Bir Taşla İki Kuş: Web 2.0 Kullanarak Akran Etkileşimi Yoluyla Teknoloji Algılarını Artırma

Abstract

Öğretmen adaylarının Web 2.0 araçlarını akranları ile kullanımı esnasındaki etkileşimi, onlara bireysel amaçlar doğrultusundaki kullanıma göre dikkate değer düzeyde katkı sağlamaktadır. Web 2.0 araçları, kullanıcıların etkin biçimde yer aldığı bir web ortamı yaratmıştır. Öğretmen adayları; bilgiye ulaşma, bilgiyi yapılandırma ve yayma sürecinde kullanabileceği bir araçla yüzyüzedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı, Web 2.0 araçlarından Vikipedi, Facebook ve Ağ Günlüklerinin kullanıldığı öğrenme çevresinde öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji algılarındaki değişimi belirlemektir. Araştırma, aynı zamanda akran öğrenimi bağlamında bu değişimin altında yatan nedenleri ortaya koymayı amaçlamıştır. Bir devlet üniversitesinde öğrenim gören Bilgisayar 2 dersini almakta olan altmış dokuz öğretmen adayının katıldığı araştırmada ardışık açıklayıcı karma desen kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada nicel veri, ön test ve son test olarak uygulanan “Teknoloji Algısı” ölçeği ile toplanmıştır. Nitel veri ise görüşme formları aracılığıyla öğretmen adaylarının akran ve bireysel öğrenme yolu tercihlerine göre toplanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre; öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji algılarına yönelik ön test son test puanları, son test puanları lehine anlamlı farklılık göstermektedir. Öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji algıları Web 2.0 araçlarının kullanımı ile artmakta ve bu artış anlamlı biçimde farklılaşmaktadır. Görüşme analizi sonuçlarına göre ise, akran öğrenmenin bilgisayar ve üst düzey düşünme becerilerinin yanı sıra kültürel yönden de gelişim sağladığı belirlenmiştir. Bununla birlikte sosyalleşme, etkileşim ve psikolojik ögeler gibi duyuşsal özelliklerin de geliştiği saptanmıştır. 

Keywords

• bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri,öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji algıları,akran etkileşimi

Two Birds with One Stone: Enhancing Technology Perception with Peer Interaction using Web 2.0

Abstract

The contribution of pre-service teachers using Web 2.0 tools for peer interaction to provide the other pre-service teachers is more remarkable than pre-service teachers who use Web 2.0 tools for individual purposes. This research aims to determine the change of technology perceptions of pre-service teachers studying in learning environments created by using Web 2.0 tools which were Wikipedia, Facebook and blogs. This research also strives to reveal the underlying causes of this change within the context of peer learning. Sixty-nine pre-service teachers who attended Computer-2 Class in a large public university participated in this research and the sequential explanatory mixed method was applied. In this research the qualitative data were collected by using Scale of Technological Perception in the form of pre and post-tests. Then, quantitative data were collected by interview forms to determine the effect of learning type on technology perception and their choice of peer or individual learning. The findings obtained from qualitative data indicate a significant difference between pre and post test scores as the score is higher in post-test regarding technology perceptions. The analysis of the interviews show that peer learning promotes computer skills, high level learning skills. In addition, it develops affective features such as socializing, interaction and psychological effects.

Keywords

• information and communication technologies,pre-services students’ technology perception,peer interaction

References

1. Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? Educause Review, 41(2). 32-44.
2. Altun, A. (2008). Yapılandırmacı Öğretim Sürecinde Viki Kullanımı. Paper presented at the International Educational Technology Conference (IETC 2008). Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
3. Bellanca, J. & Brandt, R. (2010). Twenty-first century skills: Rethinking how students learn, Moorabbin, VIC: Hawker Brownlow.
4. Bennett, S., Bishop, A., Dalgarno, B., Waycott, J. & Kennedy, G. (2012). Implementing Web 2.0 technologies in higher education: A collective case study. Computers & Education, 59(2), 524-534.
5. Brown, A.L. (2014). Implementing active learning in an online teacher education course. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(3), 170-182.
6. Chan, K.K. & Ridgway, J. (2006). Students’ perception of using blogs as a tool for reflection and communication. Paper presented at the Association for Learning Technology Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland.
7. Chiong, R. & Jovanovic, J. (2012). Collaborative learning in online study groups: An evolutionary game theory perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education, 11, 81-101.
8. Clark, W., Logan, K., Luckin, R., Mee, A. & Oliver, M. (2009). Beyond Web 2.0: Mapping the technology landscapes of young learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 56-69.

9. Cook, D.A. (2007). Web based learning: Pros, cons and controversie. Clinical Medicine, 7(1), 37-42.
10. Coover, D. & Owen, S.V (1989). Development and validation of the computer self-efficacy scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 893-899.
11. Creswell, J.W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124 -130.
12. Creswell, J.W. (2013). Nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları/araştırma deseni (Ed. Selçuk Beşir Demir). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
13. Demirci, N. (2005). Fizik öğretiminin yeniden gözden geçirilme ihtiyacı ve bazı geleneksel Olmayan öğretim yöntemlerine örnekler, 23. Uluslararası Fizik Kongresi, Eylül 2005. Muğla University, Muğla, Turkey.
14. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? P. Dillenbourg. Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, Oxford: Elsevier, 1-19.
15. Doğan D.G. & Ulukol B. (2010). Ergenlerin sigara içmesini etkileyen faktörler ve sigara karşıtı iki eğitim modelinin etkinliği, İnönü Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 179-85.
16. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E. & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education. 59(2), 423-435.
17. European Commission (2008). Commission staff working document on the use of ICT to support innovation and lifelong learning for all – A report on progress. SEC(2008) 2629 final. Retrieved from: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2008/2629/COM_SEC(2008)2629_EN.pdf on 05.10.2015.
18. Fer, S. & Cırık, İ. (2007). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. İstanbul: Morpa Kültür Yayınları.
19. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Mathes, P. G. & Simmons, D.C. (1997). Peer-assisted learning strategies: Making classroom more responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 174-206.
20. Gökçearslan, S. & Özcan, S. (2011). Place of wikis in learning and teaching process. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 481-485.
21. Hamden, N., McKnight, P.E., McKnight, K. & Arfstrom, K. (2013). A review of flipped learning. Flipped Learning Network. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
22. Hooker, D.D.T. (2010). A study of the effects of the implementation of small peer led collaborative group learning on students in developmental mathematics courses at a tribal community college. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana.
23. Huanga, W.H, Hoodb, D.W. & Yooc, S.J. (2013). Gender divide and acceptance of collaborative Web 2.0 applications for learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education. 16, 57–65.
24. Hurley, K. F., McKay, D. W., Scott, T. & James, B. (2003). The supplemental instruction project: Peer-devised and delivered tutorials. Medical Teacher, 25(4), 404–407.
25. ISTE (2008). ISTE standards for teachers’ resources. Retrieved from: http://www.iste.org/standards/standards-for-teachers on 06.11.2014.
26. Kang, I., Bonk, C-J. & Chun M-C. (2011). A case study of blog-based learning in Korea: Technology becomes pedagogy. Internet and Higher Education, 14, 227-235.
27. Karakoç, T. (2002). Görme engelli öğrencilere matematikte sözlü problem çözümünün öğretiminde doğrudan öğretim yaklaşımına göre hazırlanan öğretim programının akranlar aracılığıyla sunulmasının etkililiği. (Unpublished master dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
28. Kavanoz, S. & Yüksel, G. (2010). An investigation of peer-teaching technique in student teacher development [Special issue]. The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 1, 1-19.
29. Kaymas, S. (2010). Yeni liberalizmin hegemonya uğrağı olarak enformasyon toplumu söylemi ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler: Türkiye ve bilgi toplumu siyasası. Yakındoğu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 64-104.
30. Kiarie, W.M. (2003). The differential effects of peer tutorıng and peer tutorıng wıth a group contingency on the spelling performance and dısruptıve behavıor of fourth-grade students ın a general education classroom. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), The Ohio State University, Ohio, USA.
31. Kirschner, P.A. & Karpinski, A.C. (2010). Facebook and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1237-1245.
32. Koç, C. (2011). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının öğretmenlik uygulamasında akran değerlendirmeye ilişkin görüşleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 11(4), 1965-1989.
33. Lei, J. (2009). Digital natives as preservice teachers: What technology preparation is needed? Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25(3), 87–97.
34. Lepi, K. (2012). 25 Ways teachers can integrate social media into education. Retrieved from http://edudemic.com/2012/07/a-teachers-guide-to-social-media on 11.08.2015.
35. Linkoln, Y.S. & Guba, G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage Publication.
36. Meriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37. Mishra, P. & Kereluik, K. (2011). What 21st century learning? A review and a synthesis. SITE Conference. Michigan State University. Retrieved from http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/21stCenturyKnowledge_PM_KK.pdf on 11.09.2015.
38. Module 1 Peer Education. (2009). Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/pdf/youthnet/action/message/escap_peers_01.pdf on 20.06.2015.
39. Ocak, M.A., Gökçearslan, S. & Solmaz, E. (2014). Investigating Turkish Pre-Service Teachers' Perceptions of Blogs: Implications for the FATIH Project. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(1), 22-38.
40. OECD (2010), OECD Information Technology Outlook 2010 Highlights, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/46444955.pdf on 14.07.2015.
41. Patton, M.Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri (S. Çelik-F. Ö. Karataş, Trans.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
42. Peled, Y., Bar-Shalom, O. & Sharon, R. (2014). Characterisation of pre-service teachers' attitude to feedback in a wiki-environment framework. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(5), 578-593.
43. Peltier-Davis, C. (2009). Web 2.0, library 2.0, library user 2.0, librarian user 2.0: Innovative services for sustainable libraries, Computers in Libraries, November/December, 16-21.
44. Pifarré, M. & Fisher, R. (2011). Breaking up the writing process: How wikis can support understanding the composition and revision strategies of young writers. Language and Education, 25(5), 451–466.
45. Ruggiero, D. & Mong, C. J. (2015). The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 161-178. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP161-178Ruggiero0958.pdf
46. Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J. & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring pre-service teachers' beliefs about using Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 classroom. Computers & Education, 59(3), 937-945.
47. Seitzinger, J. (2006). Be constructive: Blogs, podcasts, and wikis as constructivist learning tools. Learning Learning Solutions e-Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/220/be-constructive-blogs-podcasts-and-wikis-as-constructivist-learning-tools/page4 on13.10.2015.
48. Selwyn, N. (2007). Screw blackboard. Do it on facebook! An investigation of students' educational use of facebook. Retrieved from: http://www.scribd.com/doc/513958/Facebookseminar-paper-Selwyn on 10.06.2015.
49. Sencar-Tokgöz, S. (2007). The effect of peer instruction on sixth grade students’ science achievement and attitudes. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
50. Shamir, A., Mevarech, Z. R. & Gida, C. (2008). The assessment of meta-cognition in different contexts: Individualized vs. peer assisted learning. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 47-61.
51. Tanrıöver, Ö., İzbırak, G., Akan, H., Gürol, Y., Demirtaş, K. , Kaspar, E.Ç. & Vitrinel, K., (2010). Yeditepe üniversitesi tıp fakültesi öğrenci YÜTBAT kongresinde yapılan klinik beceri akran eğitimi çalıştayının değerlendirilmesi, Yeditepe Medical Journal. 4(2), 278- 283.
52. Tınmaz, H. (2004). An assessment of preservice teachers’ technology perception in relation to their subject area. (Unpublished master dissertation), Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
53. Topping, K.J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645.
54. Tümer A. (2007). Fiziksel aktiviteyi artırmada değişim aşaması temelli bireysel danışmanlık girişiminin etkililiği. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.
55. Usluel, Y. & Seferoğlu, S. (2003). Eğitim fakültelerindeki öğretim elemanlarının bilgisayar kullanımı ve öz-yeterlik algıları. BTIE, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
56. Usta, E. & Korkmaz, Ö. (2010). Pre-service teachers’ computer competencies, perception of technology use and attitudes toward teaching career. International Journal of Human Sciences, 7(1), 1335-1349.
57. Waschull, S.B. (2001). The online delivery of psychology courses: attrition, performance, and evaluation. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 143-147.
58. Weidinger, D. (2005). The effects of classwide peer tutoring on the acquisition of kindergarten reading and math skills. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Kansas University, Kansas, USA.
59. West, A., Lewis, J. & Currie, P. (2009). Students’ facebook ‘Friends’: Public and private spheres. Journal of Youth Studies, 12(6), 615-627.
60. Wheatley, G.H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75(1), 9-21.
61. Wichmann, A. & Rummel, N. (2013). Improving revision in wiki-based writing: Coordination pays off. Computers & Education, 62, 262-270.