Development of Electronic Portfolio Attitude Scale

Year 2024, , 31 - 56, 21.03.2024

Bilge Gök , Mahmut Ayaz , Yasemin Erdem

https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1312493

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop an electronic portfolio attitude scale (EPAS) for prospective teachers. The scale, which was prepared during the scale development phase, was applied to 524 prospective teachers studying in the third and fourth grade. Exploratory factor analysis results (EFA) showed that 40 items in the scale were gathered under three factors. These are: "benefit for the student", "denial (negation)" and "effectiveness in terms of the instructional process". The three-factor structure obtained by confirmatory factor analysis was confirmed. When these factors are evaluated together, their contribution value to the total variance is 39.37%. Factor loadings were found to vary between .33 and .71. However, according to the results obtained in the item analysis, it was determined that all the items in the scale were distinctive. In addition, it is seen that the CR value is greater than .70, and the dimensions of the scale fulfill the composite reliability requirement. In addition, as a result of ANOVA, it was revealed that the attitudes of prospective teachers towards e-portfolio differ significantly according to their knowledge about e-portfolio and their competence in using technology. The McDonald’s ω coefficient (known as congeneric reliability) of the three factors in the scale were .97, .91 and .88, respectively, and the McDonald’s ω coefficient for all items of the scale was .96. As a result of the reliability and validity analysis, it was concluded that the electronic portfolio attitude scale is a reliable and valid measurement tool for prospective teachers.

Keywords

E-portfolio, teacher candidates, alternative assessment, attitude scale

Ethical Statement

Name of the board that carries out ethical assessment: Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Social and Humanities Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board The date and number of the ethical assessment decision: 11.04.2023 -2023/09

References

• Alan, S. (2014). İlköğretim 4. ve 5. sınıflarda e-portfolyo kullanımının değerlendirilmesi (Evaluation of e-portfolio usage in primary education 4th and 5th grades (Master Thesis). Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.
• Arap, B. (2008). Dil öğretmeni eğitiminde öğretmen adayları için elektronik portfolyo kullanımı (Electronic portfolio use for teacher candidates in language teacher education) (Master Thesis). Mersin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Mersin.
• Ayaz, M. (2021). The effect of e-portfolio application on teacher competences, motivations and reflective thinking of preservice primary school teachers. (Phd Thesis). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Ayaz, M., Gülen, S., & Gök, B. STEM etkinliklerinin uygulanması sürecinde elektronik portfolyo kullanımının sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin fen bilimleri dersi akademik başarısına ve stem tutumuna etkisinin incelenmesi (Investigation of the effect of the use of electronic portfolio in the process of applying STEM activities on the academic achievement of eighth grade students and STEM attitude). Journal of Yüzüncü Yıl University Faculty of Education, 17(1), 1153-1179.
• Barbera, E. (2009). Mutual feedback in e-portfolio assessment: an approach to the netfolio system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 342-357.
• Barrett, H., & Carney, J. (2005). Conflicting paradigms and competing purposes in electronic portfolio development. TaskStream web site, 295-314.
• Başol, G.M. (2019). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Pegem Akademi.
• Beetham, H. (2005). E-portfolios in Post-16 Learning in the UK: Developments, Issues and Opportunities, Retrieved October 10, 2021, from, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/themes/elearning/eportfolioped.pdf.
• Bhattacharya, M. & Hartnett, M. (2007). E-portfolio assessment in higher education. 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Milwaukee, WI.
• Birgin, O. (2008). Alternatif bir yöntemi olarak portfolyo uygulamasına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri [Student views on portfolio assessment as an alternative assessment method]. Gazi University Turkish Journal of Educational Sciences, 6 (1), 1-24.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2017). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (Manual of data analysis for social sciences). Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Taylor and Francis Group.
• Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. Plenum.
• Challis, D. (2005). Towards the mature ePortfolio: Some implications for higher education. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(3).
• Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, Erlbaum.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2016). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications). Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
• Çukurbaşı, B., & Kıyıcı, M. (2018). Öğretmen adaylarının elektronik portfolyoya yönelik görüşlerinin incelenmesi (Examination of pre-service teachers' views on electronic portfolio): Weebly örneği. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 19(1), 1-11.
• Demir, B. & Kutlu, Ö. (2016). Elektronik portfolyo uygulamalarının ortaokul 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin araştırma becerilerine etkisi (The effect of electronic portfolio applications on the research skills of 6th grade middle school students). Eğitim ve Bilim, 41 (188), 227-253.
• Demirli, C. (2007) E-portfolyo öğretim sürecinin öğrenenlerin tutumları ve algıları üzerine etkisi (Doktora Tezi) (The effect of e-portfolio teaching process on learners' attitudes and perceptions), Fırat Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Elazığ.
• Erice, D. & Ertaş, A. (2011). The impact of e-portfolio on foreign language writing skills. Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 44, 73–94.
• Erkuş, A. (2012). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme (Measurement and scale development in psychology). Pegem Akademi.
• Field, A. (2009) Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd Edition, Sage Publications Ltd.
• Filkins, D.T. (2010). The acquisition of electronic portfolio support staff expertise: A theoretical model. (Doktora Tezi). Accessed from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3438994).
• Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 286-199.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Edisi Kedelapan ed.). (S. Kiefer, Penyunt.) McGraw-Hill Companies. Frontiers in Education Conference, Milwaukee, WI.
• Goeman, R.L. (2007). Teacher candidates' perceptions of traditional classroom assessments and electronic portfolio classroom assessments (Unpublished doctoral thesis), University of Nebraska, Omaha.
• Gömleksiz, M. & Koç, A. (2010). Bilgisayar okuryazarlığı becerisi ediniminde e-portfolyo sürecinin öğrenen performansına ve tutumlarına etkisi (The effect of the e-portfolio process on learner performance and attitudes in computer literacy skill acquisition). Journal of Erzincan Faculty of Education, 12(2), 75-96.
• Grady, E. (1996). The grady profile. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31(4), 246-251.
• Gülbahar, Y., & Köse, F. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının değerlendirme için elektronik portfolyo kullanımına ilişkin görüşleri (Prospective teachers' views on the use of electronic portfolios for assessment). Journal of Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences, 39(2), 75-93.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson International Edition.
• Harden, R. M. (2007). Learning outcomes as a tool to assess progression. Medical Teacher, 29(7), 678-682.
• Hawisher, G. E., & Selfe, C. L. (1997). Wedding the technologies of writing portfolios and computers: The challenges of the electronic classrooms. In K. B. Yancey & I. Weiser (Eds.), Situating portfolios: For perspectives (pp. 305). Utah State: UP.
• Heath, M. (2005). Are you ready to go digital? The pros and cons of electronic portfolio development. Library Media Connection, 23(7), 66-70.
• Henson, R., K. & Roberts, J., K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393-416.
• Hung, W. (2006). The 3C3R model: A conceptual framework for designing problems in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 55-77.
• İlhan, M., & Çetin, B. (2014). Sınıf değerlendirme atmosferi ölçeğinin (SDAÖ) geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması (Development of the classroom assessment atmosphere scale (SDAÖ): A validity and reliability study). Education and Science, 39(176), 31-50.
• İlhan, M., Çetin, B., & Bars, M. (2013). Katılımcı değerlendirmeye yönelik inanç ölçeği’nin (KDYIÖ) Türkçe uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Turkish adaptation of the belief scale for participatory evaluation (KDYIÖ): Validity and reliability study]. Journal of European Education, 3(2), 17-35.
• Kasap, S. (2021). Mother tongue attitude scale (MTAS). International Journal of Kurdish Studies 7 (1), 103-122, https://doi.org/10.21600/ijoks.834913
• Kasap, S. ( 2020). Uzaktan eğitim yoluyla yabanci dil eğitiminde özerk öğrenmenin yeri. Pandemi ve Eğitim, Anı Yayıncılık.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.
• Krause, S. (1996). Portfolios in teacher education: Effects on preservice teachers' early comprehension of the portfolio process. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(2), 130-138.
• Kasap, S. (2023). The impact of musical skills on foreign language anxiety. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 8(2).
• Kutlu, Ö., Doğan, D., & Karakaya, İ. (2017). Ölçme ve değerlendirme: Performansa ve portfolyaya dayalı durum belirleme [Assessment and evaluation: determination based on performance and portfolio]. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Larson, R. L. (2003). What is a portfolio? Using portfolios to assess the impact of a curriculum. portfolio assessment uses, cases, scoring, and impact. Banta, Trudy. W. (Ed.). Published by Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint, San Francisco, 7-10.
• Liu, Y. (2003). Developing a scale to measure the interactivity of websites. Journal of Advertising Research, 43(2), 207-216.
• Lucke, J. F. (2005a). The α and ω of congeneric test theory: An extension of reliability and internal consistency to heterogeneous tests. Applied Psychological Measurements, 29(1), 65-81.
• Luyegu, E. A. (2009). Students' perceptions of assessment and the electronic portfolio project in the college of education (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of South Alabama, Alabama, The USA.
• Ma, X., & Rada, R. (2005). Building a web-based accountability system in a teacher education program. Interactive Learning Environments, 13(1-2), 93-119.
• Özkul, A. E. & Girginer, N. (2014). Uzaktan eğitimde teknoloji ve etkinlik. Sakarya University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3,107-117.
• Özgür, H. (2016). Facebook sosyal ağına entegre e-portfolyo yazılımının akademik başarı ve öğretim sürecinde kullanımına yönelik tutuma etkisi [The effect of e-portfolio software integrated into Facebook social network on academic achievement and attitude towards its use in the teaching process]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 6(1), 38-56.
• Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
• Paulson, F.L., Paulsen, P.R. & Meyer, C.A. (1991). What makes a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48 (5), 60-63.
• Polat, M. & Köse, Y. (2013). Perceptions of primary education teachers towards the use of e-portfolio as a tool of performance evaluation in schools. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 1 (1), 57-82.
• Pullman, G. 2002. Electronic portfolios revisited: The e-portfolios project. Computers and Composition, 19 (2), 151–69.
• Samaras, A., P., & Fox, R., K. (2013). Capturing the process of critical reflective teaching practices through e-portfolios, Professional Development in Education,39(1), 23-41.
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research-Online, 8(2), 23-74.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2013) Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim kuramdan uygulamaya, Yargı Yayınevi.
• Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th Edition). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
• Tetik-Küçükelçi, D. (2019). Hastane anksiyete ve depresyon ölçeği (HADS) üzerine bir çalışma [A study on the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS)]. Life Skills Psychology Journal, 3(5), 85-91
• Tezbaşaran, A.A. (1997). Likert tipi ölçek hazırlama kılavuzu [Likert type scale preparation guide], Türk Psikologlar Derneği,
• Wesson, C., & King, R. (1996). Portfolio assessment and special education students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 28, 44-48.
• Zeybek, Ü. G. (2019). Veritabanı organizasyonu dersinde elektronik portfolyo uygulamalarının akademik başarıya etkisi [The effect of electronic portfolio applications on academic success in database organization course]. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 21(4), 1045-1058.