Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenlerinin ve 7. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Dijital Okuryazarlık Becerisine İlişkin Görüşleri

Abstract

Dijital okuryazarlık; dijital ortamlara ilişkin teknik, bilişsel ve sosyolojik becerilere sahip olmak üzere verilen eğitimleri kapsamaktadır. Teknolojinin çok hızlı geliştiği ve değiştiği günümüzde bu değişim sürecine uyum sağlamak için dijital okuryazarlık becerisine sahip olmak bir zorunlulukolarak görülmektedir. Bu becerinin örgün eğitim aracılığıyla bireylere kazandırılması önem taşımaktadır. Dijital yerliler olarak adlandırılan ortaokul öğrencilerinin bu beceriye sahip olması ve bu beceriyi öğrencilere kazandıracak olan öğretmenlerin bu konuda yeterli düzeyde bilgi sahibi olması oldukça önemlidir. Bu nedenle bu çalışma djital okuryazarlık becerisini kazandırmayı amaçlayan sosyal bilgiler öğretmenleri ve ortaokul 7. Sınıf öğrencilerinin dijital okuryazarlığa ilişkin mevcut durumlarını belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Fenemonoloji yönteminin kullnıldığı bu çalışmada veriler iki farklı görüşme formu ile toplanmı, elde edilen veriler içerik analizi yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada öğretmen ve öğrenciler dijital okuryazarlığı genel olarak dijital ortamda bilgiye ulaşma, bilgiyi paylaşma, üretme olarak ifade etmişlerdir. Covid 19 pandemi sürecinde yapılan çalışmada dijital platformların kullanımı konusunda öğretmen ve öğrenciler EBA platformu ve sosyal medyayı kullandıklarını söylemişlerdir. Öğretmen ve öğrenciler dijital ortamlarda güvenliği sağlamak için doğru şifreleme, antivirüs programı kullanma, kişisel ve başkalarına ait bilgileri paylaşmama konusunda ortak fikir belirtmişlerdir. Çalışma sonunda öğretmen ve öğrencilerin etik kuralların farkında oldukları anlaşılmıştır. Öğretmenler sosyal bilgiler dersinin dijital okuryazarlığı kazandırma konusunda uygulamalı eğitimle de desteklenecek olan genişletilmiş bir müfredata ihtiyaç olduğunu ifade etmişlerdir. Öğretmenler ayrıca dijital okuryazarlığa ilişkin aldıkları eğitimlerin yetersiz olduğunu ve etkili olmadığını söylemişlerdir. Bu nedenle öğretmenlere yönelik dijital okuryazarlık konusunda daha etkili ve uygulamaya dayalı eğitimler verilmesi önerilmektedir. Ayrıca dijital okuryazarlık süreci teknoloji geliştikçe farklılaşacağından bu konudaki eğitimlerin de güncellenmesi gerektiği fark edilmiş ve eğitimler verilirken bu konuya dikkat edilmesi gerektiği önerilmiştir.

Keywords

• Dijital okuryazarlık
• sosyal bilgiler
• öğretmen
• öğrenci

Opinions of Social Studies Teachers and 7th-Grade Students Regarding Digital Literacy Skills

Abstract

Digital literacy; It covers the trainings given to have technical, cognitive and sociological skills related to digital environments. In today's world where technology develops and changes very rapidly, it is seen as a necessity to have digital literacy skills in order to adapt to this change process. It is important to gain this skill to individuals through formal education. It is very important that secondary school students, called digital natives, have this skill and that teachers who will teach this skill to students have sufficient knowledge on this subject. For this reason, this study aims to determine the current status of social studies teachers and secondary school 7th grade students, who aim to gain digital literacy skills, regarding digital literacy. In this study, in which the phenomenology method was used, the data were collected with two different interview forms, and the obtained data were analyzed with the content analysis method. In the study, teachers and students expressed digital literacy as accessing, sharing and producing information in the digital environment. In the study conducted during the Covid 19 pandemic process, teachers and students said that they use the EBA platform and social media on the use of digital platforms. Teachers and students shared a common opinion about using correct encryption, antivirus software, and not sharing personal and other information in order to ensure security in digital environments. At the end of the study, it was understood that teachers and students were aware of ethical rules. Teachers stated that there is a need for an expanded curriculum that will also be supported by practical training in social studies course in terms of gaining digital literacy. Teachers also said that the training they received on digital literacy was insufficient and not effective. For this reason, it is recommended to provide more effective and practice-based trainings on digital literacy for teachers. In addition, since the digital literacy process will differ as technology develops, it has been realized that the trainings on this subject should also be updated, and it has been suggested that this issue should be paid attention while giving the trainings.

Keywords

• digital literacy
• social studies
• teacher
• student

References

1. Arabacı, İ. B., & Polat, M. (2013). Digital natives, digital immigrants and classroom management. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 12(47), 11-20. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/esosder/issue/6161/82824
2. Bandura, R., & Leal, E. M. (2022). The digital literacy imperative. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep42041
3. Bawden, D. (2001). Information and digital literacies: a review of concepts. Journal of Documentation, 57(2), 218–259. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EUM0000000007083/full/html
4. Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices, 30(2008), 17-32.
5. Boechler, P., Dragon, K., & Wasniewski, E. (2014). Digital literacy concepts and definitions: Implications for educational assessment and practice. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence (IJDLDC), 5(4), 1-18. 10.4018/978-1-4666-8200-9.ch011
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2019). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods.]. Pegem Akademi.
7. Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1. The digital competence framework for citizens. With eight proficiency levels and examples of use. Publications Office of the European Union. https://apo.org.au/node/221736
8. Chapman, B. (1999). Digital Literacy: By Paul Gilster. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1997. Government Information Quarterly, 16(1), 77-78.

9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, D. J. (2021). Nitel yöntemler [Qualitative methods]. (G. Kayır, Trans.). In E. Karadağ (Trans ed.), Araştırma tasarımı - nitel, nicel, karma yöntem yaklaşımları [Research design - qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods approaches] (pp.179-211). Nobel. (Original work published 2018).
10. Chase, Z., & Laufenberg, D. (2011). Embracing the squishiness of digital literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 54(7), 535-537.https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.7.7
11. Çakmak, Z., & Taşkıran, C. (2017). Views of social studies teachers on education information network (EBA) platform. Inernational Journal of Turkish Education Sciences, 2017(9), 284-295. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/goputeb/issue/34356/380783
12. Donaldson, C., & Alker, Z. (2019). Digital literacy. Journal of Victorian Culture, 24(3), 329-330. https://doi.org/10.1093/jvcult/vcz026
13. Dündar, R., & Yeşilyurt, S. (2020). Assessment of social studies teachers' perspectives on distance education specific to education information network. International Journal of Social Science Research, 9(1), 79-95. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ijssresearch/issue/54863/745774
14. Eshet-Alkali, Y., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2004). Experiments in digital literacy. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 7(4), 421-429. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2004.7.421
15. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2009). Changes over time in digital literacy. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(6), 713-715. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0264
16. Gilster, P. (1997). Digital literacy. Wiley Computer Pub.
17. Görmez, E., & Şen, A. (2021). The views of the secondary school students on digital literacy skills. International Journal of Language Academy, 9(39), 90-101.
18. Hall, R., Atkins, L., & Fraser, J. (2014). Defining a self-evaluation digital literacy framework for secondary educators: The digilit deicester project. Research in Learning Technology, (22), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.21440
19. Himmetoglu, B., Aydug, D., & Bayrak, C. (2020). Education 4.0: Defining the teacher, the student, and the school manager aspects of the revolution. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(Special Issue-IODL), 12-28. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.770896
20. Hooft, M. (2006). Tapping into digital literacy: Handheld computers in the K-12 classroom. In Handbook of research on literacy in technology at the K-12 leve (pp. 287-307). IGI Global. 10.4018/978-1-59140-494-1.ch016
21. JISC. (2012). Developing digital literacies: briefing paper. Developing Digital Literacies: Jisc wEBArchive.org.uk
22. JISC. (2019). Teacher profile (higher education): Six elements of digital capabilities. https://repository.jisc.ac.uk/7278/1/BDCP-DC-Framework-Individual-6E-110319.pdf
23. Kennedy, D. M. (2008). Digital literacy research. In Encyclopedia of information technology curriculum integration. (pp. 228-234). IGI Global.
24. Kuru, E. (2019). The views of social studies teacher candidates on the concept of digital literacy. Electronic Turkish Studies, 14(3). 10.29228/TurkishStudies.22563
25. Laanpere, M. (2019). Recommendations on assessment tools for monitoring digital literacy within unesco’s digital literacy global framework. No.56. UNESCO-UIS
26. Lanham, R. A. (1995). Digital literacy. Scientific american, 273(3), 198-199. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/24981795
27. Lee, S. H. (2014). Digital literacy education for the development of digital literacy. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence (IJDLDC), 5(3), 29-43. 10.4018/ijdldc.2014070103
28. Martin, A. (2006). A European framework for digital literacy. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 1(2), 151-161. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2006-02-06
29. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2018). Sosyal bilgiler öğretim programı [Social studies curriculum] MoNE.
30. National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education in Turkey. (2022). National qualifications framework for higher education in turkey (Nqf-hetr) 6. level (Associate's) qualifications. http://tyyc.yok.gov.tr/?pid=33
31. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education 59(3). 1065-1078.10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
32. Obel-Omia, C. H. (2017). Developing digital literacy: preparing next-generation elementary education literacy Teachers. In M. Grassetti, & S. Brookby (Eds.) Advancing next-generation teacher education through digital tools and applications (pp. 103-118). IGI Global. 10.4018/978-1-5225-3417-4.ch036
33. Owen, S, Hagel, P, Lingham, B., & Tyson, D. (2016) Digital literacy, discourse: Deakin University Library research and practice, No. 3, Geelong, Deakin University Library. http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30082926
34. Öner, G. (2017). An alternative source for social studies and history lessons: eba.gov.tr. International Journal of Social Science Research, 2017(9), 227-257. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/goputeb/issue/34356/380609
35. Özaydın, A., & Kumral, O. (2021). Digital literacy through digital natives’ eyes. JRES, 8(2), 362-377. https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.1008850.
36. Pala, Ş. M., & Başıbüyük, A. (2020). The investigation of digital literacy of fifth grade secondary school students. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 9(3), 897-921. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.672882
37. Reddy, P., Chaudhary, K., Sharma, B., & Chand, R. (2022). Talismans of digital literacy: a statistical overview. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 20(5), 570-587. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.5.2599
38. Rotter, M. (2014). Perpetual digital literacy. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.22554/ijtel.v1i1.10
39. Sart, G. (2017). Nitel araştırma, yöntem, teknik ve yaklaşımları [Qualitative research, methods, techniques and methods] In F. N. Seggie & Y. Bayyurt. (Ed.), Fenomoloji ve yorumlayıcı fenomolojik analiz [Phenomenology and interpretative phenomenological analysis]. (pp. 69-81). Anı.
40. Silik, Y., & Aydın, F. (2021). Digital literacy and technological literacy: A comparative examination. Manisa Celal Bayar University Journal of Social Sciences, 19(4), 17-34.
41. Taşçı Ağaoğlu, S., & Durmaz, A. (2021). Examination of secondary students' social media use and digital literacy in terms of different variables. Cappadocia Journal of Education, 2(2), 26-31.
42. Tekerek, M., & Tekerek, A. (2013). A research on students’ information security awareness. Turkish Journal of Education, 2(3), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.181065
43. Tekindal, S. (2021). Nicel, nitel, karma yöntem araştırma desenleri ve istatistik [Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods research designs and statistics]. Nobel Akademik.
44. Tinmaz, H., Lee, Y. T., Fanea-Ivanovici, M., & Baber, H. (2022). A systematic review on digital literacy. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00204-y
45. Turkish Statistical Institute [TUIK]. (2022, 26 August). Hanehalkı bilişim teknolojileri (BT) kullanım araştırması 2022, 45587 [Household information technologies (IT) usage survey, 2022, 45587]. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-(BT)-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2022-45587
46. We Are Social. (2021). A decade in digital https://datareportal.com/reports/a-decade-in-digital?utm_source=Global_Digital_Reports&utm_medium=Partner_Article&utm_campaign=Digital_2022
47. Yerli, M. S. (2018). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde eğitim bilişim ağı (EBA) uygulamasının öğrencilerin akademik başarısına etkisi [The effect of education informatics network (EBA) application on students academic success in teaching social studies]. (Tez No. 508960). [Master Thesis, Adıyaman University]. National Thesis Center.
48. Yeşiltaş, E., & Gez, A. (2020). Sosyal bilgiler öğretim programının dijital okuryazarlık boyutu [Digital literacy dimension of social studies curriculum]. In O, Zahal., Ş, Koca., & K, Baş (Ed.). Eğitim bilimlerinde teori ve araştırmalar II [Theory and research in educational sciences II]. (pp. 137- 158). Gece Kitaplığı.
49. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2009). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin.