Language Teachers’ Perspectives on Web 2.0 in Education

. Technology has advanced rapidly, and it goes to all sectors, including education. One type of technologies, Web 2.0, has been seen as a promising tool for education, including for language education. However, this has not been maximally utilized here in Indonesia. This research aims to hear the perspectives of language teachers on the use of Web 2.0 as their teaching tool. A qualitative study was conducted with thirty participants who were all language teachers. They were given a questionnaire to fill in and were interviewed for more comprehensive answers. Looking into their answers, it could be said that most teachers welcomed Web 2.0, but they might need some time to implement it


Introduction
Learning used to be conducted in classrooms where teachers taught their lessons to students.At the same time, classrooms were all filled with discussion and interaction.However, Covid-19 pandemic has undeniably changed all aspects of live.This dramatic change has also impacted the field of education.Schools closed their gates and classrooms, and learning moved to a virtual world.
To ensure that students could still learn during the pandemic in which the end is still unclear, many countries around the world decided to switch from faceto-face meetings in classrooms to online learning [1].This sudden switch made student-teacher interaction continue happening despite the closing of schools [2].Technologies such as e-mail and video conference programs have been utilized to support the teaching and learning interaction.
The same condition also happened in Indonesia.Technologies which had never been used or heard before the pandemic started to be introduced and applied in learning.Teachers and students from different age groups have learned how to use them and tried to apply.Students could easily familiarize themselves with the technologies, but teachers have been facing a different story.They have been struggling to use the required technologies [3] [4].This struggle is also experienced by language teachers [5].They also need to master technologies as the use of technologies for language teaching is developing very fast [6].
Despite the increasing popularity of video conferencing programs, such as Microsoft Teams, Skype, and Zoom, which are mostly used to conduct the teaching and learning, the use of a popular type of digital technologies namely Web 2.0 platforms has been quite unheard.
Although Web 2.0 tools are common in everyday digital life of both teachers and students, they are rarely used in teaching and learning [7].

Objectives
Since the use of Web 2.0 is uncommon in teaching and learning, this research aims to investigate the perceptions of teachers, especially language teachers, in the application of Web 2.0 to teach.This research comes with two proposed research questions, which are "What are the teachers' perspectives on Web 2.0 in education, especially in language teaching?"and "How do they plan to use Web 2.0 in their teaching?".The results of this research will be beneficial for language teachers to know more about Web 2.0 and to learn how to use them.When the knowledge of Web 2.0 is comprehended, the use of Web 2.0 will be very beneficial for education as all different platforms of Web 2.0 could be maximized to support learning.Education will move to a new direction as teachers are not the sole source of knowledge.Students can get new knowledge from the internet via Web 2.0.

Web 2.0
The internet started with Web 1.0 which was more on a one-way communication.All platforms were only available for internet users to read passively.Static materials were distributed and consumed by other internet users [8].The advancement of technologies has brought more features to the internet, and Web 1.0 has evolved to Web 2.0 in which internet users can contribute to the materials.The features to create, edit, post, share, comment, and give feedback have been added.Web 2.0 also helps internet users search and find information more efficiently [9] These features make internet users not only consumers but also producers of contents.In addition to the features mentioned, collaboration has also become an interesting feature of Web 2.0.This is very advantageous for teachers as they can support one another to create excellent materials.Students also experience the benefits of this feature as it fosters the spirit of a group work [10].One reason why Web 2.0 is gaining popularity is that Web 2.0 does not require any specific installation.Internet users can browse and use the features which are readily available on the internet [10].
Web 2.0 can be grouped into 3 different groups.One group is about social groups or communities.This group enables users to interact with one another.Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn fall into this group.The second group is the sharing platform.Popular platforms such as YouTube and Dropbox are categorized in this group.The last one is the group which enables users to create and edit information.Wiki and WordPress are two popular examples of this group.Some features work across the groups, and that makes the categories lenient [8] [7].

Methods
This research employs qualitative data to study the perceptions.Conducted in Jakarta, this research gathered thirty English language teachers from different schools.Consisting of fifteen male and fifteen female teachers, the participants taught in different levels.They taught in primary schools, junior high schools, and senior high schools.The reason of gathering language teachers from different education levels was to find out whether there were differences in their perspectives.
The data was collected through a questionnaire which was first distributed among all participants.The questionnaire asked some demographic questions and the participants' perspectives on the use of Web 2.0 in language teaching.There were seven questions in total.
The supplementary data was gathered by interviewing all participants to do further investigation on their perspectives.There were three questions which were open-ended to give participants an opportunity to elaborate their perspectives.

Data Collection
At first, a questionnaire was distributed to all participants.An online form was used to collect the data efficiently.All participants were given five days to fill in the questionnaire.After the deadline, each participant was emailed to find mutual time to conduct an online interview.Each participant spent approximately fifteen minutes to answer comprehensively.A few participants spent a little bit longer to elaborate their answers.The online interview of all participants which was conducted via Skype was done in five days.Since then, the data from both the questionnaire and the interview was analyzed.

Results and Discussion
The findings of this research which are the findings of the questionnaire and the interview results are presented and discussed in this section.The questionnaire consisting of seven questions asking the demographic of the participants and their perspectives.This questionnaire was distributed as the first data collection to all the participants of this research.
Figure 1.Participants' gender Figure 1 tells the participants' gender.Among thirty participants, fifteen participants were males while fifteen others were females.The even number of participants was to capture the perspectives of both genders equally.The participants were then asked whether they knew about Web 2.0. Figure 4 summarizes the results.Among thirty participants, only four participants knew about Web 2.0.The rest, twenty-six participants did not know about it.
Figure 5.The use of social media Figure 5 shares the answers of the participants when they were asked if they had ever used social media as their teaching tool or material.Thirteen participants acknowledged that they had used social media as their teaching tool or material.However, a slightly higher number of participants, seventeen participants, had never used social media to teach their students.
The next question asked to the participants was regarding the use of videos, such as YouTube videos.The majority, twenty-five participants, agreed that they had used videos from YouTube or other video streaming platforms, and only five participants never used videos as their teaching materials.The last question in the questionnaire asked the participants if they had ever used any programs encouraging collaboration among their students.Figure 7 summarizes their answers.Among thirty participants, only five participants had ever utilized collaboration tools for their teaching.The majority of the participants, twenty-five participants, had never used any collaboration tools.
In addition to the questionnaire, an interview was conducted, and the results became the qualitative data of this research.All participants were given the same three open-ended questions in which they could elaborate their answers.However, before the interview started, the participants were informed about Web 2.0.This would later help them answer the questions.
The first interview question asked the participants about their view about Web 2.0 as a language teaching tool or materials.After knowing what Web 2.0 is, the majority of the participants agreed that Web 2.0 could be utilized and maximized as their teaching tool or materials.One participant commented as follows: P1: I think our students are very familiar with the idea of Web 2.0.They would not know the term, but they are all familiar with social media, YouTube, and Microsoft Office.So, I think, it would not be difficult to use Web Nevertheless, three participants who were above 50 stated that they objected to using Web 2.0 as they were not familiar.They also mentioned that it would be difficult for them to get the materials due to their unfamiliarity.One participant said: P2: Our students might be familiar and can easily access those programs, but I myself am not familiar.How can I teach a material which I have difficulty accessing ?
The second interview question asked about the participants plans to use Web 2.0 in their classes.Thirteen participants shared that they would integrate the use of Web 2.0 into their teaching tool.Some of them explained in more details: P3: I think I can ask my students to create a blog and posts their work there.P4: I would ask my students to create a video and upload to YouTube.
However, seventeen participants, most of them were teaching in primary schools, were reluctant to use Web 2.0 as their teaching material.They mostly reasoned that it would be difficult to ask their primary school students although they are familiar with the programs.Some of their comments are: P5: My students have Instagram, but it would be difficult to ask them to use Instagram to learn English.P6: I am worried if I ask my students to learn from social media or video streaming platforms, they may not really learn.They would get distracted.P7: I once asked my students to watch a video from YouTube as their learning material, but I got complaints from parents as students accessed videos which were not related to their lesson.
The last interview question asked about participants perspectives on their perspectives on collaboration tool available through Web 2.0.All of them agreed that it would be a good idea although they also expressed their concern that it might not be that easy to implement.The senior participants claimed that they had to learn all the features before they could use.A few commented that: P8: I really like the idea that we teachers can collaborate in a file.And also, our students.P9: This would totally promote teamwork among students, especially during pandemic like now.P10: I have used Microsoft Office for my collaboration with my fellow teachers.However, I have not yet asked my students to do the same thing.I will probably ask them later.P11: I always use Microsoft Word, but I never use it for collaboration.I am not too familiar with the features.I will have to learn before I can ask my students to use it.
When their answers were analyzed, some points could be discussed.Regarding the use of social media as a teaching tool or material, thirteen participants who utilized social media belonged to the age group in the range of 22 and 40.This result is not surprising considering that this age group can be categorized as those who have social media accounts and are active users.Those who are above 40 may not be familiar with social media or are not active users.They used social media just for their pleasure.
Regarding the use of videos, all participants from the same age groups in the range of 22 and 40 together with those from the age group between 41 and 50 utilized videos as their teaching tool or materials.This could happen as they are familiar with YouTube.Their students were also very familiar with YouTube so that it would not be difficult to ask them to access their learning materials from that video streaming platform.
Regarding the collaboration tools, almost all participants had never used.That is not surprising as most people would normally work on one file and send the file to their peers.They rarely use collaboration tools regardless of their age groups.This also applies to the young age group between 22 and 30.They could be considered digital natives, but that does not mean that they are comfortable to use all digital technologies.A study showed that digital native generation were familiar with some technologies which would be considered easy to use, such as social media.However, they were not able to use the full-feature tool [11].
Technology develops faster than the ability of our teachers to apply it in their teaching learning interactions as mentioned by Sutton and DeSantis [12].Some are familiar with the technology in Web 2.0, but they do not really use it to teach.Nevertheless, those who have been using Web 2.0 in their teaching claim that their students are more engaged and more motivated in learning.This shows that Web 2.0 can be very useful in teaching.
The respondents also expressed their interest in using Web 2.0 in their teaching.Teachers' willingness to use Web 2.0 in their teaching is very important in the field of education [13].However, teachers' motivation itself and familiarity with Web 2.0 technology are not enough to support teaching and learning.In order to fully maximize the use of Web 2.0 in teaching and learning, the use of this technology has to be integrated in the curriculum.Mims et al. [14] confirmed that the integration would impact student learning.As new technology is developed, teachers have to adapt immediately.This will make the use of technology relevant in teaching and learning [15].

Conclusion
This research has achieved to answer the two research questions.Despite the common use of Web 2.0 in life, most teachers rarely use it for their teaching tool or materials.Nevertheless, their perspectives on Web 2.0 are generally good as they shared their positive comments towards Web 2.0 and its possible use in education.They believed that it would be a good idea to use it in their teaching.However, they might still be hesitant to share their plan to utilize Web 2.0 as their tool as they still had to figure out further.This could be understood as they are also struggling to finish their materials in the curriculum.
To conclude, Web 2.0 is very beneficial for language teaching, and most language teachers deem Web 2.0 as a promising tool for their teaching.They might still need some time to fit Web 2.0 application to their teaching, but their positive perspective can be taken as a good start to implement.
This research was conducted with some limitations, such as the limited time and number of respondents.Although this research has shown some promising findings, a deeper research method, such as a more thorough interview, could be done to obtain more information.Moreover, having more participants would also help generalize the findings.These could then give more general and objective findings.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Participants' ageFigure2shows the age of the participants.Seven participants were between 22 and 30 while eight participants were in the range of 31 and 40.The majority of the participants, ten participants, were between 41 and 50.The last group, five participants were between 51 and 60.

E3SFigure 3 .
Figure 3. Level of educationFigure3asks the level of education each participant teaches.Ten participants taught in primary schools while ten others taught in junior high schools.The same number of participants taught in senior high schools.This is intentional to discover the perspectives on different levels.