Developing a Scale to Assess Teachers’ Perceptions towards Using Web 2.0 Tools in Lectures (TPUWL Scale)

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 3, 124 - 138, 01.12.2020

Bekir Yıldırım Adem Akkuş

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.38.7.3

Cited By: 5

Abstract

Web 2.0 tools are the tools helping individuals share information online. Although there are scales which determine the opinions of teachers on using web 2.0 tools there is no scale developed to determine the perceptions of teachers towards using Web 2.0 tools. Thus, aim of this research was to develop a scale to assess the teachers’ perceptions related to using Web 2.0 tools at lectures (TPUWL) and determine the factors affecting the perception of teachers. For scale development purpose data was gathered from 240 teachers. Exploratory factor analyses were carried out to find out the structure of the TPUWL. Analyses revealed that TPUWL’s structure had two factors. First factor had 12 items and was entitled “Perception towards Using” while second factor had 10 items and was called “Professional Competence Perception”. For confirmatory factor analyses data was gathered from 220 teachers. Thereupon, total sample of the study consisted of 460 teachers. Data analyses revealed that TPUWL scale is a reliable and valid assessment tool. Scale’s Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was found as .95. After confirming the validity and reliability of the scale, analyses were carried out to determine the factors which might affect the teachers’ perceptions on using Web 2.0 tools with respect to age, education level, experience and gender factors. Analyses revealed that age, education level and experience factors had no statistically significant effect on teachers’ perception toward using Web 2.0 tools. On the other hand, it was revealed by the study that gender factor had a statistically significant effect on the perception. As a consequence, it was determined by the researchers that TPUWL is a useful scale to determine the teachers’ perception towards using Web 2.0 tools in lectures.

Keywords

web 2.0 tools, Teacher, scale, Perception

References

• Ajjan, H., &Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.05.002
• Akpınar, Y. (2003). Öğretmenlerin yeni bilgi teknolojileri kullanımında yükseköğretimin etkisi: İstanbul okulları örneği (The effects of higher education on teachers’ use of new technologies: The Case of Schools in Istanbul). The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(2), 79-96. http://www.tojet.net/articles/v2i2/2211.pdf
• Almekhlafi, A.G., & Abulibdeh, E.S.A. (2018). K-12 teachers’ perceptions of Web 2.0 applications in the united erab emirates. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 15(3), 238-261. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-11-2017-0060
• Anderson, J. C., &Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49(2), 155–173. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294170
• Anyanwu, K. (2012). Teachers' perception concerning use of web 2.0 applications following professional development. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Houston. Texas.
• Batsila, M., Tsihouridis, C., Vavougios, D., & Ioannidis, G. (2015). Factors that influence the application of web 2.0 based techniques for instructional purposes: A case study. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(4), 15-21.http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i4.4529
• Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.
• Bentler, P.M. (1980). Multivariate analysis with latent variables: Causal modeling. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 419-456.
• Birişçi, S., Kul, Ü., Aksu, Z., Akaslan, D., & Çelik, S. (2018). A scale development study to determine web 2.0 practical content development self-efficacy belief (w2sebs). Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 8(1), 187-208. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.335164
• Blannin, J. (2015). The role of the teacher in primary school Web 2.0 use. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 188–205.https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1105760.pdf
• Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Data analysis handbook for social sciences statistics: Research design SPSS practices and interpretation] (6th ed.). Ankara, Turkey: Pegem.
• Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Eyyam, R., Meneviş, İ., Doğruer, N. (2011). Perceptions of teacher candidates towards web 2.0 technologies. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2663-2666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.166
• Faize, R., Chiheb, R., & Ee Afia, A. (2015). Students’ perceptions towards using web 2.0 technologies in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 10(6), 32-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i6.4858
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3nd ed.). California: SAGE
• Friman, H., (1999). Perception warfare: a perspective for the future. Retrieved from http://media.leeds.ac.uk/papers/pmt/exhibits/746/Friman(1999)PW.pdf
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ejbrm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=183
• Horzum, M. B. (2010). Investigating teachers’ Web 2.0 tools awareness, frequency and purposes of usage in terms of different variables. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 603-634.
• Horzum, M. B., & Aydemir, Z. (2014). Web 2.0 tools and educational usage self-efficacy: A scale development study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 453-458.
• Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
• Huang, W-H. D., Hood, D.W., & Yoo, 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. DOI:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.02.001
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the simplis command language. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151.
• Kılıç, H. E., & Şen, A. İ. (2014). UF/EMI eleştirel düşünme eğilimi ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama çalışması [Turkish adaptation study of UF/EMI Critical Thinking Disposition Instrument]. Eğitim ve Bilim [Education and Science], 39(176), 1–12. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3632
• Kieffer, K. M. (1998). Orthogonal versus Oblique Factor Rotation: A Review of the Literature regarding the Pros and Cons. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
• Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. London. England: Routledge.
• Korucu, A. T., & Yücel, A. (2015). Information technologies teachers’ ideas about dynamic web technologies use in education. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 5(2), 126-152.https://dx.doi.org/10.17943/etku.78815
• Lekan Kamil, Q. (2014). Teachers' perceptions and attitudes toward the implementation of web 2.0 tools in secondary education. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Walden University, Minnesota.
• Madans, J. H. (2001). Health Surveys. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 6619–6627. DOI:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/03903-6
• Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A Comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3–9. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167292181001
• O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved from: http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
• Özerbaş, M. A., & Mart, Ö. A. (2017). Pre-service English teachers’ opinions and utilization levels on the use of web 2.0. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(3), 1152-1167.
• Rodríguez Bolívar, M.P. Policy makers’ perceptions on the transformational effect of Web 2.0 technologies on public services delivery. Electron Commer Res 17, 227–254 (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-015-9196-1
• SPSS Statistics (Version 21) [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: SPSS.
• Soomro, K.A., Zai, S.Y., & Jafri, I. H. (2015). Competence and usage of Web 2.0 technologies by higher education faculty. Journal Educational Media International, 52(4), 284-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2015.1095522
• Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar [Structural equation models: Basic concepts and sample applications]. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları [Turkish Psychological Articles], 3(6), 49–74. Retrievedfromhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/281981476_Yapidotlesssal_esitlik_modelleri_Temel_kavramlar_ve_ornek_uygulamalar
• Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve spss ile veri analizi [Attitude measurement and data analysis with SPSS]. Ankara, Turkey: Nobel.
• Venkatesh, V., Croteau, A-M., Rabah, J. (2014). Perceptions of effectiveness of instructional uses of technology in higher education in an Era of web 2.0. 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.22
• Yan, Y., Zha, X. and Yan, M. (2014). Exploring employee perceptions of Web 2.0 virtual communities from the perspective of knowledge sharing. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66 (4), 381-400. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-08-2013-0070
• Yıldırım, B. (2018). Adapting the teachers' efficacy and attitudes towards STEM scale into Turkish. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(2), 54-6. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.12973/tused.10230a
• Yıldırım, B., & Selvi, M. (2015). Adaptation of STEM attitude scale to Turkish. Turkish Studies: International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 10(3), 1117–1130. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.7974
• Yuen, S. C., & Yuen, P.K. (2010). Web 2.0 in education: Teachers’ perceptions and perspectives. Creating Futures Through Technology Conferenc, Biloxi: Missisippi. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/scyuen/web-20-in-education-teachers-perceptions-and-perspectivres
• Yuen, S. C. Y., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Yuen, P. K. (2011). Perceptions, interest, and use: Teachers and web 2.0 tools in education. International Journal of Technology in Teaching& Learning, 7(2), 109-123.
• Zelick, S. A. (2013). The Perception of web 2.0 technologies on teaching and learning in higher education: a case study. Creative Education, 4(7), 53-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.47A2010