Evaluation of Web 2.0 applications in field training in the context of geography course

Öz

This study aims to compare the features of Web 2.0 applications that can be used in field training and evaluate them in the context of geography course. In line with this goal, average visits, the average number of unique visitors, and the average time on site, the functions of the Web 2.0 applications and other important features are presented in tables and analysed. The data of the study were obtained from pro.similarweb.com and some of the features of the applications as a secondary data in the period between February 2023 and April 2023. Based on the study's findings Canva, Quizlet, Miro, Vimeo, Tumblr, Storyboardthat and Youtube applications were found to be popular among the Web 2.0 categories in the field training. It is thought that Google Earth, ArcGIS Online, Geoguessr, Inkarnate, Worldatlas, World Geography Games, Seterra, Lizardpoint, Worldmapblank, Geographyquiz and TrueSize applications designed directly with geographical elements can positively affect all individuals involved in the geography teaching and learning process.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Web 2.0
• Web 2.0 Applications in Education
• Field Education
• Geography Education
• Teachers
• Geography Teachers

Alan eğitiminde Web 2.0 uygulamalarının coğrafya dersi bağlamında değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma, alan eğitiminde kullanılabilecek Web 2.0 uygulamalarının özelliklerini karşılaştırarak coğrafya dersi bağlamında değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu hedef doğrultusunda, Web 2.0 uygulamalarını ziyaret edenlerin sayısı, ziyaret eden tekil kişi sayısı ve uygulamalarda ortalama geçirilen sürelere ait ortalamalar, uygulamaların işlevleri ve diğer önemli özellikleri tablolar halinde sunulmuş ve incelenmiştir. Araştırmanın verileri, Şubat 2023-Nisan 2023 tarih aralığını kapsayan dönemde pro.similarweb.com adresinden alınan ikincil veri setinden ve uygulamaların bazı özelliklerinin inclenmesiyle elde edilmiştir. Araştırmanın bulgularına göre, alan eğitimi kategorisinde Canva, Quizlet, Miro, Vimeo, Tumblr, Storyboardthat ve Youtube uygulamalarının Web 2.0 kategorileri arasında popüler olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Doğrudan coğrafi öğelerle tasarlanan Google Earth, ArcGIS Online, Geoguessr, Inkarnate, Worldatlas, World Geography Games, Seterra, Lizardpoint, Worldmapblank, Geographyquiz ve TrueSize uygulamalarının ise coğrafya öğretme ve öğrenme sürecinde yer alan tüm bireyleri olumlu yönde etkileyebileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Web 2.0
• Eğitimde Web 2.0 Uygulamaları
• Alan Eğitimi
• Coğrafya Eğitimi
• Öğretmenler
• Coğrafya Öğretmenleri

Kaynakça

1. Adcock, L., & Bolick, C. (2011). Web 2.0 tools and the evolving pedagogy of teacher education. Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 11(2), 223-236.
2. Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The internet and higher education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002
3. Alan, P. (2017). The impact of technology on geography and geography teachers. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Ed.), Debates in Geography Education (pp. 184-196). Routledge.
4. Biswas, S. (2023). ChatGPT and the future of medical writing. Radiology, 307(2), e223312.
5. Chan, T. A. C. H., Ho, J. M.-B., & Tom, M. (2023). Miro: Promoting Collaboration through Online Whiteboard Interaction. RELC Journal, 00336882231165061. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231165061
6. Chang, C.-H., & Wu, B. S. (2018). Teaching geography with technology—A critical commentary. In C.-H. Chang, B. S. Wu, T. Seow, & K. Irvine (Ed.), Learning geography beyond the traditional classroom: Examples from Peninsular Southeast Asia (pp. 35-47). Springer.
7. Chen, M., Lin, H., Hu, M., He, L., & Zhang, C. (2013). Real-geographic-scenario-based virtual social environments: İntegrating geography with social research. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 40(6), 1103-1121. https://doi.org/10.1068/b381
8. Çelebi, C., & Satırlı, H. (2021). Web 2.0 araçlarının ilkokul seviyesinde kullanım alanları. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning, 2(1), 75-110. https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.938122

9. Çelik, T. (2021). Web 2.0 araçları kullanımı yetkinliği ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 449-478. https://doi.org/10.9779.pauefd.700181
10. Çenesiz, M., & Özdemir, M. A. (2021). Web 2.0 araçlarının ortaöğretim 10. Sınıf coğrafya dersi topoğrafya ve kayaçlar konusunda akademik başarıya etkisi. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, 43, 39-53. https://doi.org/10.32003/igge.750323
11. Elmas, R., & Geban, Ö. (2012). 21. Yüzyıl öğretmenleri için web 2.0 araçları. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 243-254.
12. Exarchou, E., Klonari, A., & Lambrinos, N. (2015). Using a social web 2.0 tool in geography and environmental research project: A content analysis of Greek high school students’ learning exchanges. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 5(1), 42-55.
13. Gilbert, I. (2010). Why do I need a teacher when I’ve got Google?: The essential guide to the big issues for every 21st century teacher. Routledge London.
14. Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 478-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.087
15. Huang, K. H. (2011). A GIS-interface web site: Exploratory learning for geography curriculum. Journal of Geography, 110(4), 158-165.
16. Hursen, C. (2021). The effect of problem-based learning method supported by web 2.0 tools on academic achievement and critical thinking skills in teacher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26, 515- 533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09458-2
17. Kam, H.-J., & Katerattanakul, P. (2014). Structural model of team-based learning using Web 2.0 collaborative software. Computers & Education, 76, 1-12.
18. Konstantinidis, A., Theodosiadou, D., & Pappos, C. (2013). Web 2.0 tools for supporting teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(4), 287-295.
19. Kutlu-Demir, Ö. (2018). 21st century learning: Integration of web 2. 0 tools in Turkish adult language classrooms. (PhD Thesis, Social Science Institute, English Language Education).
20. Leh, F. C., Anduroh, A., & Huda, M. (2021). Level of knowledge, skills and attitude of trainee teachers on web 2.0 applications in teaching geography in Malaysia schools. Heliyon, 7(12), e08568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08568
21. Liu, S.-H. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1012-1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.001
22. Lu, J., Lai, M., & Law, N. (2010). Knowledge building in society 2.0: Challenges and opportunities. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Ed.), New science of learning: Cognition, computers and collaboration in education (pp. 553-567). Springer.
23. Majid, N. A. A. (2014). Integration of Web 2.0 Tools in learning a programming course. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(4), 88-94.
24. Parkinson, A. (2013). How has technology impacted on the teaching of geography and geography teachers? In D. Lambert & M. S. Jones (Ed.), Debates in geography education (pp. 193-205). Routledge.
25. Rizou, O., & Klonari, A. (2020). Using Web 2.0 tools in teaching spatial statistics: Secondary teachers’ views from Greece. In Smart Geography: 100 Years of the Bulgarian Geographical Society (pp. 55-63). Springer.
26. Sendag, S., Osman, E., Sezgin, S., & Dulkadir, N. (2015). Preservice teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and web 2.0 competencies. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 172-187.
27. Shank, P. (2008). Web 2.0 and beyond: The changing needs of learners, new tools, and ways to learn. In S. Carlıner & P. Shank (Ed.), The e-learning handbook (pp. 241-278).
28. Tatlı, Z., Akbulut, H. İ., & Altınışık, D. (2016). Öğretmen adaylarının teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi özgüvenlerine web 2.0 araçlarının etkisi. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 659. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.277878
29. Tatli, Z., Akbulut, H. İ., & Altinisik, D. (2019). Changing attitudes towards educational technology usage in classroom: Web 2.0 tools. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(2), 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.17220/mojet.2019.02.001
30. Ünlü, M. (2014). Coğrafya öğretimi. Pegem Akademi Ankara.
31. Vartanian, T. P. (2010). Secondary data analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Wang, A. I., & Tahir, R. (2020). The effect of using Kahoot! For learning–A literature review. Computers & Education, 149, 103818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103818
33. Yıldırım, S., & Ünlü, M. (2021). Evaluating in-service GIS training for geography teachers based on G-TPACK model. International Journal of Geography and Geography Education (IGGE), 44, 112-123. https://doi.org/10.32003/igge.958881
34. Young, M., & Muller, J. (2010). Three educational scenarios for the future: Lessons from the sociology of knowledge. European journal of education, 45(1), 11-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2009.01413.x