Covid-19 Pandemi Sürecinde Bir Değerlendirme Aracı Olarak Sanal Öğrenme Ortamları

Abstract

Pandemiyle birlikte artan uzaktan eğitim uygulamalarında, ölçme ve değerlendirmenin nasıl yapılacağı tartışılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, yükseköğretimde, sanal öğrenme ortamlarının bir değerlendirme aracı olarak kullanılması incelenmiştir. Ortam olarak UKEY (Uludağ Üniversitesi Kurum, Eğitim ve Araştırma Faaliyetleri Yönetişim Sistemi) sanal öğrenme platformu seçilmiştir. Pandeminin etkili olduğu 2019-2020 öğretim yılı döneminde UKEY platformu kullanan 46 akademisyene çevrim içi açık uçlu sorular sorulmuştur. Açık uçlu soruların hazırlanmasında Teknoloji Kabul ve Kullanım Birleştirilmiş Modeli-2’den (UTAUT-2) yararlanılmıştır. Araştırma durum çalışmasıyla desenlenmiş, toplanan veriler betimsel analize tabi tutulmuştur. Katılımcı teyidi metodundan yararlanılmış, temaların nasıl yorumlandığı, beş katılımcı ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yapılarak gözden geçirilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonucuna göre, katılımcıların UKEY platformunu kullanmaya yönelik davranışsal niyetleri farklılaşmaktadır. Platformun, performans beklentisini kısmen karşıladığı fakat fazla çaba gerektirdiği, kolaylaştırıcı koşulların kullanıcıları olumlu etkilediği, sosyal etki bağlamında öğrenci davranışlarının akademisyenleri önemli ölçüde etkilediği, UKEY’in henüz bir alışkanlık hâline gelmediği ve söz konusu değişkenlerin kullanım niyetini önemli ölçüde etkilediği sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçları; internetteki anonimlik, teknolojinin entegrasyonunda pedagojik bakış açısı ve eğitimde gerekli olan paradigma değişikliği ihtiyacı kavramları çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

• Teknoloji Entegrasyonu
• Öğretim Teknolojileri
• Çevrim İçi Değerlendirme
• Yüksek Öğretim

Virtual Learning Environments as an Assessment Tool in Covid-19 Pandemic

Abstract

Increasingly, the methods of measurement and evaluation in distance education applications have been discussed in light of the pandemic. In this study, the use of virtual learning environments in higher education as an assessment tool has been examined. The chosen platform for this purpose was the UKEY (Uludağ University Institutional, Educational, and Research Activities Governance System) virtual learning platform. During the 2019-2020 academic year, when the pandemic had a significant impact, online open-ended questions were posed to 46 academics who used the UKEY platform. The preparation of open-ended questions was based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology-2 (UTAUT-2). Research was designed as a case study, and the collected data was subjected to descriptive analysis. Member checking method was utilized, and how the themes were interpreted was reviewed through semi-structured interviews with five participants. According to the results of the study, the behavioral intentions of the participants towards using the UKEY platform varied. It was found that the platform partially met performance expectations but required considerable effort. Facilitating conditions had a positive impact on users, and in the context of social influence, student behaviors significantly affected the academics. UKEY had not yet become a habit, and these variables were found to have a significant impact on usage intention. The results of the study were discussed within the framework of concepts such as online anonymity, the integration of technology with a pedagogical perspective, and the need for a paradigm change in education.

Keywords

• Integration of Technology
• Instructional Technologies
• Online Assessment
• Higher Education

References

1. Alyaz, Y., Baltacı Göktalay, Ş., & Gürsoy, E. (2014). Evaluating the usability of UKEY Learning Managemet System and student teachers’ opininions. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 3(3), 119-134.
2. Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04269517
3. Arı, A., Eren, E., Çam, Ş. S., Akifova, G. G., & Tahirova, G. S. (2014). Development of e-assessment materials for fifth grade middle school classes. Usak University Journal of Social Sciences, 7(1). 179-203.
4. Mbunge, E., Jiyane, S. E., & Muchemwa, B. (2021). Towards emotive sensory web in virtual health care: Trends, technologies, challenges and ethical issues. Sensors International, 3, 100134-100134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sintl.2021.100134
5. Cabı, E. (2016). The perception of students on e-assessment in distance education. Journal of Higher Education & Science, 6(1), 094–101. DOI: 10.5961/jhes.2016.146
6. Christopherson, K. M. (2007). The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: “On the Internet, Nobody Knows You’re a Dog”. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(6), 3038–3056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.09.001
7. Ekşi, F., & Ümmet, D. (2013). Internet addiction as a problem of interpersonal communication and cyber bullying: Evaluation in terms of psychological consultation. Journal of Values Education. 11(25), 91–115.
8. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. Newyork: McGraw-Hill.

9. Garg, M., & Goel, A. (2022). A systematic literature review on online assessment security: Current challenges and integrity strategies. Computers & Security, 113, 102544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102544
10. Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers and Education, 57(4), 2333–2351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.004
11. Güzeller, C., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2007). Evaluation of course software in computer based instruction. Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(1), 155–168.
12. İkiz, E., Asıcı, E., Savcı, M., & Yörük, C. (2015). Relation between problematic internet usage and adaption to collage life. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education. (1), 34-50. Doi: 10.14686/BUEFAD.2015111013
13. İnci, B. (2014). Consumer perceptions and buying behaviors towards “private shopping site” business model as an online retailing method, [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation], Marmara University. Istanbul
14. Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2020). The systemic change process in education: A conceptual framework. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(2), 97-117. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/5968
15. Kaysi, F. (2020). Covid-19 outbreak process in turkey performed evaluation of distance education. Online submision presented at the 5th International Scientific Research Congress. Online
16. Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2003). Faculty and technology: Implications for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 23-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9126-2
17. Kim, K. K., Lee, A. R., & Lee, U. K. (2019). Impact of anonymity on roles of personal and group identities in online communities. Information and Management, 56(1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.07.005
18. Koç, M., & Ateş Çobanoğlu, A. (2020). Scale development for perceived interactional value of blended learning platforms. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 10(1), 51–73.
19. Lin, C., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2019). Scaffolding learner autonomy in a wiki‐supported knowledge building community and its implications for mindset change. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2667–2684. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12713
20. Mehdiabadi, A. H., & Huang, W. D. (2018). Handbook on measurement, assessment, and evaluation in higher education. In Secolsky, C., & Denison, D. B. (Eds.) (2017). Handbook on measurement, assessment, and evaluation in higher education. Routledge. Oxon
21. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing effective instruction. John Wiley & Sons Özüçelik, E. (2019). Use of distance education systems; the case of Uludağ University [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Bursa Uludağ University.
22. Román, P. E., Torres, E. O., Hernández, R. A. L., & Martínez, C. R. V. (2020). Virtual environment e-evaluation as a management tool in numerous groups. Vivat Academia, 23(151), 107–124. http://doi.org/10.15178/va.2020.151.107-125
23. Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., & Schellens, T. (2018). Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(1), 75–99. DOI 10.1007/s10212-017-0339-8
24. Salloum, S. A., & Shaalan, K. (2019). Factors affecting students’ acceptance of e-learning system in higher education using UTAUT and structural equation modeling approaches. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 845, 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99010-1_43
25. Saunders, B., Kitzinger, J., & Kitzinger, C. (2015). Participant anonymity in the internet age: From theory to practice. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.948697
26. St‐Onge, C., Ouellet, K., Lakhal, S., Dubé, T., & Marceau, M. (2022). COVID‐19 as the tipping point for integrating e‐assessment in higher education practices. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(2), 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13169
27. Taşkın, N., & Kılıç Çakmak, E. (2017). The use of gamificaiton in student centered learning environments as alternative assessment. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(3), 1227–1248. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.333286
28. Tosun, N., Geçer, A., & Kaşıkçı, D. N. (2016). Examining the relationship between pre-service teachers' perceptions of internet ethics and locus of control. Journal of Open Education Applications and Research, 2(4), 82–103.
29. Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Cubukcu, Z., & Beauchamp, G. (2020). Transition from blackboard to interactive whiteboard: examining teachers' interactive whiteboard acceptance and use. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 19(76), 1720–1740. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.725694
30. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L. & Xu, X. (2016). Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: A synthesis and the road ahead. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(5), 328–376. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00428
31. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Sage Publications.