Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Preservice ICT Teachers’ Perceptions about Educational Mobile Apps

Year 2018, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 14 - 26, 29.03.2018

Abstract

The
purpose of this study was to describe preservice teachers’ perceptions about
educational mobile applications based on The Technology Acceptance Model
qualitatively in terms of their experience and understanding of mobile
applications in the learning-teaching process. This study was designed with the
phenomology approach from qualitative research methods. Participants of the
study consisted of 26 computer and instructional technology pre service
teachers who took the course of Project Development and Management I in
2016-2017 academic year. In the study, the mobile applications used by the
preservice teachers were selected by reviewing the related literature from the
most common and popular applications which have educational potential for
instructors. In the study, semi-structured interview forms were used to
determine the perceptions of preservice teachers regarding educational mobile
applications. Qualitative data obtained from the semi-structured interview form
were analyzed by content analysis. Pre-service teachers think that mobile
applications are useful at different stages of the course for many purposes
with the components of these applications. In addition, interface design of
mobile applications can affect ease of use that preservice teachers perceive.
Preservice teachers participating in this study noted that their attitudes
towards mobile applications usage were positive because of the advantages
offered by these applications and they would use mobile applications in
teaching professions. However, some preservice teachers were concerned about
mobile application use in teaching and learning for that reason students
perceived mobile devices as gaming devices and infrastructure or internet
access problems.

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
  • Anderson, J., Franklin, T., Yinger, N., Sun, Y., & Geist, E. (2013). Going mobile: Lessons learned from introducing tablet PCs into the business classroom. The Clute Institute International Academic Conference. Las Vegas: ABD.
  • Baran, E. (2014). A Review of Research on Mobile Learning in Teacher Education. Educational Technology & Society, 17 (4), 17–32.
  • Baran, E., & Khan, S. (2014). Going mobile—Science teacher candidates evaluating mobile apps. In C. Miller & A. Doering (Eds.), The new landscape of mobile learning: Redesigning education in an app-based world (pp. 258–275). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Baran, E., Uygun, E., & Altan, T. (2017). Examining Preservice Teachers’ Criteria for Evaluating Educational Mobile Apps. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(8), 1117-1141.
  • Burton, E., Frazier, W., Annetta, L., Lamb, R., Cheng, R., & Chmiel, M. (2011). Modeling augmented reality games with preservice elementary and secondary science teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(3), 303–329.
  • Büyüköztürk, S., Kiliç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel Arastirma Yöntemleri (18. Baski). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayimcilik.
  • Cavus, N., & Uzunboylu, H. (2009). Improving critical thinking skills in mobile learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(2009), 434–438.
  • Chen, G. D., Chang, C. K., & Wang, C. Y. (2008). Ubiquitous learning website: Scaffold learners by mobile devices with information-aware techniques. Computers & Education, 50(1), 77-90.
  • Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in qualitative research revisited, Qualitative Research, 6(3), 319-340.
  • Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: an investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 82-96.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications.
  • Cushing, A. (2011). A case study of mobile learning in teacher training—Mentor me(mobile enhanced mentoring). MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 19, 1-14.
  • Dahlstrom, E., Walker, J. D., & Dziuban, C. (2012). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology. Louisville, Co. EDUCAUSE Center for applied research.
  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982-1003.
  • Demir, K., & Akpınar, E. (2016). Mobil öğrenmeye yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 6(1).
  • Ekanayake, S. Y., & Wishart, J. (2014). Integrating mobile phones into teaching and learning: A case study of teacher training through professional development workshops. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12131
  • Fetaji, B., & Fetaji, M. (2009). Software engineering mobile learning software solution using task based learning approach. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 54, 400-404.
  • Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: Introduction to theory and research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
  • Green, L. S., Hechter, R. P., Tysinger, P. D., & Chassereau, K. D. (2014). Mobile app selection for 5th through 12th grade science: The development of the MASS rubric. Computers & Education, 75, 65-71.
  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
  • Kearney, M., & Maher, D. (2013). Mobile learning in math teacher education: Using iPads to support pre-service teachers’ professional development. Australian Educational Computing, 27(3), 76–84.
  • Kıcı, D. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin mobil öğrenmenin üniversite eğitimindeki etkisi konusundaki beklentileri üzerine bir araştırma. In International Conference On New Trends in Education and Their Implications, Antalya, Turkey.
  • Kose, U., Koc, D., & Yucesoy, S. A. (2013). An augmented reality based mobile software to support learning experiences in computer science courses. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 370-374.
  • Lan, Y.-F. & Sie, Y.-S. (2010). Using rss to support mobile learning based on media richness theory. Computers & Education 55, 723-732.
  • Liaw, S-S., & Huang, H-M. (2011). Exploring learners’ acceptance toward mobile learning. In Timothy Teo (Eds.), Technology Acceptance in Education Research and Issues. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  • Lin, C.C.(2014). Learning English reading in a mobile-assisted extensive reading program. Computers & Education, 78, 48-59.
  • Ma, W.W., Anderson, R., & Streıth, K. O. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: an empirical study of student teachers, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 387-395.
  • Madeira, R. N., Pires, V. F., Dias, O. P., & Martins, J. F. (2010). Development of a mobile learning framework for an analog electronics course. In Education Engineering (EDUCON), 2010 IEEE(pp. 561-567). IEEE.
  • Martin, F., & Ertzberger, J. (2013). Here and now mobile learning: An experimental study on the use of mobile technology. Computers & Education, 68, 76-85.
  • Menzi, N., Önal, N., & Çalışkan, E. (2012). Mobil teknolojilerin eğitim amaçlı kullanımına yönelik akademisyen görüşlerinin teknoloji kabul modeli çerçevesinde incelenmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 13(1).
  • O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., Glew, J., Taylor, J., Sharples, M. ve Lefrere, P. (2003) Guidelines for learning/teaching/tutoring in a mobile environment. Mobilearn Project deliverable. 28 Eylül 2017 tarihinde http://www.mobilearn.org/download/results/guidelines.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Ozan, O. (2013) Bağlantıcı mobil öğrenme ortamlarında yönlendirici destek. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
  • Park, S.Y., Nam, M.-W. ve Cha, S.-B. (2012). University students' behavioral intention to use mobile learning: evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Education Technology, 43, 4, 592–605.
  • Patton, M.Q. (1997). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury park, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Qiu, L., & Li, D. (2008). Applying TAM in B2C E-commerce research: An extended model. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 13(3), 265-272.
  • Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: research, practice and challenges. Distance Education in China, 3(5), 5-11.
  • Song, Y. (2014). Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50-60.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17, 273-85.
  • Sung, E. & Mayer, R. E. (2013). Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: An experimental test of Clark’s methods-not-media hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 639-647.
  • Torun, F., & Dargut, T. (2015). Mobil öğrenme ortamlarında ters yüz sınıf modelinin gerçekleştirilebilirliği üzerine bir öneri. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 20-29.
  • Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2017). Understanding students’ learning practices: challenges for design and integration of mobile technology into distance education. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(3), 357-377.
  • Yıldırım A. ve Şimşek H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayınları.
  • Yokuş, G.(2016). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin mobil öğrenmeye ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi ve eğitim bilimleri alanına yönelik mobil uygulama geliştirme çalışması: mobil akademi. Mersin Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek lisans Tezi).

Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Öğretmen Adaylarının Eğitsel Mobil Uygulamalara Yönelik Algıları

Year 2018, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 14 - 26, 29.03.2018

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğretmen
adaylarının eğitsel mobil uygulamaların öğrenme-öğretme sürecinde kullanımına
yönelik algılarının Teknoloji Kabul Modeli temelinde detaylı olarak
belirlenmesidir. Bu araştırma nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden olgubilim (phenomology)
yaklaşımı ile desenlenmiştir. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını 2016-2017
eğitim-öğretim yılında proje geliştirme ve yönetimi I dersini alan 26
bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri öğretmen adayından oluşmaktadır.
Araştırmada öğretmen adaylarının kullanmış oldukları mobil uygulamalar
bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri öğretmenlerinin kullanması muhtemel ve en
yaygın olan uygulamalardan ilgili literatür incelenerek seçilmiştir. Çalışmada
öğretmen adaylarının eğitsel mobil uygulamalar ile ilgili olan algılarını
belirlemek için yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formları kullanılmıştır. Yarı
yapılandırılmış görüşme formundan elde edilen nitel veriler, içerik analizine
tabi tutulmuştur. Öğretmen adayları mobil uygulamaları dersin farklı
aşamalarında, mobil uygulamaların bileşenlerine göre birçok amaç için
kullanmanın faydalı olduğunu düşünmektedirler. Mobil uygulamaların özellikle
ara yüz tasarımı öğretmen adaylarının algılamış olduğu kullanım kolaylığını
etkilemektedir. Araştırmaya katılan öğretmen adayları mobil uygulamaların
sunmuş oldukları avantajları nedeniyle kullanıma ilişkin tutumlarının olumlu
olduğunu ve öğretmenlik mesleklerinde bu uygulamaları kullanacaklarını
belirtmişlerdir. Ancak bazı öğretmen adayları ise öğrencilerin mobil cihazları
oyun aracı olarak görmesi ve altyapı veya internet erişim sorunları nedeniyle
eğitsel mobil uygulamaları kullanmaya yönelik kaygıları vardır. 





References

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
  • Anderson, J., Franklin, T., Yinger, N., Sun, Y., & Geist, E. (2013). Going mobile: Lessons learned from introducing tablet PCs into the business classroom. The Clute Institute International Academic Conference. Las Vegas: ABD.
  • Baran, E. (2014). A Review of Research on Mobile Learning in Teacher Education. Educational Technology & Society, 17 (4), 17–32.
  • Baran, E., & Khan, S. (2014). Going mobile—Science teacher candidates evaluating mobile apps. In C. Miller & A. Doering (Eds.), The new landscape of mobile learning: Redesigning education in an app-based world (pp. 258–275). New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Baran, E., Uygun, E., & Altan, T. (2017). Examining Preservice Teachers’ Criteria for Evaluating Educational Mobile Apps. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(8), 1117-1141.
  • Burton, E., Frazier, W., Annetta, L., Lamb, R., Cheng, R., & Chmiel, M. (2011). Modeling augmented reality games with preservice elementary and secondary science teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(3), 303–329.
  • Büyüköztürk, S., Kiliç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel Arastirma Yöntemleri (18. Baski). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayimcilik.
  • Cavus, N., & Uzunboylu, H. (2009). Improving critical thinking skills in mobile learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(2009), 434–438.
  • Chen, G. D., Chang, C. K., & Wang, C. Y. (2008). Ubiquitous learning website: Scaffold learners by mobile devices with information-aware techniques. Computers & Education, 50(1), 77-90.
  • Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in qualitative research revisited, Qualitative Research, 6(3), 319-340.
  • Ciampa, K. (2013). Learning in a mobile age: an investigation of student motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 82-96.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications.
  • Cushing, A. (2011). A case study of mobile learning in teacher training—Mentor me(mobile enhanced mentoring). MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung, 19, 1-14.
  • Dahlstrom, E., Walker, J. D., & Dziuban, C. (2012). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology. Louisville, Co. EDUCAUSE Center for applied research.
  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35(8), 982-1003.
  • Demir, K., & Akpınar, E. (2016). Mobil öğrenmeye yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 6(1).
  • Ekanayake, S. Y., & Wishart, J. (2014). Integrating mobile phones into teaching and learning: A case study of teacher training through professional development workshops. British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12131
  • Fetaji, B., & Fetaji, M. (2009). Software engineering mobile learning software solution using task based learning approach. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 54, 400-404.
  • Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: Introduction to theory and research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
  • Green, L. S., Hechter, R. P., Tysinger, P. D., & Chassereau, K. D. (2014). Mobile app selection for 5th through 12th grade science: The development of the MASS rubric. Computers & Education, 75, 65-71.
  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
  • Kearney, M., & Maher, D. (2013). Mobile learning in math teacher education: Using iPads to support pre-service teachers’ professional development. Australian Educational Computing, 27(3), 76–84.
  • Kıcı, D. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin mobil öğrenmenin üniversite eğitimindeki etkisi konusundaki beklentileri üzerine bir araştırma. In International Conference On New Trends in Education and Their Implications, Antalya, Turkey.
  • Kose, U., Koc, D., & Yucesoy, S. A. (2013). An augmented reality based mobile software to support learning experiences in computer science courses. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 370-374.
  • Lan, Y.-F. & Sie, Y.-S. (2010). Using rss to support mobile learning based on media richness theory. Computers & Education 55, 723-732.
  • Liaw, S-S., & Huang, H-M. (2011). Exploring learners’ acceptance toward mobile learning. In Timothy Teo (Eds.), Technology Acceptance in Education Research and Issues. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
  • Lin, C.C.(2014). Learning English reading in a mobile-assisted extensive reading program. Computers & Education, 78, 48-59.
  • Ma, W.W., Anderson, R., & Streıth, K. O. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: an empirical study of student teachers, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 387-395.
  • Madeira, R. N., Pires, V. F., Dias, O. P., & Martins, J. F. (2010). Development of a mobile learning framework for an analog electronics course. In Education Engineering (EDUCON), 2010 IEEE(pp. 561-567). IEEE.
  • Martin, F., & Ertzberger, J. (2013). Here and now mobile learning: An experimental study on the use of mobile technology. Computers & Education, 68, 76-85.
  • Menzi, N., Önal, N., & Çalışkan, E. (2012). Mobil teknolojilerin eğitim amaçlı kullanımına yönelik akademisyen görüşlerinin teknoloji kabul modeli çerçevesinde incelenmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 13(1).
  • O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., Glew, J., Taylor, J., Sharples, M. ve Lefrere, P. (2003) Guidelines for learning/teaching/tutoring in a mobile environment. Mobilearn Project deliverable. 28 Eylül 2017 tarihinde http://www.mobilearn.org/download/results/guidelines.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Ozan, O. (2013) Bağlantıcı mobil öğrenme ortamlarında yönlendirici destek. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
  • Park, S.Y., Nam, M.-W. ve Cha, S.-B. (2012). University students' behavioral intention to use mobile learning: evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Education Technology, 43, 4, 592–605.
  • Patton, M.Q. (1997). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury park, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Qiu, L., & Li, D. (2008). Applying TAM in B2C E-commerce research: An extended model. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 13(3), 265-272.
  • Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: research, practice and challenges. Distance Education in China, 3(5), 5-11.
  • Song, Y. (2014). Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50-60.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17, 273-85.
  • Sung, E. & Mayer, R. E. (2013). Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: An experimental test of Clark’s methods-not-media hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 639-647.
  • Torun, F., & Dargut, T. (2015). Mobil öğrenme ortamlarında ters yüz sınıf modelinin gerçekleştirilebilirliği üzerine bir öneri. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 20-29.
  • Viberg, O., & Grönlund, Å. (2017). Understanding students’ learning practices: challenges for design and integration of mobile technology into distance education. Learning, Media and Technology, 42(3), 357-377.
  • Yıldırım A. ve Şimşek H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayınları.
  • Yokuş, G.(2016). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin mobil öğrenmeye ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi ve eğitim bilimleri alanına yönelik mobil uygulama geliştirme çalışması: mobil akademi. Mersin Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek lisans Tezi).
There are 45 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Article
Authors

Aslıhan Saban

İsmail Çelik This is me

Publication Date March 29, 2018
Submission Date November 21, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 4 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Saban, A., & Çelik, İ. (2018). Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Öğretmen Adaylarının Eğitsel Mobil Uygulamalara Yönelik Algıları. Journal of Education, Theory and Practical Research, 4(1), 14-26.