Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Investigation of physiotherapy and rehabilitation students’ behaviors towards Web 2.0 tools: a case of Hacettepe University

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 3, 198 - 205, 19.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.15437/jetr.1451700

Abstract

Purpose: The use of Web 2.0 technologies in education with technological developments and the fact that education has become dynamic with this method is one of the most remarkable issues in this field in recent years. The aim of this study is to evaluate the behaviors and frequency of physiotherapy and rehabilitation students towards the use of Web 2.0 technologies in education.
Methods: The researchers created an evaluation form by scanning the Web 2.0 tools in the literature. In the evaluation form, which was presented to the students via ‘Google Forms’, information about the tools they use to create online classes or meetings, collaborate, develop content, collect data, interactive question tools, online education platforms and social media were evaluated.
Results: The study was completed with 218 students (170 F, 48 M). 63 1st grade students (28.90 %), 69 2nd grade students (31.70 %), 40 3rd grade students (18.30 %), 46 4th grade students (21.10 %) participated in the study. It was found that the most preferred Web 2.0 tools by the students were YouTube (97.70 %), Zoom (96.80 %) and Instagram (89 %), respectively. It was found that the majority of students never preferred Piktochart (98.20 %), Camtasia (97.20 %) and MindMeister (97.20 %).
Conclusion: As a result of the study, it was found that YouTube and Instagram among social media applications and Zoom among course creation applications were most preferred by physiotherapy students, while the tools used for content development/collaboration and online education platforms were not preferred at all by the majority of students. The results obtained from this study show that physiotherapy and rehabilitation students' awareness of Web 2.0 tools in educational processes should be increased and their use should be improved.

References

  • Bircan E. Türkçe öğretmenlerinin Web 2.0 araçlarını kullanma yetkinliklerinin incelenmesi. Inonu Univ J Fac Educ. 2022;23:307-323.
  • Mącznik AK, Ribeiro DC, Baxter GD. Online technology use in physiotherapy teaching and learning: A systematic review of effectiveness and users’ perceptions. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:1-12.
  • Horzum MB. Öğretmenlerin Web 2.0 araçlarından haberdarlığı, kullanım sıklıkları ve amaçlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Int J Hum Sci. 2010;7:603-634.
  • Altıok S, Yükseltürk E, Üçgül M. Web 2.0 eğitimine yönelik gerçekleştirilen bilimsel bir etkinliğin değerlendirilmesi: Katılımcı görüşleri. J Instruct Technol Teach Educ. 2017;6:1-8.
  • ÇELİK T. Web 2.0 araçları kullanımı yetkinliği ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Pamukkale Univ J Educ. 2021:1-30.
  • Elmas R, Geban Ö. Web 2.0 tools for 21st century teachers. Int Online J Educ Sci. 2012;4:243-254.
  • Ødegaard NB, Myrhaug HT, Dahl-Michelsen T, et al. Digital learning designs in physiotherapy education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21:1-18.
  • Ajjan H, Hartshorne R. Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet High Educ. 2008;11:71-80.
  • Ganesh GS, Mishra M, Dalei NN, et al. Role of social media tools in online teaching: Perception of physiotherapy students and knowledge translation. Bull Fac Phys Ther. 2022;27:7.
  • Bachman S. The use of video in the occupational therapy graduate classroom. J Occup Ther Educ. 2020;4:18.
  • Demir YP, Çirak Y, Yilmaz GD, et al. Fizyoterapi öğrencilerinde bireysel öğrenme stillerinin önemi. Turk J Physiother Rehabil. 2014;1:1-7.
  • Ilham S, Vázquez-Cano E, Novita L. Use of Canva application as a learning media. Al-Hijr. 2022;1:9-15.
  • Fitria TN. Using Canva as media for English language teaching (elt) in developing creativity for informatics students’. ELT Echo: J Eng Lang Teach Foreign Lang Context. 2022;7:58-68.
  • George DR, Dreibelbis TD, Aumiller B. Google docs and SurveyMonkey™: Lecture-based active learning tools. Med Educ. 2013;47:518-518.
  • Basilaia G, Dgebuadze M, Kantaria M, et al. Replacing the classic learning form at universities as an immediate response to the covid-19 virus infection in Georgia. Int J Res Appl Sci Eng Technol. 2020;8:101-108.
  • Varannai I, Sasvári PL, Urbanovics A. The use of gamification in higher education: An empirical study. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2017;8:1-6.
  • Richter G, Raban DR, Rafaeli S. Studying gamification: The effect of rewards and incentives on motivation. Springer; 2015.
  • Almusharraf N. Incorporation of a game-based approach into the efl online classrooms: Students' perceptions. Interact Learn Environ. 2023;31:4440-4453.
  • Utami CP, Noviana L. Students’ perspective in the use of ted talks in speaking class. IDEAS: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature. 2021;9:275-283.
  • Pollock W, Rea PM. The use of social media in anatomical and health professional education: A systematic review. Biomed Vis. 2019;5:149-170.
  • Lenhart A. Teens, social media & technology overview 2015. 2015. [Internet]. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech.
  • Ramos-Rincón JM, Belinchón-Romero I, Sánchez-Ferrer F, et al. The reach of Spanish-language YouTube videos on physical examinations made by undergraduate medical students. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2017;14:1-8.
  • Tackett S, Slinn K, Marshall T, et al. Medical education videos for the world: An analysis of viewing patterns for a YouTube channel. Acad Med. 2018;93:1150-1156.
  • Mukhopadhyay S, Kruger E, Tennant M. YouTube: A new way of supplementing traditional methods in dental education. J Dent Educ. 2014;78:1568-1571.
  • Rung A, Warnke F, Mattheos N. Investigating the use of smartphones for learning purposes by Australian dental students. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2:3120.
  • Tower M, Latimer S, Hewitt J. Social networking as a learning tool: Nursing students' perception of efficacy. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34:1012-1017.
  • Price AM, Devis K, LeMoine G, et al. First year nursing students use of social media within education: Results of a survey. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;61:70-76.
  • Ma TW, Leung L, Martin R, et al. “A great tool to open your eyes”: New graduate physiotherapists’ perceptions and use of social media for learning. Physiother Theory Pract. 2024;40:2038-2050.
  • Adzovie DE, Nyieku IE, Keku JA. Influence of Facebook usage on employee productivity: A case of university of cape coast staff. Afr J Bus Manag. 2017;11:110-116.

Fizyoterapi ve rehabilitasyon öğrencilerinin Web 2.0 araçlarına yönelik davranışlarının incelenmesi: Hacettepe Üniversitesi örneği

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 3, 198 - 205, 19.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.15437/jetr.1451700

Abstract

Amaç: Teknolojik gelişmelerle birlikte Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin eğitimde kullanılması ve bu yöntemle birlikte eğitimin dinamik bir hale gelmesi, son yıllarda bu alandaki en dikkat çekici konulardan birisidir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon öğrencilerinin eğitimde Web 2.0 teknolojilerinin kullanımına yönelik davranışlarının ve sıklığının değerlendirilmesidir.
Yöntem: Araştırmacılar, literatürde yer alan Web 2.0 araçlarını tarayarak bir değerlendirme formu oluşturdu. Öğrencilere ‘Google Forms’ üzerinden sunulan değerlendirme formunda, eğitimde online sınıf oluşturmak veya toplantı yapmak, ortak çalışma sağlamak, içerik geliştirmek, veri toplamak, interaktif soru araçları, online eğitim platformları ve sosyal medyaya ulaşmak için kullandıkları araçların hangileri olduğu ile ilgili bilgileri değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Çalışma, 218 öğrenci (170 K, 48 E) ile tamamlandı. Çalışmaya, 63 1. sınıf öğrencisi (%28,90), 69 2. sınıf öğrencisi (%31,70), 40 3. sınıf öğrencisi (%18,30), 46 4. Sınıf öğrencisi (%21,10) katıldı. Öğrenciler tarafından en çok tercih edilen Web 2.0 araçlarının sırasıyla YouTube (%97,70), Zoom (%96,80) ve Instagram (%89) oldukları bulundu. Öğrencilerin büyük çoğunluğunun Piktochart (%98,20), Camtasia (%97,20) ve MindMeister (%97,20) araçlarını hiç tercih etmediği bulundu.
Sonuç: Çalışmanın sonucunda fizyoterapi öğrencileri tarafından sırasıyla sosyal medya uygulamalarından Youtube ve Instagram, ders oluşturma uygulamalarından Zoom en çok tercih edilirken, içerik geliştirme/ortak çalışma amacıyla ve çevrimiçi eğitim platformları olarak kullanılan araçların öğrencilerin büyük çoğunluğu tarafından hiç tercih edilmediği bulundu. Bu çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlar, Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon öğrencilerinin eğitim süreçlerinde Web 2.0 araçları konusunda farkındalıklarının artırılarak kullanımlarının geliştirilmesi gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Ethical Statement

Hacettepe Üniversitesi Girişimsel Olmayan Klinik Araştırmalar Etik Kurulu onayı alındı (Etik Kurul Onay Numarası: GO 22/1249. Etik Kurul Onay Tarihi: 13.12.2022).

Supporting Institution

Yok

Thanks

Yok

References

  • Bircan E. Türkçe öğretmenlerinin Web 2.0 araçlarını kullanma yetkinliklerinin incelenmesi. Inonu Univ J Fac Educ. 2022;23:307-323.
  • Mącznik AK, Ribeiro DC, Baxter GD. Online technology use in physiotherapy teaching and learning: A systematic review of effectiveness and users’ perceptions. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:1-12.
  • Horzum MB. Öğretmenlerin Web 2.0 araçlarından haberdarlığı, kullanım sıklıkları ve amaçlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Int J Hum Sci. 2010;7:603-634.
  • Altıok S, Yükseltürk E, Üçgül M. Web 2.0 eğitimine yönelik gerçekleştirilen bilimsel bir etkinliğin değerlendirilmesi: Katılımcı görüşleri. J Instruct Technol Teach Educ. 2017;6:1-8.
  • ÇELİK T. Web 2.0 araçları kullanımı yetkinliği ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Pamukkale Univ J Educ. 2021:1-30.
  • Elmas R, Geban Ö. Web 2.0 tools for 21st century teachers. Int Online J Educ Sci. 2012;4:243-254.
  • Ødegaard NB, Myrhaug HT, Dahl-Michelsen T, et al. Digital learning designs in physiotherapy education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21:1-18.
  • Ajjan H, Hartshorne R. Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet High Educ. 2008;11:71-80.
  • Ganesh GS, Mishra M, Dalei NN, et al. Role of social media tools in online teaching: Perception of physiotherapy students and knowledge translation. Bull Fac Phys Ther. 2022;27:7.
  • Bachman S. The use of video in the occupational therapy graduate classroom. J Occup Ther Educ. 2020;4:18.
  • Demir YP, Çirak Y, Yilmaz GD, et al. Fizyoterapi öğrencilerinde bireysel öğrenme stillerinin önemi. Turk J Physiother Rehabil. 2014;1:1-7.
  • Ilham S, Vázquez-Cano E, Novita L. Use of Canva application as a learning media. Al-Hijr. 2022;1:9-15.
  • Fitria TN. Using Canva as media for English language teaching (elt) in developing creativity for informatics students’. ELT Echo: J Eng Lang Teach Foreign Lang Context. 2022;7:58-68.
  • George DR, Dreibelbis TD, Aumiller B. Google docs and SurveyMonkey™: Lecture-based active learning tools. Med Educ. 2013;47:518-518.
  • Basilaia G, Dgebuadze M, Kantaria M, et al. Replacing the classic learning form at universities as an immediate response to the covid-19 virus infection in Georgia. Int J Res Appl Sci Eng Technol. 2020;8:101-108.
  • Varannai I, Sasvári PL, Urbanovics A. The use of gamification in higher education: An empirical study. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2017;8:1-6.
  • Richter G, Raban DR, Rafaeli S. Studying gamification: The effect of rewards and incentives on motivation. Springer; 2015.
  • Almusharraf N. Incorporation of a game-based approach into the efl online classrooms: Students' perceptions. Interact Learn Environ. 2023;31:4440-4453.
  • Utami CP, Noviana L. Students’ perspective in the use of ted talks in speaking class. IDEAS: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature. 2021;9:275-283.
  • Pollock W, Rea PM. The use of social media in anatomical and health professional education: A systematic review. Biomed Vis. 2019;5:149-170.
  • Lenhart A. Teens, social media & technology overview 2015. 2015. [Internet]. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech.
  • Ramos-Rincón JM, Belinchón-Romero I, Sánchez-Ferrer F, et al. The reach of Spanish-language YouTube videos on physical examinations made by undergraduate medical students. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2017;14:1-8.
  • Tackett S, Slinn K, Marshall T, et al. Medical education videos for the world: An analysis of viewing patterns for a YouTube channel. Acad Med. 2018;93:1150-1156.
  • Mukhopadhyay S, Kruger E, Tennant M. YouTube: A new way of supplementing traditional methods in dental education. J Dent Educ. 2014;78:1568-1571.
  • Rung A, Warnke F, Mattheos N. Investigating the use of smartphones for learning purposes by Australian dental students. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2:3120.
  • Tower M, Latimer S, Hewitt J. Social networking as a learning tool: Nursing students' perception of efficacy. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34:1012-1017.
  • Price AM, Devis K, LeMoine G, et al. First year nursing students use of social media within education: Results of a survey. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;61:70-76.
  • Ma TW, Leung L, Martin R, et al. “A great tool to open your eyes”: New graduate physiotherapists’ perceptions and use of social media for learning. Physiother Theory Pract. 2024;40:2038-2050.
  • Adzovie DE, Nyieku IE, Keku JA. Influence of Facebook usage on employee productivity: A case of university of cape coast staff. Afr J Bus Manag. 2017;11:110-116.
There are 29 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Physiotherapy
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Fatma Ayvat 0000-0001-5692-4497

Mert Doğan 0000-0001-7990-3365

Ender Ayvat 0000-0002-7111-6495

Özge Onursal Kılınç 0000-0003-1885-6942

Gülşah Sütçü 0000-0002-8457-7477

Muhammed Kılınç 0000-0001-6227-2085

Sibel Aksu Yıldırım 0000-0002-7276-788X

Publication Date December 19, 2024
Submission Date March 13, 2024
Acceptance Date July 1, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 11 Issue: 3

Cite

Vancouver Ayvat F, Doğan M, Ayvat E, Onursal Kılınç Ö, Sütçü G, Kılınç M, Aksu Yıldırım S. Fizyoterapi ve rehabilitasyon öğrencilerinin Web 2.0 araçlarına yönelik davranışlarının incelenmesi: Hacettepe Üniversitesi örneği. JETR. 2024;11(3):198-205.