Öğretmen Adayları için Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri Yeterlikleri Ölçeğinin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması

Abstract

Bu çalışmada Tondeur, Aesaert, Pynoo, Braak, Fraeyman ve Erstad (2017) tarafından geliştirilmiş olan Öğretmen Adayları için BİT Yeterlikleri Ölçeğinin Türk dili ve kültürüne uyarlanması amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma 2017-2018 Öğretim yılı Güz döneminde Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi’nde öğrenim görmekte olan 206 öğretmen adayı üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Çeviri işleminin ardından elde edilen veriler üzerinde doğrulayıcı faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda, ölçeğin iki faktörlü özgün formunun doğrulandığı görülmüştür. Yakınsak, ayırt edici ve eş zamanlı geçerliği sınamak için uyarlanan formdan elde edilen veriler ile Genel BİT Eğilimi, Gerçeklik Şoku Beklentisi ve Öğretmen Adaylarının Eğitimde Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojilerini Kullanmaya İlişkin Yeterlilik Algıları ölçeklerinden elde edilen puanlar arasındaki korelasyon incelenmiş ve uyarlanan ölçeğin ilgili geçerlik türlerine sahip olduğu belirlenmiştir. Güvenirlik analizi için hesaplanan Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısı, ölçek boyutlarından elde edilen verilerin güvenilir olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Araştırmanın sonucu olarak, Öğretmen Adayları için Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri Yeterlikleri Ölçeğinin Türkçe formuna ait psikometrik özelliklerin iyi düzeyde olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

• Öğretmen adayları için bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri yeterlilikleri ölçeği,Öğretmen yetiştirme,Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi

Adaptation of Preservice Teachers’ Information and Communication Technology Competencies Scale into Turkish Culture

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to adapt Preservice Teachers’ ICT Competencies Scale which was developed by Tondeur, Aesaert, Pynoo, Braak, Fraeyman, and Erstad (2017) into Turkish. The participants were composed of 206 preservice teachers studying at Gaziosmanpaşa University during 2017-2018 academic year. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed after the translation process of the scale. The results showed that the Turkish version fits the original two factor structure. The correlation coefficients between the data obtained from the Turkish version and the data obtained from General ICT Tendency, Reality Shock Expectation, and Prospective Teachers’ Perceived Competencies about Integrating ICT into Education were examined to test convergent, divergent and concurrent validity. The results indicated that the data obtained from the Turkish version of the scale were valid. Moreover, the Cronbach alpha coefficients indicated that the data were internally consistent. In conclusion, the Turkish version of Preservice Teachers’ ICT Competencies Scale was determined to have good psychometric properties to be used in Turkish context.

Keywords

• Preservice teachers’ information and communication technologies competencies scale,Teacher education,Confirmatory factor analysis

References

1. Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.
2. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley Publications.
3. Borsa, J. C., Damásio, B. F., & Bandeira, D. R. (2012). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of psychological instruments: Some considerations. Paidéia, 22(53), 423-432. doi:10.1590/1982-43272253201314
4. Brenner, A., & Brill, J. (2016). Investigating practices in teacher education that promote and inhibit technology integration transfer in early career teachers. TechTrends, 60(2), 136-144. doi:10.1007/s11528-016-0025-8
5. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
6. Chan, F.-M. (2002). ICT in Malaysian schools: Policy and strategies. Workshop on the Promotion of ICT in Education to Narrow the Digital Divide, (s. 15-22). Tokyo, Japan.
7. Dilalla, L. F. (2000). Structural equation modeling: Uses and issues. In H. E. Tinsley, & S. D. Brown, Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 440-456). San Diego: Academic Press.
8. European Institute for E-Learning. (2017). The e-learning competency framework for teachers and trainers. Retrieved from http://www.eife-l.org/competencies/ttframework

9. Flora, D., LaBrish, C., & Chalmers, P. (2012). Old and new ideas for data screening and assumption testing for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1-21. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00055
10. Fu, J. S. (2013). ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 9(1), 112-125.
11. Gjersing, L., Caplehorn, J., & Clausen, T. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: Language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(13). doi:10.1186/1471-2288-10-13
12. Godinho, T. (2015). Portugal: Country report on ICT in education. Brussels: European Schoolnet.
13. Günbatar, M. S. (2014). The study on development of information and communication technology attitude scale. Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 15(1), 121-135.
14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
15. Hew, T. S., & Leong, L. Y. (2011). An empirical analysis of Malaysian pre-university students' ICT competency gender differences. International Journal of Network and Mobile Technologies, 2(1), 15-29.
16. ISTE. (2014). ISTE standards teachers. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-14_ISTE_Standards-T_PDF.pdf
17. Kim, H., & Cho, Y. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ motivation, sense of teaching efficacy, and expectation of reality shock. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 42(1), 67-81.
18. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications.
19. Laake, P., Olsen, B. R., & Benestad, H. B. (2007). Research methodology in the medical and biological sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press.
20. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149.
21. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519-530.
22. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-341.
23. MEB. (2006). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri [General competencies of teaching profession]. Ankara: Ministry of National Education.
24. MEB. (2017). About FATIH project. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/proje-hakkinda/
25. Morin, A., Scalas, F., Vispoel, W., Marsh, H., & Wen, Z. (2016). The music self-perception inventory: Development of a short form. Psychology of Music, 44(5), 915-934. doi:10.1177/0305735615592690
26. Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers' use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(3), 319-342. doi:10.1080/14759390000200096
27. Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). MPlus user's guide. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
28. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
29. Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
30. Özdemir, M., & Büyükgöze, H. (2016). The adaptation of reality shock expectation scale and a study on prospective teachers. Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 17(2), 243-257.
31. Shen, S., Schüttemeyer, A., & Braun, B. (2009). Visitors' intention to visit world cultural heritage sites: An empirical study of Suzhou, China. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 26(7), 722-734. doi:10.1080/10548400903284610
32. Şad, S. N., & Nalçacı, Ö. İ. (2015). Prospective teachers’ perceived competencies about integrating information and communication technologies into education. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 11(1), 177-197.
33. Şimşek, Ö., & Yazar, T. (2016). Education Technology Standards Self-Efficacy (ETSSE) Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 311-334.
34. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
35. Tasir, Z., Abour, K. M., Halim, N. D., & Harun, J. (2012). Relationship between teachers' ICT competency, confidence level, and satisfaction toward ICT training programmes: A case study among postgraduate students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 138-144.
36. Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Pynoo, B., Braak, J. v., Fraeyman, N., & Erstad, O. (2017). Developing a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers’ ICT competencies: Meeting the demands of the 21st century. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 462–472. doi:10.1111/bjet.12380
37. UNESCO. (2008). ICT competency standards for teachers. United Kingdom: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156210E.pdf
38. Van Widenfelt, B. G., Treffers, P. D. A., de Beurs, E., Siebelink, B. M., & Koudijs, E. (2005). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of assessment instruments used in psychological research with children and families. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8(2), 135-147. Doi: 10.1007/s10567-005-4752-1
39. Virginia Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel. (1998). Retrieved from http://www.educate.vt.edu/teeps/vastandards.htm