Pandemi Sürecinde Yaşanan Sorunların ve Beklentilerin Öğretmenlerin Teknoloji Entegrasyon Düzeylerine ve Okul Yöneticilerinin Teknoloji Liderliği Öz Yeterliklerine Göre İncelenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı eğitim sistemi paydaşlarından öğretmenlerin teknoloji entegrasyon düzeylerini, okul yöneticilerinin teknoloji liderliği öz yeterlik algı düzeylerini belirleyerek pandemi sürecinde yaşadıkları sorunlar, pandemi sonrasında bekledikleri değişimler ve alınması gereken önlemlerin bu düzeylere göre farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığını ortaya koymaktır. Çalışmada, nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden genel tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Öğretmenlerin teknoloji entegrasyon göstergelerini belirlemek için “Öğretmenlerin Teknoloji Entegrasyonu Göstergeleri (TEG) Ölçeği”, okul yöneticilerinin teknoloji liderliği öz-yeterliğini belirlemek için “Eğitim Yöneticileri Teknoloji Liderliği Öz Yeterlik Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmen ve okul yöneticilerinin pandemi sürecinde yaşadığı sorunlar, pandemi sonrasında eğitim uygulamaları açısından bekledikleri değişiklikler ve yaşanabilecek olası durumlarda alınabilecek önlemlerin belirlenmesi için Uzaktan Eğitim Anketi kullanılmıştır. Bu çalışma 2020-2021 eğitim ve öğretim yılında Türkiye’nin doğusunda yer alan bir ilde görev yapan 369 öğretmen ve 120 okul yöneticisi olmak üzere toplam 489 kişi ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada verilerin analizinde SPSS istatistik programı kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre öğretmenler, teknoloji entegrasyonu okul yöneticileri ise teknoloji liderliği öz yeterliği bakımından kendilerini yeterli düzeyde bulmaktadır. Hem teknoloji entegrasyon düzeyleri yüksek olan öğretmenler hem de teknoloji liderliği öz yeterlik algıları yüksek olan okul yöneticileri pandemi sürecinde e-öğrenme içeriği geliştirmede deneyim yetersizliği, hedeflenen kazanımların çevrimiçi ortamlara uygun olmaması, çevrimiçi uzaktan eğitimde öğrencilerin bireysel ilgi ve yeteneklerine göre eğitim verilememesi gibi sorunlar yaşadıklarını ve pandemi sonrasında yüz yüze eğitime geri dönülmesiyle öğrencilerin okula ve öğrenmeye karşı motivasyonlarının artacaklarını beklediklerini belirtmişlerdir.

Keywords

• Öğretmen
• Okul Yöneticisi
• Pandemi
• Teknoloji Entegrasyonu
• Teknoloji Liderliği

Examining the Problems and Expectations during The Pandemic Process According to Technology Integration Levels of Teachers and Technology Leadership Self-Efficacy of School Administrators

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to first examine the level of technology integration of teachers and the level of technology leadership self-efficacy perception of school administrators, and then to reveal whether the problems they experienced during the pandemic process, the changes they expected after the pandemic and the measures to be taken differ according to these level. The general survey model was used to conduct research. "Indicators of Technology Integration Scale" was used to determine the technology integration indicators of teachers, and the "Technological Leadership Self-Efficacy Scale for School Administrators" was used to determine the technology leadership self-efficacy of school administrators. In addition, the Distance Education Questionnaire was used to investigate the problems experienced by teachers and school administrators during the pandemic, the changes they expect in terms of educational practices after the pandemic, and the measures that can be taken in possible situations. This study was carried out with a total of 489 people, including 369 teachers and 120 school administrators. Data management and analysis were performed using SPSS statistical program. The results of this investigation show that teachers find themselves at a sufficient level in terms of technology integration and school administrators in terms of technology leadership self-efficacy. Both teachers with high technology integration level and school administrators with high technology leadership self-efficacy perceptions stated that they experienced problems such as lack of experience in developing e-learning content during the pandemic process, the targeted acquisitions are not suitable for online environments, and the inability to provide education according to the individual interests and abilities of students in online distance education. They stated that they expect students to increase their motivation towards school and learning with the return to face-to-face education after the pandemic.

Keywords

• Teacher
• School administrator
• Pandemic
• Technology Integration
• Technological Leadership.

References

1. Akbulut, Y., Odabasi, H. F. & Kuzu, A. (2011). Perceptions of preservice teachers regarding the integration of information and communication technologies in Turkish education faculties. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 175-184.
2. Alp, M. (2019). Determination of Information and Communication Technologies Competencies and Usage Levels of University Students (Unpublished Master Thesis). Ufuk University, Ankara.
3. Alcoforado, F. (2020). The World after coronavirus. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/42549068/HE_WORLD_AFTER_CORONAVIRUS.
4. 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
5. Banoğlu, K. (2011). School principals’ technology leadership competency and technology coordinatorship. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(1), 208–213.
6. Betts, K., & Heaston, A. (2014). Build it but will they teach?: Strategies for increasing faculty participation & retention in online & blended education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 17(2), 1-13.
7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2009). Scientific research methods (5th Edition). Pegem Academy: Ankara.
8. Chang, I. H., & Wu, Y. C. (2008). A Study of the relationships between principals' technology leadership and teachers' teaching efficiency. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 4(1), 171-193.

9. Çakıroğlu, U. (2013). Integration of instructional technologies into learning environments. Fundamentals of instructional technologies: Theories, research, trends, 413-4.
10. Çakıroğlu, Ü., Gökoğlu, S., & Çebi, A. (2015). Basic indicators for teachers’ technology integration: A scale development study. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 35(3), 507-522.
11. Dinçer, M. (2003). The Power of Education in the Process of Social Change. Aegean Journal of Education, 3(1), 102-112.
12. El Turk, S., & Cherney, I. D. (2016). Perceived online education barriers of administrators and faculty at a US university in Lebanon. Creighton Journal of Interdisciplinary Leadership, 2(1), 15-31.
13. Eren-Şişman, E. (2010). Leadership behaviors of primary school principals in providing and using educational technologies (Unpublished PhD Thesis). Anadolu University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Eskişehir.
14. Ergisi, K. (2005). Determining the technological competencies of school administrators regarding the effective use of information technologies at school: Kırıkkale province example (Unpublished master's thesis), Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale.
15. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., Sendurur, P. & Sendurur, P. (2012), Teacher Beliefs and Technology Integration Practies: A Critical Relationship, Computers & Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.001
16. Genç, S. Z., and Eryaman, M. Y. (2017). Changing Values and New Education Paradigm. Journal of Social Sciences, 89-102.
17. Gökçearslan, S., Coşkun, T. K., & Şahin, S. (2019). Adaptation of pre-service teacher information and communication technology competencies scale into Turkish. Kastamonu Journal of Education, 27(4), 1435-1444. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2828
18. Gurbetoğlu, A. (2018). Scientific research methods. Access Address: : http://agurbetoglu. com/files/2% 20ARA% C5% 9ETIRMA, 20.
19. Güneş, A. (2007). Assessment and Evaluation Competencies of Classroom Teachers According to Their Perceptions (Master Thesis). Marmara University Institute of Educational Sciences, İstanbul.
20. Güneş, A. M., and Buluç, B. (2017). The Relationship Between Classroom Teachers' Technology Use and Self-Efficacy Beliefs. Tübav Journal of Science, 10(1), 94-113.
21. Hacıfazlıoğlu, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. & Diver, G. (2011a). Validity and reliability study of educational administrators technology leadership self-efficacy scale. Educational Management in Theory and Practice, 17 (2), 145-166.
22. Haznedar, O. (2012). Investigation of University Students' Information and Communication Technologies Skills and Attitudes Towards E-Learning in Terms of Different Variables. Master Thesis. Dokuz Eylül University. İzmir
23. Heerwegh, D., De Wit, K., & Verhoeven, J. (2016). Exploring the self-reported ICT skill levels of undergraduate science students. Journal of Information Technology Education, 15(2016), 19-47.
24. Kara, S. (2011). Determination of Information and Communication Technology Competencies of Teachers Working in Primary Schools (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Bahçeşehir University, İstanbul.
25. Korkmaz, G. & Toraman, Ç. (2020). Are we ready for the post-COVID-19 educational practice? An investigation into what educators think as to online learning. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 293-309.
26. Meeker, M. (2017). Case study of barriers to retaining online faculty at a university in the Midwest. Proquest Dissertations and Theses.
27. Onbaşılı, Ü. (2018). The Effect of Augmented Reality Applications on Primary School Students' Attitudes towards Augmented Reality Applications and Science Motivation. Aegean Journal of Education, 19 (1), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.390018
28. Orgaz, F., Moral, S., and Domínguez, C. M. (2018). Student’s Attitude and Perception with the Use of Technology in the University. Propósitos y Representaciones, 253-299.
29. Ozan, C. and Taşgın, A. (2017). Investigation of Teacher Candidates' Self-Efficacy on Educational Technology Standards. Educational Technology Theory and Practice, 7(2), 236-253. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.307575
30. Özcan, S. (2019). An examination of the online education engagements of the distance education institutions’ faculty (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Gazi University, Institute of Education Sciences, Ankara.
31. Şahin, I. (2011). Development of survey of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 97-105.
32. Topper, A. (2004). How are we doing? Using self-assessment to measure changing teacher technology literacy within a graduate educational technology program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(3), 303-317.
33. Uluysal, B., Demirel, S., Tanyeri, T., & Şahin, Y. L. (2014). A teacher's journey of technology integration. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 12-22.
34. Urdan, T. A., & Weggen, C. C. (2000). Corporate E-learning: Exploring a New Frontier. England:WR Hambrecht & Co./Equity Research.
35. Ünlüer, S. (2010). Examining the integration process of information and communication technologies in the Integrated School for the Disabled (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
36. Who [World Health Organization] (2020). Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covıd-19) Situation Report – 1. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200121-sitrep-1-2019-ncov.pdf?sfvrsn=20a99c10_4.
37. Yılmaz, M. (2007). Technology education in elementary teacher training. Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 27(1), 155–167.
38. Yu, C. & 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
39. Yurdakul, I. K. (2011). Examination of teacher candidates' technopedagogical education competencies in terms of their use of information and communication technologies. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 40(40), 397-408.