A Qualitative Focus on School Leaders' Perceptions of Roles, Responsibilities, and Expectations in Enhancing Equitable Access to Educational Technology In the Era of Gen-AI

Yıl 2024, , 208 - 227, 31.03.2024

Ali Duran , Uğur Ferhat Ermiş

https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.1440249

Öz

The purpose of this study is to provide a phenomenological perspective on school leaders' perceptions of their roles, responsibilities and expectations in increasing equal access to educational technology in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. This research was conducted through in-depth interviews with a phenomenological approach. The participants consisted of school leaders (school principals [n = 24] and vice principals [n = 18]) working at various educational levels. The qualitative data obtained were analysed by content analysis. Following the data collection process, themes were formed with main words or sentences as a result of descriptive processes. The data obtained through interviews were analysed in a three-stage process of sorting, coding and categorisation. According to the findings, school leaders perceive the responsibility of integrating productive AI technologies into their schools as strengthening the technological infrastructure and supporting R&D studies to ensure equal opportunities in education. In providing equal access to Productive AI educational technologies, the leaders stated that especially economic and socio-economic conditions should be improved and the importance of the correct and efficient use of these technologies. Recommendations for future research are presented.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Generative AI, equitable access to educational technology, school leadership, social justice, ChatGPT

Kaynakça

• Afshari, M., Bakar, K. A., Luan, W. S., Samah, B. A., and Fooi, F. S. (2008). School leadership and information communication technology. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 7(4), 82-91. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1102941.pdf
• Afshari, M., Bakar, K. A., Luan, W. S., Samah, B. A., and Fooi, F. S. (2009). Technology and school leadership. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(2), 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390902992527
• Alasadi, E. A., and Baiz, C. R. (2023). Generative AI in education and research: Opportunities, concerns, and solutions. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(8), 2965-2971. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00323
• Ashford, N. (2015). Özgür toplumun ilkeleri (C. Madenci, Çev.). Liberte.
• Asongu, S. A., Orim, S. M. I., and Nting, R. T. (2019). Inequality, information technology and inclusive education in sub-Saharan Africa. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 380-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.06.006
• Ayeni, O. O., Al Hamad, N. M., Chisom, O. N., Osawaru, B., and Adewusi, O. E. (2024). AI in education: A review of personalized learning and educational technology. GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(02), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.30574/gscarr.2024.18.2.0062
• Bahroun, Z., Anane, C., Ahmed, V., and Zacca, A. (2023). Transforming education: A comprehensive review of generative artificial intelligence in educational settings through bibliometric and content analysis. Sustainability, 15(17), 12983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712983
• Baidoo-Anu, D., and Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62. https://doi.org/10.61969/jai.1337500
• Balbaa, M. E., Abdurashidova, M., Khalikov, U., and Ismailova, N. (2023). Educational ethics in the digital age: addressing contemporary challenges. In S. M. Curle and M. T. Hebebci (Eds.) Proceedings of international conference on academic studies in technology and education 2023, (pp. 84-96). Antalya, Turkiye.
• Baydar, F. (2022). The Role of Educational Leaders in the Development of Students' Technology Use and Digital Citizenship. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 32-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.52380/mojet.2022.10.1.367
• Blanden, J., Doepke, M., and Stuhler, J. (2023). Educational inequality. In E. A. Hanushek, S. Machin, and L. Woessmann (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education (pp. 405-497). Netherlands: North-Holland publications.
• Braun, V., and Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. American Psychological Association.
• Bright, S., and Calvert, E. (2023). Educational technology: Barrier or bridge to equitable access to advanced learning opportunities?. Gifted Child Today, 46(3), 187-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168711
• Brockmeier, L. L., Sermon, J. M., and Hope, W. C. (2005). Principals' relationship with computer technology. NASSP Bulletin, 89(643), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263650508964305
• Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., and Liu, C. (2022). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education. Educational Technology and Society, 25(1), 28-47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48647028
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education
• Crompton, H., and Sykora, C. (2021). Developing instructional technology standards for educators: A design-based research study. Computers and Education Open, 2, 100044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100044
• Çevik, E., and Toplu, M. (2023). Dijital eşitsizliğin hibrit eğitimdeki yansımaları [The reflections of digital ınequality in hybrid education]. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 37(4), 267-292. https://doi.org/10.24146/tk.1356841
• Daresh, J. C. (2006). Technology and school leaders: overdue or overload?. Journal of Thought, 41(1), 27-39. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42589854
• Degar, K. S. (2023). Online professional development’s effect on teachers’ technology self-efficacy and continuance intention to use pear deck (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina).
• del Tufo, S., Randle, L., and Ryan, J. (2023). Inequality in a school system. In A. Ohri, B. Manning, and P. Curno (Eds.), Community work and racism (pp. 75-87). London: Routledge.
• Drisko, J., and Maschi, T. (2015). Basic content analysis. In J. Drisko and T. Maschi (Eds.), Content analysis (pp. 21–56). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Ergün, M. and Arık, B. M. (2020). Eğitim izleme raporu 2020: Öğrenciler ve eğitime erişim. Eğitim Reformu Girişimi [Education monitoring report 2020: Students and access to education. Education Reform Initiative]. https://www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/egitim-izleme-raporu-2020-ogrenciler-veegitime-erisim/
• Esplin, N. L., Stewart, C., and Thurston, T. N. (2018). Technology leadership perceptions of Utah elementary school principals. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50(4), 305-317. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2018.1487351
• Flanagan, L., and Jacobsen, M. (2003). Technology leadership for the twenty‐first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 124-142. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310464648
• Flynn, S. (2021). Education, digital natives, and inequality. Irish Journal of Sociology, 29(2), 248-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/079160352110048
• Fullan, M., Azorín, C., Harris, A., and Jones, M. (2023). Artificial intelligence and school leadership: challenges, opportunities and implications. School Leadership and Management, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2023.2246856
• Gamoran, A., and Long, D. A. (2007). Equality of educational opportunity a 40 year retrospective. In R. Teese, S. Lamb, and M. Duru-Bellat (Eds.), International studies in educational inequality, theory and policy (pp. 23-47). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
• Garbin Praničević, D., Spremić, M., and Jaković, B. (2019). Technology and educational leadership: The role of leaders vs. national education policies. In Á.H., Ingþórsson, N. Alfirević, J., Pavičić, and D. Vican, (Eds.), Educational leadership in policy (pp. 97-116). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99677-6_7
• Gocen, A., and Aydemir, F. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education and schools. Research on Education and Media, 12(1), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.2478/rem-2020-0003
• Groth, S., and Southgate, E. (2024). A policy document analysis of student digital rights in the Australian schooling context. The Australian Educational Researcher, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-023-00683-z
• Hasa, K. (2023). Examining the OECD’s perspective on AI in education policy: a critical analysis of language and structure in the ‘AI and the future of skills’(AIFS) document and its implications for the higher education (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia).
• Hendricks, P., Wahl, L., Stull, J., and Duffield, J. (2003). From policy to practice: Achieving equitable access to educational technology. Information Technology and Disabilities, 9(1).
• Hines, C., Edmonson, S., and Moore, G. W. (2008). The impact of technology on high school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 92(4), 276-291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636508328593
• Işık, M. and Bahat, İ. (2021). Teknoloji bağlamında eğitimde fırsat eşitsizliği: Eğitime erişime yönelik sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri [Inequality of opportunity in education and problems and solutions regarding access to education in the context of technology]. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(2), 498-517. https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.908232
• Jacob, B., Berger, D., Hart, C., and Loeb, S. (2016). Can technology help promote equality of educational opportunities?. The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 2(5), 242-271. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2016.2.5.12
• Jiang, M. (2023). The impact and potential of educational technology: A comprehensive review. Research and Advances in Education, 2(7), 32-49. https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2023.07.05
• Kayyali, M. (2024). Future possibilities and challenges of AI in education. In R. C. Sharma and A. Bozkurt (Eds.), Transforming education with generative AI: Prompt engineering and synthetic content creation (pp. 118-137). The USA: IGI Global.
• Keskin, T., and Vermeulen, F. (2024). Overcoming the digital divide in the era of artificial intelligence. Proceedings of the 57th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1471-1475). The USA: Hawaii. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/106562
• Kondakci, Y., Zayim Kurtay, M., and Kaya Kasikci, S. (2021). School leadership for social justice in Turkish urban setting. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20(1), 95-110.
• Krippendorff, K. (2003). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage.
• Kuş, Z., Mert, H., and Boyraz, F. (2021). Covid-19 salgını süresince eğitimde fırsat eşit(siz)liği: Kırsal kesimdeki öğretmen ve ebeveyn görüşleri [Equality of opportunity durıng the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic: Teachers' and parents' views in the rural section]. Education Technology Theory and Practice, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.913684
• Langdridge, D. (2017). Phenomenology. In B. Gough (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of critical social psychology (pp. 165–183). Basingstoke: Palgrave.
• Laouni, N. E. (2023). An investigation into the relationship between principals’ leadership styles and level of technology integration in Moroccan public schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(3), 468-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1799436
• Leithwood, K. (2021). A review of evidence about equitable school leadership. Education Sciences, 11(8), 377. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080377
• Leithwood, K., Sun, J., and Schumacker, R. (2020). How school leadership influences student learning: A test of “The four paths model”. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(4), 570-599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19878772
• Leong, M. W., Kannan, S., and Maulo, S. B. A. (2016). Principal technology leadership practices and teacher acceptance of School Management System (SMS). Educational Leader (Pemimpin Pendidikan), 4, 89-103.
• Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Mercik, V. (2015). Eğitimde fırsat eşitliği, toplumsal genel başarı ve adalet ilişkisi: PİSA projesi kapsamında Finlandiya ve Türkiye deneyimlerinin karşılaştırılması (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Balıkesir Üniversitesi.
• Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., and Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Nastasi, B. K., and Schensul, S. L. (2005). Contributions of qualitative research to the validity of intervention research. Journal of School Psychology, 43(3), 177-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2005.04.003
• Nemorin, S., Vlachidis, A., Ayerakwa, H. M., and Andriotis, P. (2023). AI hyped? A horizon scan of discourse on artificial intelligence in education (AIED) and development. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 38-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2095568
• Pasternak, D. L., Harris, S. D., Lewis, C., Wolk, M. A., Wu, X., and Evans, L. M. (2023). Engaging culturally responsive practice: Implications for continued learning and teacher empowerment. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103976
• Panigrahi, C. M. A. (2020). Use of artificial intelligence in education. Management Accountant, 55, 64-67. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3606936
• Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. S. Valle and S. Halling (Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology: Exploring the breadth of human experience (pp. 41–60). New York, NY: Plenum Press
• Punch, K. F. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. Sage.
• Ratten, V., and Jones, P. (2023). Generative artificial intelligence (ChatGPT): Implications for management educators. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(3), 100857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100857
• Richardson, J. W., Flora, K., and Bathon, J. (2013). Fostering a school technology vision in school leader. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 8(1), 144-160. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1012953.pdf
• Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., McNaughton, N. C., and Ormston, R. (2014). Chapter 11–analysis in practice. Qualitative research practice. Sage.
• Sahlberg, P., and Cobbold, T. (2021). Leadership for equity and adequacy in education. School Leadership and Management, 41(4-5), 447-469. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2021.1926963
• Schofield, J. W., and Davidson, A. L. (1998). The internet and equality of educational opportunity. National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.; Department of Commerce, Washington, DC.
• Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers college press.
• Shaked, H., and Schechter, C. (2017). School principals as mediating agents in education reforms. School Leadership and Management, 37(1-2), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2016.1209182
• Tawfik, A. A., Reeves, T. D., and Stich, A. (2016). Intended and unintended consequences of educational technology on social inequality. TechTrends, 60, 598-605.
• Tubin, D., and Edri, S. (2004). Teachers planning and implementing ICT-based practices. Planning and Changing, 3(4), 181– 191.
• Wellington, J. (2000). Educational research: Contemporary issues and practical approaches. London: Continuum.
• Wiyono, B. B., Komariah, A., Alghamdi, A. A., and Fahlevi, M. (2023). The influence of principals’e-leadership on the effectiveness of schools’ public relations and organizational improvement. Sustainability, 15(2), 1296. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021296
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Yayınları.
• Yilmaz-Ince, E., Kabul, N., and Kabul, A. (2022). Inequality of opportunity in distance education during the pandemic process. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 21(1), 68-79. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1337797.pdf
• Yin, R. K. (2016). Qualitative research from start to finish (2nd ed.). London: The Guilford Press
• Yu, C., and Durrington, V. A. (2006). Technology standards for school administrators: An analysis of practicing and aspiring administrators' perceived ability to perform the standards. NASSP Bulletin, 90(4), 301-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636506295392