Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği

Year 2017, Issue: 12, 67 - 83, 25.07.2017

Suat Çelik Türkan Karakuş Engin Kurşun Yüksel Göktaş Mevlüt Özben

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın
amacı, Fırsatları Arttırma ve Teknolojiyi İyileştirme Hareketi Projesinin
(FATİH) pilot uygulamasına katılan öğretmen ve öğrencilerin; öğretmenler, öğrenciler
ve okul müdürlerinin bakış açısından karşılaştıkları pedagojik sorunları
araştırmaktır. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Hükümeti, okulların eğitimde Bilgi ve
İletişim Teknolojilerinden yararlanmaları için FATİH projesini Türkiye çapında
başlatmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini; Türkiye’nin doğusunda yer alan dört il
merkezinde projenin pilot uygulamasına katılan 167 öğretmen, 667 öğrenci ve 31
okul müdürü oluşturmaktadır. Veriler likert ölçeği anketleri ve grup
görüşmeleri ile toplanmıştır. Anketler projede yer alan okullardaki
öğretmenlere, öğrencilere ve okul yöneticilere online ortamda uygulanmıştır.
Toplanan nicel veriler analiz edildikten sonra belirlenen öğrenci, öğretmen ve
okul idarecileri ile odak grup görüşmeleri yapılmıştır. Nicel veriler betimsel
analizlere tabi tutulurken, nitel veriler içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur.
İçerik analizinin güvenirliğini sağlamak için veriler iki araştırmacı
tarafından analiz edilerek tutarlılık katsayısı hesaplanmıştır. Nicel ve nitel
sonuçlar bazı farklılıklar göstermesine rağmen bulgular öğretmenlerin sınıf
yönetiminde zorluk çektiklerini, sınıftaki lider rollerini kaybettiklerini,
bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin entegrasyonu ile birlikte öğrencileriyle
olan iletişim ve etkileşimlerini kaybettiklerini göstermektedir. Öğrenciler
açısından ise; yeni teknolojilerin öğrencilerde dikkat dağınıklığına yol
açtığı, öğrencilerin zamanlarının çoğunu bu teknolojilerle oynayarak
geçirmelerine neden olduğu ve öğrencilerin pasif hale gelmesine neden olmak
gibi birçok pedagojik soruna yol açtığı ve öğrencilerin bu teknolojileri sadece
oyun oynamak için kullandıkları öğretmenler, öğrenciler ve okul müdürleri
tarafından dile getirilmiştir. 

Keywords

FATİH projesi pedagojik problemler BİT

References

  • Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe. European Commission, European Schoolnet.
  • Butler, D., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to AdoptingTechnology for Teaching and Learning. Educause Quarterly, 2, 22-28.
  • Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39 (1), 22-43.
  • Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42 (2), 21-29.
  • Cox, M., Preston, C., & Cox, K. (1999). What Factors Support or Prevent Teachers from Using ICT in their Classrooms? British Educational Research Association Annual Conference. September, pp. 2-5. Brighton: University of Sussex at Brighton.
  • Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, G. (2001). High Access and Low Use of Technologies in High School: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (4), 813-834.
  • Deaney, R., Ruthven, K., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Pupil perspectives on the contribution of information and communication technology to teaching and learning in the secondary school. Research Papers in Education, 18 (2), 141-165.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47 (4), 47-61.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53 (4), 25-39.
  • Frey, J. H., & Fontana, A. (1991). The group interview in social research. The Social Science Journal, 28 (2), 175-187.
  • Gall, G., & Gall, J. (2003). Educational research: An introduction. Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Ghavifekr, S., Kunjappan, T., Ramasamy, L., & Anthony, A. (2016). Teaching and Learning with ICT Tools: Issues and Challenges from Teachers' Perceptions. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), 38-57.
  • Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J. J. (2017). Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 441-449.
  • Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Techology for Teacher Education, 10 (3), 257-278.
  • Goktas, Y., Gedik, N., & Baydas, O. (2013). Enablers and barriers to the use of ICT in primary schools in Turkey: A comparative study of 2005–2011. Computers & Education, 68, 211-222.
  • Jagdish, R. (2006). ICT for Curriculum Support and Teaching. DRTC15 Conference on ICT for Digital Learning Environment. Bangalore: Indian Statistical Institute.
  • Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42 (2), 7-19.
  • Kraushaar, J. M., & David, C. (2010). Examining the Affects of Student Multitasking With Laptops during the Lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21 (2), 241-251.
  • Laurillard, D. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 5-20.
  • Lipponen, L. (1999). The Challenges for Computer Supported Collaborative Learning in Elementary and Secondary Level: Finnish Perspectives. In Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning. December, p. 46. International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  • Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research. London: Sage.
  • McCormick, R., & Scrimshaw, P. (2001). Information and Communications Technology, Knowledge and Pedagogy. Education, Communication and Information, 1 (1), 37-57.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  • Ministry of National Education (MONE). (2013, 03 12). About Fatih Project. Retrieved 03 12, 2013 from Fatih Projesi: http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/tr/icerikincele.php?id=6
  • Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers' use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9 (3), 319-342.
  • Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K., Newby, T., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55 (3), 1321-1335.
  • Pelgrum, W. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37, 163-178.
  • Sana, F., Tina, W., & Nicholas, J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education (62), 24-31.
  • Watson, D. M. (2001). Pedagogy before Technology: Re-thinking the Relationship between ICT and Teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6 (4), 251–266.
  • Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A Review of Pedagogy Related to Information and Communications Technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13 (3).
  • Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58 (1), 365-374.

Year 2017, Issue: 12, 67 - 83, 25.07.2017

Suat Çelik Türkan Karakuş Engin Kurşun Yüksel Göktaş Mevlüt Özben

Abstract

References

  • Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT Impact Report A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe. European Commission, European Schoolnet.
  • Butler, D., & Sellbom, M. (2002). Barriers to AdoptingTechnology for Teaching and Learning. Educause Quarterly, 2, 22-28.
  • Brinkerhoff, J. (2006). Effects of a long-duration, professional development academy on technology skills, computer self-efficacy, and technology integration beliefs and practices. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39 (1), 22-43.
  • Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42 (2), 21-29.
  • Cox, M., Preston, C., & Cox, K. (1999). What Factors Support or Prevent Teachers from Using ICT in their Classrooms? British Educational Research Association Annual Conference. September, pp. 2-5. Brighton: University of Sussex at Brighton.
  • Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, G. (2001). High Access and Low Use of Technologies in High School: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (4), 813-834.
  • Deaney, R., Ruthven, K., & Hennessy, S. (2003). Pupil perspectives on the contribution of information and communication technology to teaching and learning in the secondary school. Research Papers in Education, 18 (2), 141-165.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47 (4), 47-61.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53 (4), 25-39.
  • Frey, J. H., & Fontana, A. (1991). The group interview in social research. The Social Science Journal, 28 (2), 175-187.
  • Gall, G., & Gall, J. (2003). Educational research: An introduction. Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Ghavifekr, S., Kunjappan, T., Ramasamy, L., & Anthony, A. (2016). Teaching and Learning with ICT Tools: Issues and Challenges from Teachers' Perceptions. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), 38-57.
  • Gil-Flores, J., Rodríguez-Santero, J., & Torres-Gordillo, J. J. (2017). Factors that explain the use of ICT in secondary-education classrooms: The role of teacher characteristics and school infrastructure. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 441-449.
  • Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Techology for Teacher Education, 10 (3), 257-278.
  • Goktas, Y., Gedik, N., & Baydas, O. (2013). Enablers and barriers to the use of ICT in primary schools in Turkey: A comparative study of 2005–2011. Computers & Education, 68, 211-222.
  • Jagdish, R. (2006). ICT for Curriculum Support and Teaching. DRTC15 Conference on ICT for Digital Learning Environment. Bangalore: Indian Statistical Institute.
  • Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42 (2), 7-19.
  • Kraushaar, J. M., & David, C. (2010). Examining the Affects of Student Multitasking With Laptops during the Lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21 (2), 241-251.
  • Laurillard, D. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 5-20.
  • Lipponen, L. (1999). The Challenges for Computer Supported Collaborative Learning in Elementary and Secondary Level: Finnish Perspectives. In Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning. December, p. 46. International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  • Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research. London: Sage.
  • McCormick, R., & Scrimshaw, P. (2001). Information and Communications Technology, Knowledge and Pedagogy. Education, Communication and Information, 1 (1), 37-57.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  • Ministry of National Education (MONE). (2013, 03 12). About Fatih Project. Retrieved 03 12, 2013 from Fatih Projesi: http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/tr/icerikincele.php?id=6
  • Mumtaz, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers' use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9 (3), 319-342.
  • Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K., Newby, T., & Ertmer, P. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55 (3), 1321-1335.
  • Pelgrum, W. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers & Education, 37, 163-178.
  • Sana, F., Tina, W., & Nicholas, J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education (62), 24-31.
  • Watson, D. M. (2001). Pedagogy before Technology: Re-thinking the Relationship between ICT and Teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6 (4), 251–266.
  • Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A Review of Pedagogy Related to Information and Communications Technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13 (3).
  • Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58 (1), 365-374.
There are 31 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Suat Çelik

Türkan Karakuş

Engin Kurşun

Yüksel Göktaş

Mevlüt Özben

Publication Date July 25, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017 Issue: 12

Cite

APA Çelik, S., Karakuş, T., Kurşun, E., Göktaş, Y., et al. (2017). Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği. Journal of Education and Future(12), 67-83.
AMA Çelik S, Karakuş T, Kurşun E, Göktaş Y, Özben M. Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği. JEF. July 2017;(12):67-83.
Chicago Çelik, Suat, Türkan Karakuş, Engin Kurşun, Yüksel Göktaş, and Mevlüt Özben. “Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler Ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği”. Journal of Education and Future, no. 12 (July 2017): 67-83.
EndNote Çelik S, Karakuş T, Kurşun E, Göktaş Y, Özben M (July 1, 2017) Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği. Journal of Education and Future 12 67–83.
IEEE S. Çelik, T. Karakuş, E. Kurşun, Y. Göktaş, and M. Özben, “Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği”, JEF, no. 12, pp. 67–83, July 2017.
ISNAD Çelik, Suat et al. “Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler Ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği”. Journal of Education and Future 12 (July 2017), 67-83.
JAMA Çelik S, Karakuş T, Kurşun E, Göktaş Y, Özben M. Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği. JEF. 2017;:67–83.
MLA Çelik, Suat et al. “Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler Ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği”. Journal of Education and Future, no. 12, 2017, pp. 67-83.
Vancouver Çelik S, Karakuş T, Kurşun E, Göktaş Y, Özben M. Teknoloji Destekli Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmenler ve Öğrencilerin Karşılaştığı Pedagojik Problemler: FATİH Projesi Örneği. JEF. 2017(12):67-83.
Gereken durumlarda baş editör ile iletişim kurmak için jef.editor@gmail.com adresine e-posta gönderebilirsiniz.