Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

TEACHERS’ OPINIONS ABOUT INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY USE IN EDUCATION: A METAPHORICAL STUDY

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 31, 121 - 159, 26.03.2019
https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.492882

Öz

The aim of the study is to determine teachers’
opinions on the use of information and communication technologies in education.
The research was designed as a phenomenological study, one of the qualitative
research methods. Convenience sampling was used for choosing the participants.
However, in the study group,13 teachers from all levels of education and from
different educational backgrounds have been included to ensure the participant
diversity. Therefore, maximum diversity sampling is also taken as a basis for
determining the participants. The data were collected via individual
face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured interview form prepared by the
researcher. Descriptive and inductive content analyses were used in the
analysis process. Teachers have indicated that they mostly use information and
communication technologies in their learning and teaching activities to
increase their permanence, use rich content in lessons, attract students’
attention, motivate them and make the lessons fun. It has also been determined
that information and communication technologies are used in the areas of data
storage and transportation, administrative works, preparation for classes,
communication, measurement and evaluation, research, access to information and
sharing it, and personal and professional development. As a result, teachers
have a positive perception about the use of information and communication
technologies in education and they try to use them effectively in schools.
Teachers have stressed that the use of information and communication
technologies in education is mainly beneficial and that they may also have
devastating effects. Moreover, information and communication technologies are
seen as a deeply changing, developing and expanding field, and it is emphasized
that the sufficient technology use is decisive for the effectiveness of
information and communication technology in education.

Kaynakça

  • Balkı, E., & Saban, A. (2009). “Teachers’ perceptions and practices of information technologies: The case of private Esentepe elementary school.” Elementary Education Online, 8(3): 771-781.
  • Berg, B.L. & Lune, H. (2015). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (Çev. H. Aydın). Konya: Eğitim Yayınevi.
  • Black, A. (2013). Picturing Experience: Metaphor as Method, Data and Pedagogical Resource. In W. Midgley, K. Trimmer, & A. Davies, (Eds.). Metaphors for, in and of Education Research (26-50). UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Brigas, C., Ravasco, C., Fonseca, C., Mateus, J., & Bolota, U. (2016). Use of ICT in school context: pupil’s, parents’ and teachers’ perceptions. In M.J. Marcelino, A. J. Mendes, M. Cristina & A.o Gomes (Eds.), ICT in Education: Multiple and Inclusive Perspectives (pp. 97-113). Cham: Springer.
  • Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). “Factors influencing teachers' adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature.” International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1): 136-155.
  • Büyüöztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Comi, S., Argentin, G., Gui, M., Origo, F., & Pagani, L. (2017). “Is it the way they use it? Teachers, ICT and student achievement.” Economics of Education Review, 56: 24-39.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Nitel araştırmacılar için 30 temel beceri (H. Özcan, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage publications.
  • Çetin, S. (2008). İlköğretim Okulu Yöneticilerinin Bilgisayar Teknolojisini Kullanma Yeterliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Dawes, L. (2001). What stops teachers using new technology. In M. Leask (Ed.), Issues in teaching using ICT (pp.61-79). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • Donnelly, D., McGarr, O., & O’Reilly, J. (2011). “A framework for teachers’ integration of ICT into their classroom practice.” Computers & Education, 57(2): 1469-1483.
  • Drossel, K., Eickelmann, B., & Gerick, J. (2017). “Predictors of teachers’ use of ICT in school–the relevance of school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes and teacher collaboration.” Education and Information Technologies, 22(2): 551-573.
  • Ersoy, E. (2010). Eğitim Yöneticilerinin E-Okul Sisteminin İşleyişine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Memnuniyet Düzeyleri (Esenyurt-Beylikdüzü İlçeleri Örneği). Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Yeditepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • 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.
  • European Commission. (2013). Survey of Schools: ICT in Education. Benchmarking Access, Use and Attitudes to Technology in Europe’s Schools. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/KK-31-13-401-EN-N.pdf. Accessed September 2018.
  • Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J. J. (2017). “Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure.” Computers in Human Behavior, 68: 441-449.
  • Haddad, W.D. & Jurich, S. (2002). ICT for Education: Potential and Potency. In Haddad, W. & Drexler, A. (eds). Technologies for Education: Potentials, Parameters, and Prospects. (27-40). Washington DC: Academy for Educational Development and Paris: UNESCO.
  • Hays, D. G., & Singh, A. A. (2012). Qualitative inquiry in clinical and educational settings. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Häkkinen, P., & Hämäläinen, R. (2012). “Shared and personal learning spaces: Challenges for pedagogical design.” The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4): 231-236.
  • Köroğlu, A. (2014). Okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin ve öğretmen adaylarının bilişim teknolojileri özyeterlik algıları, teknolojik araç gereç kullanım tutumları ve bireysel yenilikçilik düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Kuş, E. (2007). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri. Ankara. Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Küçük, M., & Yalçın, Y. (2014). “Turkish Elementary School Teacher Candidates’ Technology Metaphors.” Turkish Journal of Teacher Education, 3(1): 53-63.
  • Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2015). Metaforlar Hayat Anlam ve Dil (G.Y. Demir, Çev.). İstanbul: İtihaki (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi 2003).
  • Livingstone, S. (2012) “Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education.” Oxford Review of Education, 38(1): 9-24.
  • Luu, K. (2009). An Analysis of the Relationship Between Information And Communication Technology (ICT) and Scientific Literacy in Canada and Australia. Dissertation of Master of Education. Faculty of Education, Queen’s University. Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Mama, M., & Hennessy, S. (2013). “Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT.” Computers & Education, 68: 380-387.
  • Marton, F. (2005). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. In R. R.Sherman & R. B.Webb (Eds.), Qualitative research in education: Focus and methods, (pp.140-160). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • MEB. (2018a). FATİH Projesi Eğitim Teknolojileri Zirvesi 2018. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesietz.meb.gov.tr/
  • MEB. (2018b). Eğitimde FATİH Projesi. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/proje-hakkinda/
  • Midgley, W. & Trimmer, K. (2013). ‘Walking the labyrinth’: A metaphorical understanding of approaches to metaphors for, in and of education research. In W. Midgley, K. Trimmer, & A. Davies, (Eds.). Metaphors for, in and of Education Research (1-9). UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2017). Investigating young children’s engagement with computer use as a school activity computeruse as a school activity: a pilot study pilot study of computer use in school activity. In P. Anastasiades & N. Zaranis (Eds.), Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education (pp. 47-57). Springer, Cham.
  • OECD. (2001). Schooling for tomorrow learning to change: ICT in schools. Paris: Centre for Educatıonal Research and Innovation- Organisation for Economic Co-Operatıon and Development.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
  • Prestridge, S. (2012). “The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices.” Computers & education, 58(1): 449-458.
  • Şahin, A. (2014). “The role of information and communication technologies in schools: perspectives of teachers.” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 3(2): 112-124.
  • Şişman Eren, E., & Şahin-İzmirli, Ö. (2012). “İlköğretim okul müdürü ve bilişim teknolojileri öğretmenlerine göre bilişim teknolojileri dersinde yaşanan sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri (Eskişehir ili örneği).” Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4): 2861-2888.
  • Tepebaşılı, F. (2013). Metafor Yazıları. Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
  • Tondeur, J., Roblin, N. P., Braak, J.v., Voogt,J. & Prestridge, S. (2017) “Preparing beginning teachers for technology integration in education: ready for take-off?”. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(2): 157-177.
  • Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Mäkitalo‐Siegl, K., & Sointu, E. (2018). “Differences in pre‐service teachers' knowledge and readiness to use ICT in education.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(2): 174-182.
  • Vanderlinde, R., Aesaert, K., & Van Braak, J. (2014). “Institutionalised ICT use in primary education: A multilevel analysis.” Computers & Education, 72: 1-10.
  • Webber, C.F. (2003). “New Technologies and Educative Leadership.” Journal of Educational Administration: 41(2): 119-123.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
  • Zhao, H., Coombs, S., & Zhou, X. (2010). “Developing professional knowledge about teachers through metaphor research: facilitating a process of change.” Teacher Development: 14(3), 381-395.

EĞİTİMDE BİLİŞİM TEKNOLOJİSİ KULLANIMINA İLİŞKİN ÖĞRETMEN GÖRÜŞLERİ: METAFOR ÇALIŞMASI

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 31, 121 - 159, 26.03.2019
https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.492882

Öz

Çalışmanın
amacı, eğitimde bilişim teknolojisi kullanımına ilişkin öğretmen görüşlerini
belirlemektir. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden olgubilim deseni
kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada kolay ulaşılabilir durum örneklemesi kullanılmıştır.
Ancak katılımcı çeşitliliğini sağlamak amacıyla tüm öğretim kademelerinden
farklı eğitim seviyesine sahip 13 öğretmen çalışmaya alınmıştır. Dolayısıyla
çalışma grubu maksimum çeşitlilik özelliği de göstermektedir. Veriler
araştırmacı tarafından hazırlanmış yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme formunun
kullanıldığı bireysel yüz yüze görüşmelerle toplanmıştır. Analiz sürecinde
betimsel ve tümevarımsal içerik analizleri kullanılmıştır. Öğretmenler bilişim
teknolojilerini çoğunlukla öğrenme düzeyini ve kalıcılığını artırma, derslerde
zengin içerik kullanımı, öğrencilerin dikkatini çekme, güdüleme ve dersleri
eğlenceli hale getirme amacına yönelik kullandıklarını belirtmişlerdir. Ayrıca
içerik saklama ve taşıma, idari işleri yürütme, derslere hazırlık, iletişim,
ölçe ve değerlendirme, araştırma, bilgiye erişim ve paylaşım, kişisel ve
mesleki gelişim alanlarında da bilişim teknolojilerinden yararlanıldığı
belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak öğretmenlerin eğitimde bilişim teknolojisi
kullanımına ilişkin olumlu algıya sahip oldukları, okullarda bilişim
teknolojilerinden etkin şekilde yararlanmaya çalıştıkları görülmektedir.
Öğretmenler eğitimde bilişim teknolojilerinin kullanımını ağırlıklı olarak faydalı
görmekle birlikte yıkıcı etkilerinin olabileceğine de işaret etmektedirler.
Ayrıca, bilişim teknolojileri sürekli değişen, gelişen ve genişleyen derin bir
alan olarak görülmekte olup teknoloji kullanımı yeterliğinin eğitimde bilişim
teknolojilerinin etkililiği açısından belirleyici olduğuna vurgu yapılmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Balkı, E., & Saban, A. (2009). “Teachers’ perceptions and practices of information technologies: The case of private Esentepe elementary school.” Elementary Education Online, 8(3): 771-781.
  • Berg, B.L. & Lune, H. (2015). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (Çev. H. Aydın). Konya: Eğitim Yayınevi.
  • Black, A. (2013). Picturing Experience: Metaphor as Method, Data and Pedagogical Resource. In W. Midgley, K. Trimmer, & A. Davies, (Eds.). Metaphors for, in and of Education Research (26-50). UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Brigas, C., Ravasco, C., Fonseca, C., Mateus, J., & Bolota, U. (2016). Use of ICT in school context: pupil’s, parents’ and teachers’ perceptions. In M.J. Marcelino, A. J. Mendes, M. Cristina & A.o Gomes (Eds.), ICT in Education: Multiple and Inclusive Perspectives (pp. 97-113). Cham: Springer.
  • Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). “Factors influencing teachers' adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature.” International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1): 136-155.
  • Büyüöztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Comi, S., Argentin, G., Gui, M., Origo, F., & Pagani, L. (2017). “Is it the way they use it? Teachers, ICT and student achievement.” Economics of Education Review, 56: 24-39.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Nitel araştırmacılar için 30 temel beceri (H. Özcan, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage publications.
  • Çetin, S. (2008). İlköğretim Okulu Yöneticilerinin Bilgisayar Teknolojisini Kullanma Yeterliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Dawes, L. (2001). What stops teachers using new technology. In M. Leask (Ed.), Issues in teaching using ICT (pp.61-79). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • Donnelly, D., McGarr, O., & O’Reilly, J. (2011). “A framework for teachers’ integration of ICT into their classroom practice.” Computers & Education, 57(2): 1469-1483.
  • Drossel, K., Eickelmann, B., & Gerick, J. (2017). “Predictors of teachers’ use of ICT in school–the relevance of school characteristics, teachers’ attitudes and teacher collaboration.” Education and Information Technologies, 22(2): 551-573.
  • Ersoy, E. (2010). Eğitim Yöneticilerinin E-Okul Sisteminin İşleyişine İlişkin Görüşleri ve Memnuniyet Düzeyleri (Esenyurt-Beylikdüzü İlçeleri Örneği). Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Yeditepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  • 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.
  • European Commission. (2013). Survey of Schools: ICT in Education. Benchmarking Access, Use and Attitudes to Technology in Europe’s Schools. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/KK-31-13-401-EN-N.pdf. Accessed September 2018.
  • Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J. J. (2017). “Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure.” Computers in Human Behavior, 68: 441-449.
  • Haddad, W.D. & Jurich, S. (2002). ICT for Education: Potential and Potency. In Haddad, W. & Drexler, A. (eds). Technologies for Education: Potentials, Parameters, and Prospects. (27-40). Washington DC: Academy for Educational Development and Paris: UNESCO.
  • Hays, D. G., & Singh, A. A. (2012). Qualitative inquiry in clinical and educational settings. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Häkkinen, P., & Hämäläinen, R. (2012). “Shared and personal learning spaces: Challenges for pedagogical design.” The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4): 231-236.
  • Köroğlu, A. (2014). Okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin ve öğretmen adaylarının bilişim teknolojileri özyeterlik algıları, teknolojik araç gereç kullanım tutumları ve bireysel yenilikçilik düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Kuş, E. (2007). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri. Ankara. Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Küçük, M., & Yalçın, Y. (2014). “Turkish Elementary School Teacher Candidates’ Technology Metaphors.” Turkish Journal of Teacher Education, 3(1): 53-63.
  • Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2015). Metaforlar Hayat Anlam ve Dil (G.Y. Demir, Çev.). İstanbul: İtihaki (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi 2003).
  • Livingstone, S. (2012) “Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education.” Oxford Review of Education, 38(1): 9-24.
  • Luu, K. (2009). An Analysis of the Relationship Between Information And Communication Technology (ICT) and Scientific Literacy in Canada and Australia. Dissertation of Master of Education. Faculty of Education, Queen’s University. Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
  • Mama, M., & Hennessy, S. (2013). “Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT.” Computers & Education, 68: 380-387.
  • Marton, F. (2005). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. In R. R.Sherman & R. B.Webb (Eds.), Qualitative research in education: Focus and methods, (pp.140-160). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
  • MEB. (2018a). FATİH Projesi Eğitim Teknolojileri Zirvesi 2018. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesietz.meb.gov.tr/
  • MEB. (2018b). Eğitimde FATİH Projesi. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/proje-hakkinda/
  • Midgley, W. & Trimmer, K. (2013). ‘Walking the labyrinth’: A metaphorical understanding of approaches to metaphors for, in and of education research. In W. Midgley, K. Trimmer, & A. Davies, (Eds.). Metaphors for, in and of Education Research (1-9). UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2017). Investigating young children’s engagement with computer use as a school activity computeruse as a school activity: a pilot study pilot study of computer use in school activity. In P. Anastasiades & N. Zaranis (Eds.), Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education (pp. 47-57). Springer, Cham.
  • OECD. (2001). Schooling for tomorrow learning to change: ICT in schools. Paris: Centre for Educatıonal Research and Innovation- Organisation for Economic Co-Operatıon and Development.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
  • Prestridge, S. (2012). “The beliefs behind the teacher that influences their ICT practices.” Computers & education, 58(1): 449-458.
  • Şahin, A. (2014). “The role of information and communication technologies in schools: perspectives of teachers.” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 3(2): 112-124.
  • Şişman Eren, E., & Şahin-İzmirli, Ö. (2012). “İlköğretim okul müdürü ve bilişim teknolojileri öğretmenlerine göre bilişim teknolojileri dersinde yaşanan sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri (Eskişehir ili örneği).” Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4): 2861-2888.
  • Tepebaşılı, F. (2013). Metafor Yazıları. Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
  • Tondeur, J., Roblin, N. P., Braak, J.v., Voogt,J. & Prestridge, S. (2017) “Preparing beginning teachers for technology integration in education: ready for take-off?”. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(2): 157-177.
  • Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Mäkitalo‐Siegl, K., & Sointu, E. (2018). “Differences in pre‐service teachers' knowledge and readiness to use ICT in education.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(2): 174-182.
  • Vanderlinde, R., Aesaert, K., & Van Braak, J. (2014). “Institutionalised ICT use in primary education: A multilevel analysis.” Computers & Education, 72: 1-10.
  • Webber, C.F. (2003). “New Technologies and Educative Leadership.” Journal of Educational Administration: 41(2): 119-123.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
  • Zhao, H., Coombs, S., & Zhou, X. (2010). “Developing professional knowledge about teachers through metaphor research: facilitating a process of change.” Teacher Development: 14(3), 381-395.
Toplam 44 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Ahmet Şahin 0000-0002-1254-393X

Yayımlanma Tarihi 26 Mart 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Sayı: 31

Kaynak Göster

APA Şahin, A. (2019). EĞİTİMDE BİLİŞİM TEKNOLOJİSİ KULLANIMINA İLİŞKİN ÖĞRETMEN GÖRÜŞLERİ: METAFOR ÇALIŞMASI. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(31), 121-159. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.492882

Cited By




Special Education Teachers And Technology: A Metaphor Analysis
Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.887466


Investigation of Prospective Teachers’ Use of Mobile Technologies in Teaching Activities
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE)
https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2022-10-2-121-132

Metaphorical Perceptions of Science and Art Center Teachers Distance Education Process
Turkish Academic Research Review - Türk Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi [TARR]
https://doi.org/10.30622/tarr.1103831