Definition of a Learning Object from Perspectives of In-Service Teachers ( Case of Duzce Province )

Learning objects, as a relatively new technological concept, have drawn much attention from educators because these dijital resources are easily accessible, relatively easy to use due to their limited size and focus, interactive, and adaptable to many different educational contexts. Despite the fact that learning objects have the great potential to improve teaching and learning experiences by providing teachers reusable learning materials and reducing costs, the lack of a “working and clear” definition of these materials has restricted their effective and efficient use. This study aimed to explore elementary school teacher perceptions of their use of learning objects from a qualitative research paradigm in order to reveal the extent to which teachers understand concept of learning object and its instruction approach. The method of the study was based on descriptive phenomenology. Data were collected using multiple methods, including the semi-structured interview, field observation reports, and photos from nine inservice elementary school teachers from different departments in Duzce, Turkey. Methods of data analysis were based on Giorgi’s method of descriptive phenomenology including four stages of content analysis: data coding, developing themes, organizing code and themes, describing findings. Overall findings of the study indicate that teachers use learning objects in their lesson activities without explicit recognition; however they generally fail to understand the exact meaning of a learning object approach and its applications in the classroom. Participants understood different properties of learning objects. Almost all participants perceive objectivity as the most important characteristic of the learning object. In addition, a majority of the teachers recognized the value of a learning object’s reusability. In-service teachers’ vague perceptions of the definition and usage of learning objects indicated that they used these materials without clear directions and explanations on what a learning object is, and how these materials can be used in an efficient way. Implications for teacher education and development of curriculum materials related to reusable learning objects were discussed.

There are many studies conducted in Turkey to investigate some of the various effects of learning objects on learning, on students' academic achievements, or on students' attitudes (e.g., Akpınar & Simsek, 2007;Türel, 2008;Baki & Çakıroğlu, 2010). In these studies, a learning object is defined as a digital resource that can be used or reused to facilitate learning and teaching. This is a common definition generally used by researchers to indicate all digital materials named as learning object, reusable learning objects, educational objects, etc.
As a result, in this study, background of the problem is based on definition of learning objects and analyzing in-service teachers' real experiences to understand how they define a learning object and how it differs from existing definitions and meanings of a learning object defined by designers, researchers, and organizations.

Methodology
The present research study focused mainly on the teachers' own perspectives of learning object and its integration into the Turkish elementary school classrooms, where teachers act as both subject matter expert and instructional designer.
A qualitative research paradigm was used to focus on these two roles, and how teachers experience and interact with the phenomenon being studied at a given point in time and in particular context (Croker, 2009). For this study, qualitative research methodology, specifically the phenomenological approach, was employed to (a) gain in-depth information with rich-andthick descriptions of perceptions and lived experiences of elementary teachers, (b) avoid bias, presuppositions, and judgments, and (c) potentially add new codes, themes, and patterns revealed from interview, observation, and document data. Therefore, to provide a foundational basis for the future quantitative research studies, this study examined in details the skills, knowledge, and perceptions of a sample of teachers who use and implement learning objectbased instruction. Results from this research may also be used to define a learning object for creating more effective and appropriate strategies that are built on these materials A descriptive phenomenological method was used and two research questions were formulated for the study: (1) "How do teachers define a learning object?" and (2) "What are the characteristics of a learning object from teachers' point of view". A qualitative phenomenological research model with an open-ended, semi-structured interview was used to assess how elementary teachers define a learning object in their educational setting.

Participants
Because a sampling procedure in qualitative research is generally flexiblethat is, there are no clear guidelines on selection criteria for sample (Morse, 1991), it may sometimes create some problems for the researcher. According to Kitson et al. (1994), interpretation of research findings and replication of the study in qualitative method depends on explaining or describing sample strategies in adequate detail. The researcher for this study used purposeful sampling as described by Patton (1990). The study consisted of nine in-service elementary school teachers from the field of classroom teacher and was conducted in Duzce, Turkey, a city in the western corner of the Turkey. Nickname was used for the participants to ethically protect and to mask the real names in data analysis and presenting findings. These nicknames were DZC1, DZC2, DZC3, DZC4, DZC5, DZC6, DZC7, DZC8, and DZC9. Additional demographic information regarding the 9 teachers is provided in Table 2.

Data Collection
Data collection methods of phenomenological research include in-depth interviews (structured, semi-structured, and unstructured), observations, and documents (Creswell, 2007;Moustakes, 1994). Data were collected by researcher in three ways for this study; individual face-to-face interviews, field observation reports, and photographs. Each of the interviews is digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim (i.e., all information gained from the interview is recorded word by word, exactly as stated), and then saved into computer text files. The data files are then uploaded into ATLAS.ti, a software analysis program for qualitative data that generates themes, codes, and qualitative data statistics. As the second data collection tools, observation reports were used to collect data from the teachers about their classroom environment, such as teacher' behaviors and teacher-student and student-student interactions. And photographs were also used to collect qualitative data from the participants, which may have the potential of illustrating some aspect of using and implementing learning objects into educational settings.

Data Analysis
The data analysis of this study was based on Giorgi's (1997) method of descriptive phenomenology, as described by Langdridge (2007) because the goal is to fully understand and describe the perceptions and lived experiences of elementary education teachers using learning objects in their lesson activities. According to Giorgi (1997), phenomenological method "…should be descriptive because the phenomenological researcher wants to avoid any kind of premature analysis or explanatory constructs" to ensure trustworthiness of the study (p. 47). Data analysis included five essential processes: epoche, getting a sense of the whole, phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and synthesis of meaning (Giorgi, 1997;Moustakes, 1994). The first step in data analysis is the epoche. This requires the researcher to set aside all his or her previously acquired knowledge, biases, presuppositions, and suppositions about the phenomenon (Giorgi, 1997;Moustakes, 1994). After epoche, the researcher reads descriptions of interviews. Entire transcription of each of the participants was read and reviewed multiple times in order to perceive the essence of the underlying meanings of the phenomenon. Phenomenological reduction was the third step of the analysis. This is the continuing process of epoche and includes description, horizontalization, and verification for "…continually returning to the essence of the experience in order to derive the inner structure or meaning in and out of itself" (Merriam et al.,p. 94). The next step in data analysis is the imaginative variation (or imaginative free variation). It is "…the process of approaching the phenomenon being experienced from different perspectives by imaginatively varying features of the phenomenon" (Langdridge, 2007, p.19). The final step is the synthesis of meaning units. After identifying the essential meaning units, the researcher organizes them to describe the structure of the experience of elementary teachers. In the present study, content analysis of the Giorgi's (1997) method of descriptive phenomenology was conducted under the following stages, stated by Yildirim and Simsek (2011): 1. Data coding 2. Developing themes 3. Organizing codes and themes 4. Describing findings Each step is followed for analyzing and identifying potential pattern and themes within the date from interviews, observation reports, and photographs. For this, the ATLAS.ti, qualitative data analysis software, was used to prepare the data for qualitative and quantitative analysis for all of the different types of data collection tools. Following figure shows the ATLAS.ti interface with a coded interview.

Researcher's Role
In qualitative research, the researcher act as a primary instrument of the research (Patton, 1999;Yildirim and Simsek, 2008) and active participant in data collection and analysis (Cresweell, 1998). According to Creswell (1998), this participation may have an effect on the meaning and context of the phenomenon being studied. Therefore, the central focus in all phenomenological studies is on attempting to remove presumptions, knowledge, biases, and ideas about the phenomenon under study (Giorgi, 1997;Moustakes, 1994), known as reflectivity in qualitative studies.
In this study, the role of the researcher can be explained under two stages. One of them is Epoche. Patton (1990) indicates that "the first step in phenomenological analysis is that of Epoche". Langdridge (2007) describes epoche as a process by which "we attempt to abstain from our presuppositions, those preconceived ideas we might have about things we are investigating" (p.17). To achieve epoche, researcher must put aside his perceptions, judgments, and knowledge throughout data collection and analysis (Patton, 1990;Moustakes, 1994;Giorgi, 1997). Second role of the researcher is to indicate or reveal any potential bias for the validity of the study if the phenomenon is somehow related to the researcher, which is also called "backyard research". To minimize potential threats of backyard research, (a) data triangulation (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), (b) member checking (Lincoln and Guba, 1985), (c) peer debriefing (Lincoln & Guba, 1985;Creswell, 2007), (d) noting and reflecting possible biases (Creswell, 2007), (e) providing rich and thick description of research context (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), (f) ensuring that teachers understood that their participation to the research would not have any effect on their school conditions and professional life, were used.

Validity and Reliability
Reliability and validity define the value of the research, and generally focus on measurements and predictions of the study in quantitative research (Landridge, 2007;Moustakes, 1994). Morse at al. (2002) point out that this process determines the rigor of the study and recommends that reliability and validity analysis can be applied to all research methods. On the other hand, some researchers, such as Lincoln and Guba (1985), assert that these terms are not appropriate for qualitative research, so alternative terms have developed for reliability and validity, such as trustworthiness, rigorousness, or quality. For this study, trustworthiness substitutes for validity and reliability. Under the general banner of trustworthiness, credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability were addressed to ensure trustworthiness of findings (Yildirim & Simsek, 2008;Lincoln & Guba, 1985;Moustakes, 1994;). Polkinghorne (1989) defines a list of five guidelines for the validity of the phenomenological research to be answered by researcher:  Did the interviewer influence the contents of the subjects' descriptions in such a way that the descriptions do not truly reflect the subjects' actual experience?  Is the transcription accurate and does it convey the meaning of the oral presentation in the interview?  In the analysis of the transcriptions were there conclusions other than those offered by the researcher that could have been derived? Has the researcher identified these alternatives and demonstrated why they are less probable than the one decided on?  Is it possible to go from the general Structural description to the transcriptions and to account for the specific contents and connections in the Original examples ot the experience?  Is the structural description situation-specific or does it hold in general tor the experience in other situations? (p.208) In order to address to the guidelines above, researcher used credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability throughout the data collection and data analysis.
For internal validity, member checking was firstly used as an internal check of the research and it can be defined as a technique to establish to the validity of an account. All transcribed data were sent to the participants to check and revise the accuracy of the findings and interpretations. Triangulation, second technique to provide credibility in this study, refers to the combination of several data sources (Patton, 2002). In this study, the researcher used three types of data collection techniques to verify data --semi-structured interview and field observation report and photos. In order to enhance external validity, the researcher provided rich and thick descriptions of research context and process to enable the readers to judge whether or not the findings of the study are transferable. Based on assumptions of reliability, an external auditor, as suggested by Lincoln and Guba (1985), is one of the strategies to ensure the dependability or consistency of the results of study.

Findings
A goal of this research study is to discover definition and characteristics of learning objects from teachers' lived experiences, including descriptions, perceptions, and feelings regarding the phenomenon being studied. Thematic analysis of the interview results revealed that most of the teachers did not have a clear understanding of the term "learning object". While some participants indicated that they had no literal information about learning object, and they are using it in their lesson activities without labelling it as such, most participants defined the learning object as "digital or non-digital material to facilitate learning by guiding, motivating, and leading students to accomplish desired learning objectives". Interview results are supported by analysis of observation reports and photographs that indicate teachers actively use different types of learning objects in their lectures. The presentation of findings is divided into two main sections: (1) definitions and (2) features of learning objects.

Definitions
Two teachers said although they have practical experiences on how to use learning objects in their lessons, they did not know anything theoretically about learning object and could not define what a learning object is. However, most of the participants defined a learning object as a digital or non-digital resource used to retain knowledge, to guide, motivate, and facilitate students. For example, one of the female participants stated this as follow: Now we have something like this: for example, I do not have a large library in my house and also the library of the school is not enough for students. It is not always possible to find a book of any poet and show the students. Instead, I can show them the cover of all of the books from internet or presentations. they retain easily in this way, however sometimes to view the book itself, I mean to touch and analyze it, can be more useful for them than just seeing from the internet (DZC8 -10:49).
For some, a learning object is facilitator tool. One male participant, for example, considered the impact on students of his feedback and encouragement by using these materials. And he observed and noted in many cases that lack of experience of using learning object can aggravate the learning situation for some students: Teachers generally face time issue when conducting a lesson, especially student number in a classroom is much more than 20. I mean it is not always possible to deal with all of your students one by one so some of the students do not get all necessary information without an appropriate guidance. I think these small materials solve this issue by giving feed-back and encouragement according to students' responses .
Another definition given by teachers was that learning object is a helper tool for them because of constraints on lesson preparation time and the ability to reuse it in different lessons or situations. According to some teachers (n=5), some learning objects include everything they need during the lesson activities, such as brief information, discussion forms, test, quizzes, questions, and other forms of assessment. One participant expressed a common view by explaining: "for me that is great to work with such kind of learning materials because I always have them and I can use same materials for each year in different classes without changing so much" (DZC3 -1:21).
Some participants drew on the perceptions and attitudes of their students by noting the motivational aspect of learning object with such words as "motivate", "drive", "interesting", "enjoyable", and "very curiosity". Teachers use learning object because they draw students' attention, and their students like to see them in lesson activities. One participant further indicated learning object as a useful guiding tool that helps students "follow the road".
Participants also discussed their role as facilitator for students. They stated that such learning materials provide a new learning environment for the students to overcome some difficulties, and barriers that teachers encounter in more crowded classroom where they do not enough time to attend to all of the students' needs. One female participant, for example, aptly commented on this issue: "My biggest problem is crowded classroom. Sometimes I have classrooms where there are more than 30 students so under these conditions I am using some learning objects that facilitate students' understanding and creativity by providing guidance, necessary resources, and support during lesson activities" (DZC2 -33:16) Table 3 shows a brief summary of the definitions based on the number and reference of the participants and combination of the definitions stated by participants.

Attributes
As for the properties of learning object from teachers' point of view, results indicate that all of the participants perceived objectivity as the most important characteristic of learning objects. They thought that learning objects help students understand more easily a concept that is intangible and not easy to apply in a classroom environment. Participant 3, for example, said: "Presentations can help them [students] objectify intangible concepts" and "it objectifies and facilitates learning" (DZC3 -8:11). One of the teachers also stated that all learning objects include a learning objective so students can gain expected skills and knowledge from the learning objects. He stated this by saying "some of students can learn easily if I use flash cards. I think students can recall all of the information by using simple flash cards that include an objective" (DZC7 -6:18).
Other most-cited property of a learning object mentioned by multiple teachers (n=6) was reusability. According to teachers, a learning object should be able to provide a positive user experience. As one teacher, for example, stated, "Learning materials must be clear and easy to use because as you know we are very limited in terms of time so it would be very great if the learning objects we use in the lesson are well quality, professional, and ready to use." . Teachers in this study explained that one of the important aspects of the learning object is the ability to use a material in different instructional contexts and at different learning levels, as one illustrated: "you can use a learning object again and again that is really important. I have three classrooms in different grades so I can incorporate an object to different activities easily" (DZC2 -2:6) For some participants, a learning object is also interactive. They highlighted that for many students, immediate feedback may be very important, especially in a class of larger size. One of the teachers noted: "interactive learning objects provide an environment for my students where they can get some important skills by practicing their knowledge on a challenging situation. Actually, they like such kind of learning objects very much. To me, it is a very important experience for them to see and test the immediate result of their actions" (DZC9 -41-33). The other one said, "students are doing on their own these games, some animations, and such kind of fun things like these, they are just at the center of the event therefore they are getting both to enjoy and to learn, so it is very difficult to forget it, and so such kinds of activities are very helpful" (DZC1 -3:106).
Participants additionally described other properties of learning object as developable and enjoyable. Table 4 shows the references and number of participants and a distribution of properties of learning objects.

Discussion and Implications
Overall, results of the study suggest both strengths and weaknesses in the uses of learning objects by teachers. Participants in this study generally failed to understand the literal concept of learning object. This can be evidence of a lack of effective and efficient use of learning object, as supported by the research literature (Parris, 2003). Because teachers participated in the study did not know well the methodology of learning object concept and technology supported learning, there may also be a lack of clear understanding of this term as well as a lack of effective incorporation of it into their educational system. This result is consistent with Koper (2004), who stated that for a successful implementation of learning object, teachers need appropriate directions and explanations on what a learning object is and how these materials can be used in an efficient way. On the other hand, based on data from the observation, interviews and photographs, results showed that teachers easily integrated materials into their lessons, and guided and encouraged students on their use. These results are consistent with studies that relate teachers' attitudes to learning objects (Baki & Çakıroğlu, 2010;Türel & Gürol, 2011;Kay & Knaack, 2007b). According to Kay and Knaack (2007b), teachers react positively because they recognize that student learning and motivation is enhanced when learning objects are used in lesson planning and delivery. Since one of the important goals of this study is to define a learning object according to perceptions of in-service teachers, we analyzed in detail teachers' responses based on their real experiences and how they were employed in the elementary class. The current study showed that participants in this study perceived learning object as a referring tool that can be digital or non-digital to facilitate learning by guiding, motivating, and also helping students objectify intangible concepts. This understanding of LO is partly supported by The IEEE Learning Technology Committee (2006), which defines learning object as "any entity, digital or nondigital, that may be used for learning, education or training". On the other hand, as stated earlier, some of researchers, such as , indicated that a definition including nondigital material makes the concept broader, while the Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) is trying to make the scope of the definition more narrow and specific to the instructional designer and teachers (IEEE LTSC, 2006).
Results showed that teachers perceived learning object more broadly than digital material and/or technology supported learning elements that enhance learning, but learning object approach is based upon digital perspectives and that a definition must include the two critical characteristics: "reusable" and "digital". According to Rennie and Robin (2004), learning object is a form of computer based instruction connected with the Object-Oriented paradigm in computer programming. The basic principle here is the creation of components (called as objects) that can be used or moved in different contexts. In an analogous way, Wiley (2002b indicates that instructional designers or teachers can create small instructional components that may be reused again and again in different learning tasks. On the other hand, teachers believed that anything or everything can be a learning object if it was used to facilitate learning and teaching. The fact that perceptions and knowledge of participants in the sample seem to be rather unclear about learning objects has important implications. In-service teachers have vague perceptions of learning object and its use in education which is mainly grounded on incomplete information and extensive generalizations. This shows that classroom teachers have used these resources without clear directions and explanations for more effective and efficient use or integration (Koper, 2003). To at least partially remedy this situation, as a first step, the Turkish teacher educational system may need to develop some special programs or certificates for preparing teachers in the concept, creation, and deployment of learning object. Teachers should be knowledgeable about digital learning materials, and they should be given highly practical information on how to use learning object effectively and efficiently. Implementation of these strategies has begun with a new project sponsored by the Turkish Ministry of National Education titled the 'Movement to Increase Opportunities and Technology (f@tih)', a goal of which is to create comprehensive online resources with tablet PCs and interactive smart boards to integrate technology into Turkey's education system.
There is also a high degree of uncertainty about characteristics of learning objects for experienced teachers. Almost all participants perceived objectivity as the most important characteristic of the learning object. They thought that learning objects help students more easily understand a concept that is intangible and not easy to apply in a classroom environment. Another property of learning objects according to the majority of the teachers was reusability. They thought that one of the attractive features of a learning object is the ability to reuse it in different lessons or in different groups of students. Reusability is the core idea of the learning object approach and it refers to a process of using a digital material in multiple contexts (McGreal & Roberts, 2003;Parrish, 2004;Boyle, 2008). Some researchers prefer to use the term "reusable learning object" instead of "learning object". According to Parrish (2004), if a learning object is reusable, that material used in one course or in one place can be used in different courses or in different places. This does not preclude updating or modifying existing materials. However, teachers defined reusability as being able to use material in different years for different students, not in different contexts.
As a result, the study revealed that teachers try to use learning objects in almost all of their lesson activities without formal recognition of this concept. However they generally fail to understand the exact meaning of learning object approach and its useful applications in an environment designed to support students with different types of learning objects.
Teachers play a very important role in the system of education. Many researchers indicated that classroom teachers, as the last authority in this system, have decided which resources and strategies will be used. Teachers' perceptions and expectations about how students learn indicate the importance of the availability and use of relevant tools such as learning object. The potential for success of in-service teacher education is enhanced by the incorporation of digital learning objects for teachers and students. Based on the findings derived from this study, Turkish pre-service teachers need a new and appropriate instructional program for introducing them to learning object technology and its effective and efficient use in their future learning environments. This qualitative study may provide important information that begins to address the current status of teachers' understanding (and lack thereof) about learning object.