” As a result, even when teaching writing in the FP, teachers should keep in mind the role of technology in the classroom. This emphasizes the need for teachers to constantly take steps to advance professional development that allows for a lifelong examination of methods to improve writing teachings in the FP. Beers et al. [16] warns that there is no longer a singular approach for teaching children to write and read. As a result, it’s vital to investigate the impact of technology innovations on education, particularly how they affect teaching and learning. The rationale for this study is even more pertinent in light of the move to online and blended provision as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, as it seeks to emphasize the importance of developing technology-assisted teaching while taking into account the diversity and context of the learners’ backgrounds. Hence, this study looked at integrating technology in teaching writing in the FP classroom.

The study was guided by the following research question:

  • What are the attitudes and practices of the teachers toward the use of technology in teaching writing in the FP?

  • What are learners’ experiences toward the use of technology when learning writing in the FP?

1.1 Theoretical framework

The cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML) and the sociocultural theory of learning were utilized to assist make sense of the challenges addressed in this study. R.E. Mayer developed the CTML in the late 1990s [17]. It asserts that a person learns and engages more effectively in a learning environment that includes multiple forms of media [17, 18]. It is assumed that when information is provided visually and audibly, the recipient is more likely to respond positively to it [18] and to build a better understanding of it than when only one form of media is employed. It examines how we process information and how our answers are influenced by how we handle that information. To put it another way, cognitive psychology is concerned in what goes on in our heads when input and reaction are linked. It is important because this study has to do with how learning can foster critical thinking that can be applied in real-life situations. Because IsiXhosa learners in the FP lack basic writing abilities, they require direction and support from their teachers in order to complete literacy tasks independently [19]. This theory is relevant to this study because it supports the idea of using a digital platform to create visual graphics, text, and audio recordings to teach FP learners writing skills.

This means that the writing in the FP should include pictures, words, and a textual story when utilizing technology to teach writing. Learners are busy picking and arranging their ideas when they select photos to express their thoughts and create a story about the images’ meaning. When learners begin to form links with prior knowledge about a certain topic, such as when studying phonology and phonemes, integration occurs.

In the early 1960s, Lev Vygotsky developed the sociocultural learning theory. It has since been utilized in scholarly discussions about how humans learn from their social environments and the relevance of scaffolding in mental development [20]. The researchers chose this theory because it emphasizes the zone of proximal development (ZPD), information acquisition through social interaction, and scaffolding as a method of learning constructively [21, 22]. The ZPD outlines what learners can achieve with help and what they can do on their own [22]. The researchers propose that similar to how writing is learned through social contact, technology may be used to teach and learn. Scaffolding can be used in conjunction with the ZPD to close the gap between what learners can do with help and what they can do on their own [22]. The researchers believe that most learners are left behind in the ZPD because they have not yet acquired the knowledge and abilities required before moving on to the next level, owing to poor teaching practices.


2. Literature review

Writing has the power to shape the way learners think, reason, and learn. It also has the power to eave an enduring blueprint [23]. According to Taylor et al. [23], learners in the FP should write four times a week, with one extended piece of writing. The following is their requirement for writing per grade: Writing sentences in first grade, paragraphs in second grade, and extended sections in third grade. Teachers must have pedagogical understanding in order to teach writing effectively. Moreso, they need to reconsider the methodology they use in their classrooms that best suit the learners’ needs. The learners of the twenty first century are born into a technological culture, and they have access to a wealth of information thanks to the recent technological growth. Technology has enabled young learners to be born into a linked world of the internet, social media, instant messaging, and always-on digital devices [24]. With this in mind, it’s become increasingly vital to consider how these changes affect young learners, particularly how technology influences their learning and teaching. Therefore, teachers must learn to teach in a way that is most effective for their students. This does not imply that the meaning of what is significant is changed or that the old curriculum is eliminated. Teachers of the twenty first century, on the other hand, must adapt their materials to the needs of digital learners. The issue is no longer about whether or whether teachers should utilize digital media; rather, it is about how to use new media in a constructive, creative way in FP classrooms to boost learners’ writing skills.

2.1 Barriers of technology integration

A lack of technological knowledge and skills, as well as technology-supported pedagogical knowledge and skills and technology-related classroom management knowledge and abilities, has been identified as a key barrier to technology integration. Lack of specific technical knowledge and skills is one of the most common reasons given by teachers for not using technology [25, 26]. For example, a lack of knowledge in the use of databases and spreadsheets was reported as a hindrance by more than 10% of primary school teachers in a study of Scottish schools [26]. Snoeyink et al. [25] discovered that teachers’ lack of technology integration was due to a lack of computer expertise or skills in their study of one middle-class school in the United States of America. The teachers in their study did not engage their students in any technology-related activities until they had mastered basic skills such as logging onto a network, opening and closing files and applications, and basic word processing. In addition to their lack of technical competence and skills, some teachers lack familiarity with the pedagogy of using technology. According to Hughes et al. [27], teachers must have a foundation of knowledge and abilities in technology-supported pedagogy that they may draw on when planning to integrate technology into their classrooms. Pedagogy that is supported by technology can be divided into three types, according to how it is used: (a) to replace, (b) to amplify, or (c) to transform [27]. When technology is used as alternative, it is used to attain the same educational aim in a different way.

South Africa’s failure to overcome the “digital divide” is due to the challenges faced by schools in the country that do not employ ICT to enhance teaching and learning. The digital divide is the difference between people who profit from digital technology and those who do not [28]. The use of ICT in schools to increase learning could help overcome some of the barriers to boosting the efficiency and productivity of both learning and teaching while also closing the digital divide [29]. The challenge for educators is to stay informed about the various types of information available, the technology used to obtain it, and how this knowledge may affect students. Learners must gain ICT skills in order to perform effectively in society as a whole and to contribute to the long-term use of ICTs.

2.2 Benefits of teaching writing using technology in the FP classroom

Incorporating technology into the teaching of writing in the FP classroom is not a quick fix process. Instead, school management should be prepared to assist teachers as they progress through a technology adoption and acquisition process. Infusing technology in teaching writing is one of the various methods that can be used in the FP. Many studies on technology integration in teaching and learning reach the same conclusion: technology plays a significant role in education at all levels [30]. However, while technology has importance as a learning and teaching tool, its full potential in FP contexts has yet to be realized. Despite this, it is only used in a small number of classrooms since it is considered as going against the grain of play-based pedagogy [31] and developmentally appropriateness [32]. Dietze et al. [33] say, on the other hand, that technology should not be considered as a threat to active play, but rather as a tool that may be utilized to improve it. According to the National Institute for Literacy, “young children need opportunities to develop early technology-handling abilities associated with early digital literacy that is equivalent to book-handling abilities associated with early literacy development.” Children, on the other hand, are used to using technology in their homes, but this use is rarely duplicated to its full capacity in the FP context. Shams-Abadi et al. [34] backs up the claims, stating that writing in blended learning produces high-quality writing and answers from students.


3. Methodology

The researchers adopted qualitative methods such as a draw and write/talk technique for learners and semi-structured interviews for teachers as data generation methods. Using qualitative research for this study was suitable because it enabled the researchers and participants to gain a deeper understanding of teaching writing using technology in the FP classrooms. FP learners were able to respond to a researcher’s question with a drawing by using the draw and write/talk technique. It also allowed participants to provide written responses to their final drawings. To characterize and clarify the image’s content before providing a commentary on which the researchers can base their findings. The participants were taught that the message, not the quality of the drawings, is what matters [35]. Interviews were performed in this study to acquire a better understanding of each teacher’s knowledge and experience of teaching writing using technology in the FP class. The data from the interviews were captured and transcribed, and then compared to the data from the draw and write approach. Silverman et al. [36] defined triangulation as the process of comprehending a situation by merging many perspectives.

Data analysis was used to identify and code themes from the raw qualitative data. The data were examined using content analysis. Content analysis is an inductive procedure in which the researcher compares the information gathered [37]. The goal of this form of analysis is to come up with conclusions based on the participants’ perceptions, knowledge, attitudes, standards, feelings, and talents [37]. In a member-checking process, themes were circulated to participants for comments. Triangulation of data collection methods, direct quotes from participants’ explanations of their drawings, and interview data were used to establish the research’s credibility [38]. The data were analyzed by the researchers in terms of how teachers responded to the interview questions.

The sample comprised a total of four Grade 3 classroom teachers drawn from two primary schools in the township in the Eastern Cape Province. Teachers were all females between the ages of 27–58 whose home language is isiXhosa. The sample of learners consisted of 12 Grade 3 learners. Learners were boys and girls between the ages of 9–11. In reporting the data, teachers were labeled as Tc1–Tc4, and learners were labeled as Lr1–Lr12. The schools were purposefully selected because they were typical township primary schools and were accessible.

The appropriate ethical issues were taken into account. The participants were all made aware that their participation was completely optional. The researchers asked the classroom teachers to locate focus-group participants who were willing to speak with the researchers and had their parents’ permission to participate in the study. Because the majority of the participants were children, both the children and their parents signed informed consent forms prior to the intervention. Teachers and learners were both informed about the study’s contents, research process, and data protection.

In this study, the researchers documented true findings of the teachers teaching writing skills using technology in the FP.

A two-cycle process was used to generate data for the study. These cycles will be explained shortly below.

3.1 Orientation

Twelve Grade 3 learners were purposively chosen from a homogeneous sample and asked to participate in the experiment. The purpose of the first week was to introduce the participants to the drawing/talk technique. Participants in this session exhibited their artworks separately in a classroom. Each participant was required to write a narrative. The teachers were provided with projectors before the lessons had to take place and taken through the process of teaching using technology.

3.2 Cycle 1

The researchers conducted a desktop study of teaching methodologies for FP English First Additional Language (EFAL) sessions that included teaching writing while incorporating technology, as well as how to construct these media tools for FP English First Additional Language (EFAL) courses. Teachers were given an action learning set by the researchers to assist them to reflect on their EFAL insights about teaching writing, as well as the teaching practices they believe contribute to the development of writing skills. Participants’ thoughts, as well as transcriptions of the action learning sets, were gathered through draw-and-talk interactions between the participants and the researchers. At this point in the data collection process, both the participants and the researchers kept reflective diaries, which helped them chronicle their experiences as they transpired and categorize critical ideas about what happened.

3.3 Cycle 2

The data from cycle one was utilized to outline how instructors could use technology to teach writing in the classroom during this cycle. These remedial action plans were created collaboratively by teachers and researchers. The remedial action plans were then implemented in their classrooms in the following stage. The participants and the researcher both used laptops and projectors. Teachers were encouraged to keep track of the changes in their learners’ attitudes toward writing by taking field notes or filming them. The researchers used field notes, films of the participants, and talks to evaluate the plan they wanted to implement to solve the difficulties noted.


4. Findings

The data analysis for this study was given in a descriptive fashion, owing to the qualitative nature of the research. The themes that arose from the data are addressed with data support and then justified with a theoretical grounding. The findings are explained in terms of the two cycles that drove the study’s data collection. Cycle one involved identifying the research problem and planning how to overcome the obstacles, while cycle two involved putting the remedial action plan into action and reflecting on the results of our remedial action plans.

4.1 Teachers’ feelings and attitudes on teaching writing using technology in the FP

Three out of every four teachers, according to the teachers interviewed, were reared and schooled in a technologically deficient setting. Only one was given the chance to be exposed to a learning environment in which technology is used to educate and learn. The school systems of the other three participants did not allow for the use of digital learning resources. Teachers were concerned about using technology in the classroom, according to the findings of the interviews. As a result, a teacher’s lack of past experience with technology-related supplies is a reliable predictor of their attitudes and beliefs regarding using technology in FP. According to the data, technology was not used in the FP classroom. Despite the benefits and relevance of employing technology in the classroom, some teachers have failed to embrace this innovation. Some teachers still make use of chalkboards and only use the provided laptops for administrative work. This argument is encapsulated in the following verbatim quote.

Tc1 said “the challenge is the lack of gadgets. Even though I have a laptop which was supplied by the department it is difficult to share the prepared lesson with the whole classroom since we do not have projectors and Wi-Fi in the classroom. When I decide to use the laptop, I divide learners into groups so that they can see what I am teaching on the screen of the laptop”. Tc2 stated “It is very critical for us to be provided with the necessary tools of trade more especially for a big class like mine, as interaction with these learners is a challenge because of larger numbers. Yes of course I cannot run for the fact that technology is good, but we cannot only use technology to teach kids, chalk and board is important”. Tc3 said “For me, the greatest challenge in using ICT is the lack of knowledge, I struggle a lot to keep up with it. You must know the system very well and be familiar with it to use it effectively. If you do not know the system at all, it’s very difficult”.Tc4: “The challenges involved are so many, for example, maintaining the facility, safety of infrastructure, lack of proper skills on the part of the teacher. I can go on and on”.She further said “I think maybe the people that have been teaching for a very long time do not always incorporate technology, because they are not comfortable. So, for us, newer teachers embrace and incorporate it into lessons like doing a slide show, using DVDs, and the internet”.

The participants identified several barriers to integrating technology into the FP while teaching writing, including the high cost of procuring equipment, as well as the financial limits associated with educating instructors in technology and maintaining the continuing use of technology. Tc1 expressed her opinion as follows: “Using computers or the Internet requires planning. It cannot be seen as a distinct plan, but rather as an integral element of the curriculum. Many teachers lack the necessary skills to know how to utilize ICT, which increases the cost load on a school because it is pointless to have the technology if the teachers are unable to use it. As a result, teachers are required to attend training sessions on how to use technology. This, I believe, is one of the primary reasons why schools do not spend money on equipment.”The teachers are one of the main reasons why technology is not being adopted more widely. The success of introducing technology when it is accessible is determined by the teacher’s attitude. “It’s about teacher attitude once again,”Tc2 remarked. Also, a desire to incorporate technology into the classroom.” “You have to have the training, you have to have a laptop, you have to know how to use it,“Tc3 explained, “which is a method that the department is trying to support teachers in terms of their workload, planning, and that kind of thing, but it’s taking a long time.”Furthermore, the participants noted that pricey electronic equipment in the school is vulnerable due to high crime rates and widespread theft.

Apart from the above participants indicated the influence of planning using a laptop since given by the government. Tc4 said in the current report, “Yes, having my own laptop influenced me to use technology. It would have been dreadful if I hadn’t had it. I gained confidence by using my laptop at home, and the researchers made sure I knew how to do everything.”To this end, three teachers stated that instead of wasting time duplicating notes on a chalkboard, they prepared lessons on their laptops at home and taught using projectors. According to the findings, younger generation instructors who have been qualified in recent years have a more open attitude toward the usage of technology and the necessity to include technology training in their professional development plan. Teaching writing using technology was a challenge to teachers. Although the department of education provided them with computers, data revealed that they were only using it for planning. Only one teacher was using technology due to previous experience.

4.2 Teachers’ experience of teaching writing using technology

Their opinions toward the use of technology appear to be tied to their teaching experience. Teachers with more teaching experience were reluctant in the integration of technology in teaching writing in the FP. However, after interventions, all four teachers agreed to pilot this project. They all agreed that the use of technology helped them to improve teaching writing in the FP. The findings indicated that teachers’ perceptions changed. Tc1 indicated “Kids learn more when they have technology because it is colorful and they can see and is related to their daily lives of technology. Their writing skill has developed”.

The second respondent concurs with the fact that technology integration is a welcome idea; it makes lesson delivery more interesting and enjoyable, especially for learners in the FP classroom. Tc2: It is very good. The kids like it, they are immediately interested. It is more interesting than books, although it helps, it should not take the place of traditional teaching and teachers must not discard the method of teaching with the textbooks totally.Tc3 respondent “apart from making lessons more enjoyable for learners; technology also makes the teacher’s work easier, but there is the possibility that it may replace the textbook in the nearest future”.Tc4 further commented, “instead of preparing notes on a notebook which wasted a lot of time, I prepare my lessons at home with my laptop”. The teachers agreed that technology is good and because learners are familiar with it since they have these facilities at home, they tend to pay more attention in class. Tc4 said “I think infusing technology provides teachers with different options to present their lessons when teaching the learners. Furthermore, the majority of teachers thought that the use of technology gave several opportunities for successful teaching, and that aided teaching improves learning.

4.3 Learners’ experience of learning writing skills using technology

Data obtained from learners through the write/talk technique also showed that technology in teaching writing enabled the learners to be more active and engaging in the lesson prepared by the teachers.

Hereunder is the evidence of learners writing paragraphs exercise.

Paragraph writing

The Figures 15 below indicate the learners’ writing skill development after cycle 2 of writing using technology. The data indicated a huge improvement in learners’ writing from the three different classes.

Figure 1.

Drawing by Lr2.

Figure 2.

Drawing by Lr3.

Figure 3.

Drawing by Lr5.

Figure 4.

Drawing by Lr9.

Figure 5.

Drawing by Lr11.

Drawings of learners


5. Discussion of findings

5.1 Teachers’ feelings and attitudes on teaching writing using technology in the FP

Feelings and attitudes about teaching writing with technology are characterized in this study as informal training that affected teachers’ willingness to adopt and use technology for teaching writing in the FP. To fulfill the demand of living in the twenty first century, new information and abilities are necessary, and our teachers and students will be asked to learn in creative ways. In view of the foregoing, the Action Plan for 2019 [2] emphasizes the importance of well-designed government initiatives to address the digital gap in South Africa by taking charge of technological advancement. On the other hand, this policy structure does not serve the FP and, worse, does not explain the pedagogical components of employing technology in teaching and learning. Nyambane et al. [14] say that “when technology is used, content and pedagogy, the two core aspects of teaching and learning, must be integrated.” As a result, role players must recognize that employing a given technology can change how learners grasp concepts in that content area in order to deliver the required sustenance for choosing the real technology as well as the associated information for the technology. This suggests that teachers need to be taught in using technology to teach writing in the FP.

5.2 Teachers’ experience of teaching writing using technology

When applied effectively, the data showed that technology can help pedagogy. When it came to teaching writing while incorporating technology in the FP classroom, participants highlighted several ideas and techniques. It is widely acknowledged that FP learners differ from previous generations, and as a result, the manner they are taught should be different as well. Despite the fact that these learners have a unique learning style that needs a child-centered, play-based curriculum, technology can help in the construction of a plan that is accessible and flexible outside of the classroom. Teachers were unanimous in their assessment of the platform’s effectiveness in the FP classroom. Teachers also felt that technology is useful in a variety of ways, particularly in assisting learners in learning to write in an enjoyable, dynamic, and meaningful way. In addition, our findings are consistent with many studies on infusing technology in teaching and learning which agree that technology has a vital role to play in teaching at all levels [30]. Moreover, findings indicated that one area where technology integration has the potential to increase learners learning is in the area of teaching writing. Shams-Abadi et al. [34] back up the claims, stating that writing in blended learning produces good writing and reactions from students.

5.3 Learners’ experience of learning writing skills using technology

The findings revealed that learners were enthusiastic about using technology to improve their writing skills. Affectively, the learners expressed a desire to use technology because of its novelty, novelty, and appeal. Learning to write with technology was easy and uncomplicated for the learners, and it encouraged them to write. The overall learner experience of learners was excellent, learners confirmed that technology helped them to learn better about the writing. Much research [30, 33, 34] have come to similar conclusions. In this study, the participants had access to a smartphone and a computer or laptop at home, as well as a positive attitude toward technology use. Prensky et al. [15] highlights this point by arguing that learners have changed as a result of the introduction and quick spread of digital technology in the later eras of the twentieth century, as well as its progression into the twenty first century. This conclusion applies to all language learning situations, both national and international, and allows teachers to better address the requirements of their own learners, especially when learners come from a variety of educational backgrounds and have varying technological skills.


6. Conclusion

This study is significant because it paves the way for a technology-based pedagogical investigation of teaching writing in the FP. Today’s learners are socialized in a fundamentally different way than earlier generations because we now all live in a “wired” and connected global information society. The impact of technology at the dawn of the information era was largely focused on information access or transmission, but it should now be extended to encompass how teachers teach (i.e., pedagogy) and how learners learn. It is necessary to integrate technology with knowledge content.


7. Recommendations

This study’s recommendations are made from the top-down manner. Starting with the suggestion that the government provides technological assistance to FP teachers. Following that, it is proposed that FP teachers adjust the way they organize their classes in order to respond to the benefits of technology-assisted instruction. Finally, it is advocated that FP learners have access to the most appropriate technology-based information. Therefore, it is advised that schools provide the essential infrastructure for our young learners to take advantage of technology instruments for learning. Because technology allows for the adaptation of classroom procedures as well as the ability to teach and learn in exciting, new ways, its proper deployment still requires assistance. It is, therefore, suggested that a set of recommendations for an emergent curriculum centered on the interests of this generation of learners be produced to aid teachers and learners in successfully integrating teaching and technology in the FP. Teachers’ attitudes about technology must be modified, and teachers must have the proper training in how to use technology to teach writing in the FP. Any policy governing the use of technology in the classroom must be simple to understand.


  1. 1. Mpiti T, Makena B, Mpahla NE. Applying place-based approach in teaching academic writing in a tertiary english first additional language context in the Eastern Cape. In: Conference Proceedings of International Technology, Education and Development Conference 2021 INTED; 08-09 March 2021. Valencia: INTED; 2021. pp. 10739-10747
  2. 2. Department of Basic Education. Action Plan to 2019 Towards the Realisation of Schooling 2030: Taking forward South Africa’s National Development Plan 2030. Pretoria; 2015
  3. 3. Myhill D, Jones S, Lines H. Supporting less proficient writers through linguistically aware teaching. Language and Education. 2018;32(4):333-349. DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2018.1438468
  4. 4. Gadd M, Parr JM, Robertson J, Carran L, Ali Z, Gendall L, et al. Portrait of the student as a young writer: Some student survey findings about attitudes to writing and self-efficacy as writers. Literacy. 2019;53(4):226-235
  5. 5. KeenGwe J, OnChwari G, OnChwari J. Technology and student learning: Towards a learner-centered teaching model. AACE Review (Formerly AACE Journal). 2009;17(1):11-22
  6. 6. Gialamas V, Nikolopoulou K. In-service and pre-service early childhood teachers’ views and intentions about ICT use in early childhood settings: A comparative study. Computers & Education. 2010;55(1):333-341
  7. 7. Kalas I. Integration of ICT in Early Childhood Education. Torun, Poland: X World Conference On Computer Education; 2013
  8. 8. United States. Department of Education [Internet]. 2016. Available from:[Accessed: July 04, 2021]
  9. 9. Du Toit I. The effect of ICT curriculum support on the measured skills levels of learners of two sub-projects of the Khanya project. In: 8th IFIP World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE 2005). 2005. Retrieved Available from:[Accessed: November 11, 2021]
  10. 10. Hsin CT, Li MC, Tsai CC. The influence of young children’s use of technology on their learning: A review. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2014;17(4):85-99. Available from:[Accessed: January 11, 2022]
  11. 11. Ghavifekr S, Afshari M, Amla S. Management strategies for E-Learning system as the core component of systemic change: A qualitative analysis. Life Science Journal. 2012;9(3):2190-2196
  12. 12. Zevenbergen R. Digital natives come to preschool: Implications for early childhood practice. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. 2007;8(1):19-29. Available from:[Accessed: May 05, 2021]
  13. 13. Prensky MR. Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning. Corwin Press; 2010. Available from:[Accessed: August 09, 2021]
  14. 14. Nyambane CO, Nzuki D. Factors influencing ICT integration in teaching—A literature review. International Journal of Education and Research. 2014;2(3):1-7
  15. 15. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon. 2001;2:358
  16. 16. Beers CS, Beers JW, Smith JO. A Principal’s Guide to Literacy Instruction. Australia: Guilford Press; 2009
  17. 17. Mayer RE, Moreno R. A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: Implications for design principles. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1998;91(2):358-368. Available from:[Accessed: January 15, 2022]
  18. 18. Sorden SD. A cognitive approach to instructional design for multimedia learning. Informing Science. 2005;8:263
  19. 19. Fani T, Ghaemi F. Implications of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) in teacher education: ZPTD and self-scaffolding. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 1 Jan 2011;29:1549-1554
  20. 20. Newman F, Holzman L. Lev Vygotsky (classic edition): Revolutionary Scientist. Australia: Psychology Press; 24 Jul 2013
  21. 21. Mcdevitt TM, Ormrod JE. Cognitive development 2: Cognitive process. In: Child Development Education and Working with Children and Adolescents. 2nd ed. Oxford: Pearson; 2004. pp. 91-98
  22. 22. Brewer JA. Introduction to Early Childhood Education: Preschool through Primary Grades. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2001
  23. 23. Taylor N, Draper K, Muller J, Sithole S. The state of literacy teaching and learning in the foundation phase. X World Conference On Computer Education
  24. 24. Codrington G. Mind The Gap: Own Your Past, Know Your Generation, Choose Your Future. Oxford: Penguin Random House South Africa; 2012
  25. 25. Snoeyink R, Ertmer PA. Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2001;30(1):85-111
  26. 26. Williams D, Coles L, Wilson K, Richardson A, Tuson J. Teachers and ICT: Current use and future needs. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2000;31(4):307-320
  27. 27. Hughes J. The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 2005;13(2):277-302
  28. 28. Best ML, Maclay CM. Community Internet access in rural areas: Solving the economic sustainability puzzle
  29. 29. Chitamu PJ, Van Olst R, Vannucci DE. How can the cost of telecommunications access in Africa be driven downwards. In: Southern African Telecommunications and Applications Conference (SATNAC), Proceedings (CDROM). New York: Psychology Press; 2013. ISBN 0-620-30949-0
  30. 30. Padayachee K, Kritzinger E. Teaching safe and secure usage of ICTs in South African schools [Online]. Available from:[Accessed: August 13, 2021]
  31. 31. Murcia K, Campbell C, Aranda G. Trends in early childhood education practice and professional learning with digital technologies. Pedagogika. 2018;68(3):233. DOI: 10.14712/23362189.2018.858
  32. 32. Langub LW, Lokey-Vega A. Rethinking instructional technology to improve pedagogy for digital literacy: A design case in a graduate early childhood education course. TechTrends. 2017;61(4):322-330. DOI: 10.1007/s11528-017-0185-1
  33. 33. Dietze B, Kashin D. Shifting views: Exploring the potential for technology integration in early childhood education programs/Changement d’opinion: Exploration du potentiel d’intégration de la technologie dans les programmes d’éducation de la petite enfance. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie. 2013;39(4):233. DOI: 10.21432/T25P4Z
  34. 34. Shams-Abadi BB, Ahmadi SD, Mehrdad AG. The effect of Edmodo on EFL learners’ writing performance. International Journal of Educational Investigations. 2015;2(2):88-97
  35. 35. Theron L, Stuart J, Mitchell C. A positive, African ethical approach to collecting and interpreting drawings. In: Picturing Research. SensePublishers; 2011. pp. 49-61
  36. 36. Silverman D. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. Athens: Sage; 2013
  37. 37. Nieuwenhuis J. Introducing qualitative research. First Steps in Research. 2007;5:224-254
  38. 38. Creswell JW. Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2009;3(2):95-108

Written By

Pretty Thandiswa Mpiti and Bulelwa Makena

Submitted: February 10th, 2022 Reviewed: February 11th, 2022 Published: March 28th, 2022