terms. Teachers can do this by incorporating past knowledge and experience of students into the learning
It is also obvious that researchers prefer to focus on the impact of watching movies on other facets of
vocabulary learning rather than just the word itself. They think that understanding a word entails knowledge
of several characteristics of that word. Despite the fact that the aforementioned research papers have made
significant contributions to the field of second/foreign language acquisition, it appears that there is still more
work to be done in this area. For example, further study is needed to explore the impact of videos (including
short snippets, full-length films, and any other sort of audio-visual resources) on the vocabulary acquisition
of young learners. This can be done to examine whether there are any disparities in vocabulary acquisition of
language learners of different ages due to differences in learning methods and attitudes toward learning the
Arndt, H. L., & Woore, R. (2018). Vocabulary learning from watching YouTube videos and reading
blog posts. Language Learning & Technology, 22(3), 124-142.
Bada, E. (2000). Culture in ELT. Cukurova University Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 100-110.
Bruton, A., Lopez, M. G., & Mesa, R. E. (2011). Incidental vocabulary learning: An impracticable
term? TESOL Quarterly, 45(4), 759-768. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq. 2011.268061
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-
Danan, M. (2004). Captioning and subtitling: Undervalued language learning strategies. Meta, 49(1),
Egbert, J., Hanson-Smith, E., & Chao, C. C. (2007). Introduction: Foundations for teaching and
learning. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL Environments: nd Research, Practice, and
Critical Issues (2 Ed., pp. 1-18). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Garza, T. J. (1991). Evaluating the use of captioned video materials in advanced foreign language
Harmon, J. M., Wood, K. D., & Keser, K. (2009). Promoting vocabulary learning with interactive word
wall. Middle School Journal, 40(3), 58-63. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00940771.2009.11495588
Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of
elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language
instruction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In Doughty, C., & Long, M. H. (Eds). The
Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (349-381). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Kacetl, J., & Frydrychova-Klimova, B. (2015). English vocabulary in video clips on travel and tourism.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 364-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.788
PROBLEMS OF USING HIGH TECHNOLOGIES IN THE CLASS
SamSIFL, Master of Foreign Languages and Literature (English)
the goal of this study is to show frequent issues that educators confront while seeking to
integrate technology into the classroom, as well as potential answers to those challenges. These concerns
should be of interest to current and future educators, school administrators, and educational technology
experts. The chapter opens by introducing the external (extrinsic) to the teacher hurdles to technology
integration, such as access to resources, training, and support. We then provide internal impediments to
instructors, such as their attitudes and beliefs, aversion to technology in the classroom, and knowledge and
access, training, support, teacher’s attitude, beliefs, knowledge, technology
Nowadays, technology is possibly the most powerful element changing the educational landscape.
Many school districts are demonstrating their support for higher levels of technology in the classroom by
providing gear such as tablets and PCs, improving internet access, and creating computer literacy programs
for both instructors and students.
Although instructors usually recognize the value of educational technology, they frequently find the
seamless and successful incorporation of new educational technologies difficult. Technological integration
provides considerable obstacles to educators at all levels of school systems, from the procurement of new
technology equipment to the adaption of curricula and teaching practices to accommodate new educational
First-order impediments to successful technology integration in the classroom are variables outside
of the control of the instructors who employ technology. External constraints must be addressed at the
institutional level, and improvements are usually gradual (for example, rolling out technological access one
level at a time). Although there is emerging evidence that first-order hurdles are being addressed in the
United States, Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, more effort is required to
completely overcome these problems. In this part, we will discuss some of the external challenges to
classroom technology integration and ways for overcoming them [3, 51].
First, we address the issue of insufficient equipment or connectivity, sometimes known as the access
limitation. Implementing instructional technology is impossible if a teacher's school lacks suitable computers
and a fast internet connection. Following that, we discuss the issue of inadequate technological training.
Teachers will be unable to fully utilize new technology unless they receive good professional development
on them. Finally, we explore aspects of the support constraint. Inadequate technical help and
administrative/peer support are two main hurdles to technology integration.
Early descriptions of technology integration focused most of their attention on improving computer
access in classrooms. Certainly, widespread access to the equipment required to run instructional computer
programs is the most fundamental step toward effective technology integration. Consistent usage of
instructional technology is impossible if computer lab time is restricted to one hour per week. While many
schools around the country are implementing one-to-one (1:1) computing, many kids do not have consistent
and dependable access to a computer. Instructors find it incredibly difficult to integrate technology into
current lecture plans due to inconsistent computer availability. A primary necessity is regular access to
hardware (e.g., laptops or tablets), software (e.g., reading and writing software, internet browsers), and an
internet connection [1, 46].
Despite great recent developments, effective use of educational technology for literacy may need
more frequent computer teaching than the existing student-to-computer ratio allows. Intelligent tutoring
systems, such as those described in this book, may tailor training to student success inside the system, but
given this pedagogical approach, regular 1:1 computer access is essential. With limited federal, state, and
local financing, schools may be forced to investigate alternative funding sources in order to buy classroom
technology. Crowd funding platforms, some of which particularly target education financing, might be used
to augment budgets.
According to Ertmer et al, the most often reported cause for a lack of classroom technology
deployment is a lack of professional development and training. One of the National Education Association's
(NEA) policy proposals is to promote professional development in technology [4, 432]. According to NEA
statistics, teachers now have greater confidence in utilizing classroom technology, running software, and
surfing the internet; yet, because technology is always evolving, it is more crucial than ever that teachers
maintain their technological competence. Even if a school system hires solely instructors who are fluent in
current classroom technology, innumerable new technologies will emerge during their teaching careers,
necessitating ongoing training to maintain their abilities up to date.
Though we cannot predict how the future will affect professional development, it is apparent that
today's teachers do not have adequate access to technology support. According to U.S. Department of
Education statistics (2010), 68 percent of school districts indicated appropriate support for instructional
technology. While it is heartening that the majority of responding districts believe they have appropriate
support, there is certainly space for improvement. Teachers may focus on educating their pupils instead of
worrying about technological impediments with increased technology support.
Adopting a new instructional technology can be a lengthy process. If a technology is implemented
across the school, teachers should have access to ongoing assistance from trained experts rather than a single
hour-long meeting before the school day begins. Of course, this will almost certainly necessitate extra school
money, but producers of instructional technology should also place a greater focus on user assistance.
Teachers will have access to the resources they need with high-quality assistance from both educational
technology producers and school staff. The awareness that help is accessible may boost adoption of
Internal Classroom Technology Challenges
We examined external hurdles to educational technology integration in the classroom in the
preceding section. Of course, as Ertmer points out, even if first-order barriers were erased, digital technology
would not arrive in all classrooms employing suitable pedagogy instantaneously and easily. Individual
educators are ultimately accountable for how technology is used, therefore even when tools are provided,
they have options regarding how they use technology.
This section discusses difficulties particular to instructors, their beliefs, and their knowledge. These
concerns are, by definition, personal, and hence differ widely amongst teachers, even within the same milieu.
As a result, addressing these concerns comprehensively is challenging.
Teachers’ attitudes and views
The attitudes and views of teachers are critical in influencing the role and usefulness of technology
in the classroom. Teachers' attitudes and ideas regarding educational technology, as well as pedagogy in
general, will eventually impact how they apply technology. In the parts that follow, we will explore these
concerns as well as approaches to create positive attitudes that can maximize technology use. Now that
technology is extensively utilized in schools, the most significant question may be how to best use
technology, rather than whether technology will be used at all [5, 330].
Abilities and knowledge
Given the plethora of instructional technology accessible, it is critical that instructors feel
comfortable and confident in their abilities to utilize it successfully. Many modern instructors grew\sup
without access to technologies like the personal computer and the internet, yet pupils today nurtured in an
atmosphere saturated by computer technology. These "digital natives" might be intimidating to teachers,
particularly those with less technology skills. If instructors believe they lack the essential competences while
utilizing technology, they may feel less in charge of the class, use less technology, and are less inclined to
explore new options for employing technology in class design. Teachers who are less comfortable with
technology can preserve control of their classrooms by adhering to conventional teaching approaches. There
will be no need to prepare for the issues of educating digital natives in a digital world in the classroom.
Although the process of technology integration provides considerable obstacles to school districts,
school administrators, and teachers alike, exciting new educational technologies that allow teachers unique
methods of presenting curriculum to pupils are becoming accessible. The research on the reading and writing
technologies discussed in this book shows that they can have a significant positive influence on student
performance. And, despite certain possible impediments, attempts to implement innovative instructional
tools in the classroom will be recognized.
Allen, L. K., Jacovina, M. E., & McNamara, D.S. (in press). Computer-based writing instruction.
In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research.
Bitner, N. & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating Technology into the Classroom: Eight Keys to Success.
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 95-100. Norfolk, VA: Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education.
Ertmer, P.A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for
technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47- 61.
Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher
beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59, 423-435.
Harris, J. B., & Grandgenett, N. (1999). Correlates with use of telecomputing tools: K-12
teachers’ beliefs and demographics. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 327–340.
KUSHBAKOVA, M., Zarina, R. U. Z. I. M. U. R. O. D. O. V. A., & Shahram, A. S. L. O. N. O.
V. (2020). Innovative Methods and Ways to Teach and Learn Foreign Language. ECLSS Online 2020a, 146.
Rasulov, S., Akhmedova, G., Rustamova, K., Turamkulov, S., & Nurullayeva, N. (2020). Grape
Shinny For Prevention And Nutritional Support Of Micronutrient Deficiency In Mothers And
Children. European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 7(07), 2020.
Матьякубова, Ф. Э., Рустамова, Х. Х., & Муродова, У. Р. (2020). ПАТОГЕНЕТИЧЕСКИЕ
АСПЕКТЫ ТЕРАПИИ ХРОНИЧЕСКОГО ВИРУСНОГО ГЕПАТИТА В. Достижения науки и
образования, (17 (71)), 86-91.
Aslonov, S., & Ruzimurodova, Z. (2020). INGLIZ TILINI O ‘QITISHNING INNOVATSION
USULLARI. Студенческий вестник, (12-5), 72-74.
Халимбетов, Ю. М., Ибрагимова, Э. Ф., Арслонова, Р. Р., Рустамова, Х. Х., & Наимова,
З. С. (2020). Формирование молодежи в Узбекистане как научно управляемый процесс. Наука и
образование сегодня, (2 (49)), 57-59.
Ахмеджанова, Н., & Аслонов, Ш. (2020). Семантические типы предикатов и фазовая
членимость глагольного действия. Интернаука,(12-1), 27-29.
THE EXPRESSION OF SOCIAL DEXTERITY IN UZBEK FICTION
Yuldashev Sherzod Rabbimkulovich
SamSIFL assistant teacher,
year master degree student SamSIFL,
Kandiyev Hakim Sirochovich,
As it is known, the social status of occupation in the communication is determined, compared to the
participants-curry, relationship status, position and role in the family. Speech communication is an
important tool for providing information about the social status of the participants. For example, the speech
units selected by the owner, the speech etiquette forms can transport information about the social status of
the speaker. In particular, the participants' concluding remarks in the life of society are received great
attention in the communication culture of Uzbekistan. In this article deixis theory in linguistics, deixis of the
social condition, its representatives are discussed. In communication gestural units they are mainly used to
express participants' social condition. The social status of linguistics in the speech of the participants of the
dialogue is pointed as social deixis, we used terminology of social condition deixis. After all, the social
status (social further status) of speech participants is provided in terms of social deixis. The speech units that
express social status deixis not only explain speaker and social condition of other participants, but also
inform about its subjective evaluation. Linguistic and also extralinguistic units are used to make deixis of
social status in the Uzbek language. Language units of deixis of social status language include pronouns,
contact units, social lexic units and some supplements. Personal pronoun organize complicated deictic
character as a tool to form of social status and person's deixis. They indicate participants of the speech
which makes clear individual's deixis and determine social status deixis via showing their relations and
social factors in the same time. Supplement -s which indicates grammar meaning of possession, personal
suffixes, respect does a task of clarifying social status deixis too. Also, one of active language units that
could explain speech participants' social status is reference units. Reference units' have a special duty of not
only grabbing attention of listener in the speech, but also defining social relationship between speech
participants. Communication units are actively used as a tool of indicating speech participants' social status
in our speech. Even spelling name incorrectly to the listener indicates disrespectfulness, lowness of listener's
social status or using words that mean relativity with strangers’ services as a respect. In speech deictic
points which have social symbol are used in lexical field too. This include socially specialized lexic units. In
the conversion of speech participants practicing certain field's representatives' special words, slangs
indicate that they are in a one group and they are socially equal. Character (right) which was formed by
human's job, position, adorenes identifies not only that person's duty (responsibility), but also his position
along communicative act. Overall, in Uzbek language expression units of the social condition deixis are
various, therefore when each of them are analysed deeply they could obviously give intriguing informations
about not only pragmalinguistics, but also sociolinguistics of Uzbek linguistics' researches.
Deixis, Social Deixis, Deixis of Social Status, Pronouns, Units of Conversion,
Socially Special Lexical Units, Some Affixes, Addressee, Context, Communication, Conversation,
Condition, Deictic expression, Discourse, Denotation, Deictic centre, Expression, Linguistic pragmatics,
Maxim, Non-linguistic-the same extralinguistic, Person deixis, Pragmatics, Spatial deixis, Speech act
It is well known that society places certain demands on human behavior through moral and social
norms. These norms determine the content of human behavior, how to act in a particular situation. It seems
that as long as a person lives inseparably from society, in his speech he also obeys the moral and social rules
of society. He communicates in his speech, understanding the role of himself (the speaker), the listener and
the other in society, that is, his social status (profession, personal qualities, financial status, gender, age). It is
known that the social status of communication participants is determined by their occupation, kinship status,