Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Year 2020, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 138 - 156, 01.12.2020

Ümmühan Avcı Orçun Oruç

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the views of students about the procedure, content and benefits of the computer literacy course conducted by distance education in terms of active and passive participants and non-participating students. Sixty-one faculty of education students, who had taken the Computer Literacy course at a private university, participated in this qualitative study. The data obtained from the opinion form consisting of open-ended questions were analyzed by content analysis. According to the results, the students found live course recording videos most useful and generally had a positive views about the course being given by distance education. When asked about their preferences, it was seen that half of the active participant students preferred distance education and the other half preferred face-to-face education, the majority of the passive students preferred distance education and non-participant students preferred more face-to-face education. It was seen that watching the recorded course videos for active students and preparing homework for passive or non-participating students help them learn the course more easily. In order for the course to be learned more effectively, it is necessary to have attendance requirement according to the passive students and face-to-face education according to the non-participant students.

Keywords

Computer literacy Distance education Student views Active participation Passive participation

References

  • Akdağ, M. ve Karahan, M. (2004). Üniversite öğrencilerinin bilgi okuryazarlık düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 29(134).
  • Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding. Luxembourg: European Union.
  • Ateş, A. ve Altun, E. (2008). Bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri eğitimi öğrencilerinin öğrenme biçemleri ve öğrenme tercihleri. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 30, 1-16.
  • Beth, A. D., Jordan, M. E., Schallert, D. L., Reed, J. H., & Kim, M. (2015). Responsibility and generativity in online learning communities. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(4), 471-484.
  • Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in qualitative research revisited, Qualitative Research, 6(3), 319-340.
  • Dinçer, S. (2011). Öğretmen yetiştiren kurumlardaki öğrencilerinin öğrenim hayatları boyunca bilgisayar öğrenme düzeylerinin ve bilgisayar okuryazarlıklarının incelenmesi. Akademik Bilişim 11.
  • Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Pre-entry variables related to retention in online distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 199-206.
  • Eryılmaz, S. (2018). Öğrencilerin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri yeterliliklerinin belirlenmesi: gazi üniversitesi, turizm fakültesi örneği. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 17(65), 37-49.
  • Ezziane, Z. (2007). Information technology literacy: Implications on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 175-191.
  • Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks (Report EUR 25351 EN). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union
  • Forson, I. K., & Vuopala, E. (2019). Online Learning Readiness: Perspective Of Students Enrolled in Distance Education in Ghana. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 7(4), 277-294.
  • Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149.
  • Gupta, G. K. (2006). Computer literacy: Essential in today's computer-centric world. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 38(2), 115-119.
  • Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107-119.
  • Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Yu, Y. (2014). An examination of CSCL methodological practices and the influence of theoretical frameworks 2005–2009. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 305-334.
  • Kim, M. K., & Ketenci, T. (2019). Learner participation profiles in an asynchronous online collaboration context. The Internet and Higher Education, 41, 62-76.
  • Leontyeva, I. A. (2018). Modern distance learning technologies in higher education: Introduction problems. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), 1-8.
  • Maphosa, C., & Bhebhe, S. (2019). Digital literacy: A must for open distance and e-learning (ODEL) students. European Journal of Education Studies, 5(10), 186-199.
  • Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 1-16.
  • Sherry, L. (1995). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365.
  • Siri, A., & Rui, M. (2015). Distance education for health professions’ students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 730-738.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, T. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage
  • Subaşı, M. ve Okumuş, K. (2017). Bir araştırma yöntemi olarak durum çalışması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2), 419-426.
  • Xie, K., Di Tosto, G., Lu, L., & Cho, Y. S. (2018). Detecting leadership in peer-moderated online collaborative learning through text mining and social network analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 9-17.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin.
  • Yin, R.K., (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.

Computer Literacy Course with Distance Education: Students' Views on the Procedure, Content and Benefits

Year 2020, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 138 - 156, 01.12.2020

Ümmühan Avcı Orçun Oruç

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı öğrencilerin uzaktan eğitim ile gerçekleştirilen bilgisayar okuryazarlığı dersinin işlenişine, içeriğine ve faydalarına yönelik görüşlerini derse aktif ve pasif katılanlar ile katılmayan öğrenciler açısından incelemektir. Nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılan bu çalışmaya özel bir üniversitede Bilgisayar Okuryazarlığı dersini almış olan 61 eğitim fakültesi öğrencisi katılmıştır. Yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formundan elde edilen veriler içerik analizi ile analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlara göre öğrenciler canlı ders kayıt videolarını en faydalı bulmaktadırlar ve dersin uzaktan eğitimle veriliyor olmasından çoğunlukla memnundurlar. Tercihleri sorulduğunda derse aktif katılan öğrencilerin yarı yarıya uzaktan veya yüz yüze eğitimi, derse pasif katılan öğrencilerin çoğunluğunun uzaktan eğitimi, derse hiç katılmayan öğrencilerin ise daha çok yüz yüze eğitimi tercih ettikleri görülmüştür. Aktif katılan öğrenciler kayıtlı ders videolarını izleyerek, pasif katılan ya da katılmayan öğrenciler ödev hazırlayarak dersi daha kolay öğrendiklerini belirtmişlerdir. Dersinin daha etkili öğrenilmesi için, pasif katılan öğrencilere göre devam zorunluluğu olması, katılmayan öğrencilere göre ise yüz yüze eğitim olması gerekmektedir.

Keywords

Bilgisayar okuryazarlığı Uzaktan eğitim Öğrenci görüşleri Aktif katılım Pasif katılım

References

  • Akdağ, M. ve Karahan, M. (2004). Üniversite öğrencilerinin bilgi okuryazarlık düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 29(134).
  • Ala-Mutka, K. (2011). Mapping digital competence: Towards a conceptual understanding. Luxembourg: European Union.
  • Ateş, A. ve Altun, E. (2008). Bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri eğitimi öğrencilerinin öğrenme biçemleri ve öğrenme tercihleri. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 30, 1-16.
  • Beth, A. D., Jordan, M. E., Schallert, D. L., Reed, J. H., & Kim, M. (2015). Responsibility and generativity in online learning communities. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(4), 471-484.
  • Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006). Validity in qualitative research revisited, Qualitative Research, 6(3), 319-340.
  • Dinçer, S. (2011). Öğretmen yetiştiren kurumlardaki öğrencilerinin öğrenim hayatları boyunca bilgisayar öğrenme düzeylerinin ve bilgisayar okuryazarlıklarının incelenmesi. Akademik Bilişim 11.
  • Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Pre-entry variables related to retention in online distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 199-206.
  • Eryılmaz, S. (2018). Öğrencilerin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri yeterliliklerinin belirlenmesi: gazi üniversitesi, turizm fakültesi örneği. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 17(65), 37-49.
  • Ezziane, Z. (2007). Information technology literacy: Implications on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 175-191.
  • Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks (Report EUR 25351 EN). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union
  • Forson, I. K., & Vuopala, E. (2019). Online Learning Readiness: Perspective Of Students Enrolled in Distance Education in Ghana. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 7(4), 277-294.
  • Grow, G. O. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149.
  • Gupta, G. K. (2006). Computer literacy: Essential in today's computer-centric world. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 38(2), 115-119.
  • Hatlevik, O. E., Throndsen, I., Loi, M., & Gudmundsdottir, G. B. (2018). Students’ ICT self-efficacy and computer and information literacy: Determinants and relationships. Computers & Education, 118, 107-119.
  • Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Yu, Y. (2014). An examination of CSCL methodological practices and the influence of theoretical frameworks 2005–2009. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 305-334.
  • Kim, M. K., & Ketenci, T. (2019). Learner participation profiles in an asynchronous online collaboration context. The Internet and Higher Education, 41, 62-76.
  • Leontyeva, I. A. (2018). Modern distance learning technologies in higher education: Introduction problems. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), 1-8.
  • Maphosa, C., & Bhebhe, S. (2019). Digital literacy: A must for open distance and e-learning (ODEL) students. European Journal of Education Studies, 5(10), 186-199.
  • Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 1-16.
  • Sherry, L. (1995). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 337-365.
  • Siri, A., & Rui, M. (2015). Distance education for health professions’ students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 730-738.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, T. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage
  • Subaşı, M. ve Okumuş, K. (2017). Bir araştırma yöntemi olarak durum çalışması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2), 419-426.
  • Xie, K., Di Tosto, G., Lu, L., & Cho, Y. S. (2018). Detecting leadership in peer-moderated online collaborative learning through text mining and social network analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 9-17.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin.
  • Yin, R.K., (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.
There are 26 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Other Fields of Education
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ümmühan Avcı 0000-0001-7007-1478

Orçun Oruç 0000-0001-9462-0881

Publication Date December 1, 2020
Submission Date June 9, 2020
Acceptance Date July 8, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 1 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Avcı, Ü., & Oruç, O. (2020). Computer Literacy Course with Distance Education: Students’ Views on the Procedure, Content and Benefits. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning, 1(2), 138-156.
 Download Cover Image

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.