Comparison of the Level of Pedagogical Digital Literacy of In-Service Teachers in Turkey Depending on Some Variables

Abstract

The significance of teachers' pedagogical digital competency for teaching has rapidly expanded with the worldwide pandemic. This study compares public school teachers' pedagogical digital competencies (PDC) across many parameters. A self-assessment scale created through a project funded by the European Commission was utilized in the study. This scale measures four aspects of instructors' technology-enhanced teaching proficiency. 204 teachers from various branches who worked in Turkish provinces' public schools made up the participants. According to the survey, 42% of participants were proficient, and 35% were beginners. It was discovered that teachers of science courses had higher PDC than social and other topics teachers. Additionally, teachers who had attended in-service IT training either because it was obligatory or on their own will had significantly higher PDC than those who had not. The sub-dimensions of digital content use and production as well as digital communication and collaboration, had the participants' lowest scores.

Keywords

• Pedagogical digital competence
• Digital literacy
• Digital competence of teachers
• Teacher education

Türkiye'deki Devlet Okulu Öğretmenlerinin Pedagojik Dijital Beceri Yeterlilik Düzeyi

Öz

Küresel salgınla birlikte örgün eğitim süreçlerinin acilen dijital ortama taşınması, öğretmenlerin öğretim amaçlı pedagojik dijital yeterliklerine hızla önem kazandırmıştır. Bu çalışmada kamu öğretmenlerinin pedagojik dijital yeterliklerinin (PDY) düzeyi için bir karşılaştırma çalışması yapılmıştır. Çalışmada Avrupa Komisyonu tarafından desteklenen bir proje kapsamında geliştirilen TET-SAT öz değerlendirme ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Bu ölçek, dijital yeterliliğin dört boyutunu içerir: dijital pedagoji, dijital içeriğin kullanımı ve üretimi, dijital iletişim ve işbirliği ve dijital vatandaşlık. Araştırmanın katılımcıları, Türkiye'de farklı illerde kamuda görev yapan farklı branşlardan 204 öğretmendir. Çalışma sonucunda, katılımcıların yarısının PDY’leri başlangıç seviyesindedir. PDY düzeyleri karşılaştırıldığında, 30 yaş üstü öğretmenlerin; erkek öğretmenlerin; Fen branşlarından öğretmenlerin, diğerlerine göre; hizmet içi bilişim teknolojileri eğitimi alanların, almayanlara göre PDY düzeyi anlamlı olarak daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Ayrıca katılımcılar en düşük puanı dijital içerik kullanımı ve üretimi ile dijital iletişim ve işbirliği alt boyutlarında almışlardır. Dijital okuryazarlık deneyiminin azlığına paralel olarak pedagojik amaçlı kullanımı da azalmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Pedagojik dijital yeterlilik
• Öğretmen eğitimi
• Öğretmen dijital okur-yazarlığı
• Öğretmen dijital yeterliliği

Kaynakça

1. Adler, R., ve Kim, H. (2018). Enhancing future K-8 teachers’ computational thinking skills through modeling and simulations. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1501–1514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9675-1
2. Area-Moreira, M., Hernández-Rivero, V. ve Sosa-Alonso, J. J. (2016). Models of educational integration of ICTs in the classroom. Comunicar. Media Education Research Journal, 24(1).
3. Asio, J. M. R. ve Bayucca, S. A. (2021). Spearheading education during the COVID-19 rife: Administrators’ level of digital competence and schools’ readiness on distance learning. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 3(1), 19-26. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2021364728
4. Avrupa Komisyonu, (2016). Improving and modernising education. COM(2016) 941 final. https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/COM-2016-941-F1-EN-MAIN.PDF
5. Avrupa Komisyonu, (2020). Digital Competence Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu). https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcompedu
6. Baran, E., Canbazoglu Bilici, S., Albayrak Sarı, A. ve Tondeur, J. (2017). Investigating the impact of teacher education strategies on preservice teachers’ TPACK. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1).
7. Bastos, S., Silva, M., Oliveira, H. M., Caggiano, V. ve Poza-Lújan, J-L. (2021). Digital-Distance-Education: A Step Back. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(3), 2733-2740.
8. Başaran, B. (2020). Examining Preservice Teachers’ TPACK-21 Efficacies with Clustering Analysis in Terms of Certain Variables. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(3), 84-99.

9. Bocconi, S. ve Panesi, S. (2018). Teachers’ professional learning and competence in the digital era:the DigCompEdu framework. Media Education: Studi, Ricerche, Buone Pratiche, 39. https://dx.doi.org/10.4399/97888255210234
10. Bond, M., Zawacki-Richter, O. ve Nichols, M. (2018). Revisiting five decades of educational technology research: A content and authorship analysis of the British Journal of Educational Technology. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12730
11. Boz, T., Allexsaht-Snider, M. (2022) How do elementary school teachers learn coding and robotics? A case study of mediations and conflicts. Educ Inf Technol 27, 3935–3963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10736-4
12. Bozkurt, A. (2020). Koronavirüs (Covid-19) pandemi süreci ve pandemi sonrası dünyada eğitime yönelik değerlendirmeler: Yeni normal ve yeni eğitim paradigması. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 112-142.
13. Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S., Al-Freih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, Jr., D., Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I., Bali, M., Alvarez, A. J., Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., de Coëtlogon, P. ve Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1-126. Retrieved from http://asianjde.org/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/462
14. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (17. Baskı). Pegem Yayınları.
15. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B. ve Turner, L.A. (2014). Research methods, design, and analysis (12th ed.). Pearson.
16. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H. ve Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813–834. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00028312038004813
17. Çebi, A. ve Reisoğlu, İ. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının dijital yeterliklerinin geliştirilmesine yönelik bir eğitim etkinliği: BÖTE ve diğer branşlardaki öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama 9(2).
18. Erol, S. ve Aydin, E. (2021). Digital literacy status of Turkish teachers. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 13(2), 10-15345.
19. Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Education Tech Research Dev, 68, 2449–2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
20. Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J. ve García-Martínez, I. (2020). Digital competences for teacher professional development. Systematic review. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1827389
21. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. ve Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design & evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw Hill.
22. Gisbert Cervera, M. ve Lázaro Cantabrana, J. L. (2015). Professional development in teacher digital competence and improving school quality from the teachers’ perspective: a case study. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 4 (2), pp. 115-122. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2015.7.123
23. Guillén-Gámez, F. D., Lugones, A., Mayorga-Fernández, M. J. ve Wang, S. (2019). ICT use by pre-service foreign languages teachers according to gender, age and motivation. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1574693.
24. Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., Aznar-Diaz, I., Cáceres-Reche, M. P., Trujillo-Torres, J. M. ve Romero-Rodriguez, J. M. (2019). Factors influencing the development of digital competence in teachers: Analysis of the teaching staff of permanent education centres. IEEE Access, 7, 178744-178752.
25. John, S. P. (2015). The integration of information technology in higher education: A study of faculty’s attitude towards IT adoption in the teaching process. Contaduríay Administración, 60, 230–252. doi:10.1016/j.cya.2015.08.004
26. Korucu, A. T., Yucel, A., Gündogdu, M. M. ve Gencturk, T. (2016). Investigation the Technology Usage Level of Teacher Candidates. Participatory Educational Research (PER), 3(1), pp. 14-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.17275/per.15.36.3.1
27. Krumsvik, R. J. (2008). Situated learning and teachers’ digital competence. Education and Information Technologies, 13(4), 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639- 008-9069-5.
28. List, A., Brante, E. W. ve Klee, H. L. (2020). A framework of pre-service teachers’ conceptions about digital literacy: Comparing the United States and Sweden. Computers & Education, 148, 103788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103788
29. Looney, J. (2015). Online self-assessment with MENTEP: A review of the literature, European Institute of Education and Social Policy.
30. Markauskaite , L. (2006). Gender issues in preservice teachers’ training: ICT literacy and online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22, 1–20.
31. McMillan, J.H. ve Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). Pearson. MEB İstatistikleri (2022). Millî Eğitim İstatistikleri, Örgün Eğitim 2021/'22. https://sgb.meb.gov.tr/www/icerik_goruntule.php?KNO=460
32. MENTEP Executive Report (MER). (2018). Summary of results of the field trials: The impact of the technology enhanced teaching self-assessment tool (TET-SAT). http://mentep.eun.org/documents/2390578/2452293/MENTEP_Executive-Summary.pdf/6875708a-9e74-43eb-ae93-ea2c9c5ca3fe
33. MENTEP, (2020). MENTEP (Mentoring Technology-Enhanced Pedagogy). http://mentep.eun.org/about Mishra, P. ve Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 6, 1017–1054.
34. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection (OTA-EHR-616). Government Printing Office.
35. Roig, R., Mengual, S. ve Quinto, P. (2015). Conocimientos tecnológicos, pedagógicos y disciplinares del profesorado de Primaria [Primary Teachers’ Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge]. Comunicar, 45, 151-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/ - C45-2015-16
36. Sarıçoban, A., Tosuncuoğlu, İ. ve Kırmızı, Ö. (2019). A technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment of pre-service EFL teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language, Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(3), 1122-1138
37. Taddeo, G., Cigognini, M. E., Parigi, L. ve Blamire, R. (2016). MENTEP Deliverable 6.1: Certification of teachers’ digital competence Current approaches and future opportunities. http://mentep.eun.org/documents/2390578/2452293/MENTEP_D6+1.pdf/e9982840-f226-4b68-bebd-4fefeb67004e
38. The World Bank, UNESCO and UNICEF (2021). The State of the Global Education Crisis: A Path to Recovery. Washington D.C., Paris, New York: The World Bank, UNESCO, and UNICEF.
39. Thurstone, L.L. (1927). A law of comparative judgement. Psychological Review, 34, 273-286.