Teachers’ Computer Self-Efficacy And Their Use Of Educational Technology

Year 2014, Volume: 15 Issue: 4, 130 - 149, 01.12.2014

Vehbi Turel

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.81990

Cited By: 5

Abstract

This study examined the use of educational technology by primary and subject teachers (i.e. secondary and high school teachers) in a small town in the eastern part of Turkey in the spring of 2012. The study examined the primary, secondary and high school teachers’ Ø personal and computer related (demographic) characteristics, Ø their computer self-efficacy perceptions, Ø their computer-using level in certain software, Ø their frequency of computer use for teaching, administrative and communication objectives, and Ø their use of educational technology preferences for preparation and teaching purposes. In this study, all primary, secondary and high school teachers in the small town were given the questionnaires to complete. 158 teachers (n=158) completed and returned them. The study was mostly quantitative and partly qualitative. The quantitative results were analysed with SPSS (i.e. mean, Std. Deviation, frequency, percentage, ANOVA). The qualitative data were analysed with examining the participants’ responses gathered from the open-ended questions and focussing on the shared themes among the responses. The results reveal that the teachers think that they have good computer self-efficacy perceptions, their level in certain programs is good, and they often use computers for a wide range of purposes. There are also statistical differences between; Ø their computer self-efficacy perceptions, Ø frequency of computer use for certain purposes, and Ø computer level in certain programs in terms of different independent variables.

Keywords

Teachers; Educational Technology; Information And Communication Technology (ICT); Primary, Secondary And High Schools; Computer Self-Efficacy Perceptions.

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.
• Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). Öğretmenlerin internet kullanımı ve bu konudaki öğretmen
• Görüşleri [Use of Internet by teachers and their opinions on the issue]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education]. 22. 1-8. Albion. P. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-efficacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education. 9(3). 321
• Altun, A.; & Çakan. M. (2006) Undergraduate students' academic achievement. Field dependent/independent cognitive styles and attitude toward computers. Educational
• Technology & Society. 9(1). 289-297. Askar, P.; & Umay. A. (2001). İlköğretim Matematik öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin bilgisayarla ilgili öz-yeterlilik algısı [Perceived computer self-efficacy of the students in the elementary mathematics teaching programme]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi
• [Hacettepe University Journal of Education].21. 1-8. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
• Balasubramanian, K.. Clark-Okah, W.; Daniel. J.; Fereira. F.; Kanwar. A.; Kwan. A. et.al. (2009). ICTs for higher education: Background paper from the Commonwealth of
• Learning. Paris: UNESCO. Available online from and Retrieved on 10 January 2014. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001832/183207e.pdf
• Becta, (Leading Next Generation Learning). (2009). Harnessing technology for next generation learning: Children. Schools and families implementation plan 2009–2012.
• [Available from and retrieved on 15 January 2014. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20101102103654/http://publications.becta. org.uk/download.cfm?resID=39547
• Bilge, F. (2012). Bir grup ilköğretim öğrencisinde bilgisayara yönelik bağımlılık eğilimi
• Değerlendirmesi [Evaluation of computer addiction tendencies in a group of primary students]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education]. 43. 96- Buchanan, T.; Sainter. P.; & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning technologies: implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of
• Computing in Higher Education. 25. 1–11. Cassidy, S.; & Eachus. P. (2002). Developing the computer user self-efficacy (CUSE) scale
• Investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy. gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 26(2). 133-53. Duncan-Howell, J. (2012). Digital mismatch: Expectations and realities of digital competency amongst pre-service education students. Australasian Journal of Educational
• Technology. 28(5). 827-840. Available from and retrieved on 30 January 2014. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet28/duncanhowell.html
• Goktas, Y.; Kucuk. S.; Aydemir, M.; Telli, E.; Arpacik, O.; Yildirim, G.; & Reisoglu, I. (2012). Educational technology research trends in Turkey: A content Analysis of the 2000-2009 decade. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. 12(1). 177–199.
• Goktas, Y.; Yildirim, S.; & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main Barriers and Possible Enablers of ICTs
• Integration into Pre-service Teacher Education Programs. Educational Technology & Society. 12(1). 193–204. Green, K. C. (1996). Campus computing 1995: The sixth national survey of desktop computing in higher education. Encino. CA: Campus Computing
• Hong, K.-S.. & K.-W. Lai. (2011). ICT for accessible. effective and efficient higher education: Experiences of Southeast Asia. Australasian Journal of Educational
• Technology. 27(8). Editorial: Preface to the Special issue. Hsu, M.-H.. & Chiu. C.-M. (2004). Internet self-efficacy and electronic service acceptance.
• Decision Support Systems. 38(3). 369–381. Keser, H. (2005). İnsan bilgisayar etkileşimi ve sağlığa etkisi değerlendirmesi [Human- computer interaction and assessment of its impact on health]. Nobel Yayınevi. Ankara.
• Kennedy, G.; B. Dalgarno, S.; Bennett, K.; Gray, J.; Waycott, T.; Judd, A.; et al. (2009).
• Educating the net generation: A handbook of findings for practice and policy. The University of Melbourne. [Available from and retrieved on 12 March 2014. http://www.netgen.unimelb.edu.au/outcomes/handbook.html
• Kregor, G., Breslin, M., & Fountain, W. (2012). Experience and beliefs of technology users at an Australian university: Keys to maximising e-learning potential. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 28(8). 1382-1404.
• Kucuk, S.; Aydemir. M.; Yildirim, G.; Arpacik, O.; & Goktas, Y. (2013). Educational technology research trends in Turkey from 1990 to 2011.Computers & Education68. 42
• Kwok-Wing, L. (2011). Digital technology and the culture of teaching and learning in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 27(8). 1263-1275.
• Maher, D.; Phelps, R.; Urane, N.; & Lee, M. (2012). Primary school teachers’ use of digital resources with interactive whiteboards: The Australian context. Australasian Journal of
• Odabası, F. (2005). Parent’s views on the Internet use. TOJET. 4(1). 38-45.
• Ozden, M. Y. Erturk. I;, & Sanlı, R. (2004). Students’ Perceptions about online assessment: A case study. Journal of Distance Education. 19(2). 77-92.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives. digital immigrants. On the Horizon. 9(5). NCB
• University Press. Available from and retrieved on 25 February 2014. http://http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20
• %20Digital%20Natives.%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf Romeo, G. I. (2006). Engage. empower. enable: Developing a shared vision for technology in education. In D. Hung & M. S. Khine (Eds). Engaged learning with emerging technologies (pp. 149-175). Dordrecht. The Netherlands: Springer.
• Romeo, G.; Lloyd, M.; & Downes, T. (2012). Teaching Teachers for the Future (TTF):
• Building the ICT in education capacity of the next generation of teachers in Australia. In Rossiter, D. (2007). Whither e-learning? Conceptions of change and innovation in higher education. Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change. 4(1). 93-107.
• Turel, Y. K.; & Johnson, T. E. (2012). Teachers' Belief and Use of Interactive Whiteboards for Teaching and Learning. Educational Technology & Society. 15(1). 381–394.
• Turel, V.. & P, McKenna. (2013). Design of Language Learning Software. In Bin Zou et al.
• (Eds.). Computer-Assisted Foreign Language Teaching and Learning: Technological Advances (pp. 188-209). USA. Hershey: IGI-Global. Retrieved on 12 January 2014. http://www.igiglobal.com/chapter/design-language-learning-software/73265
• Turel, V. (2012). Design of Feedback in Interactive Multimedia Language Learning
• Environments. Linguistik Online. 54(4). 35-49. Available from and retrieved on 25 Sep. 20 http://www.linguistik-online.de/54_12/tuerel.pdf Turel. V. (2011). Learners' Attitudes to Repetitious Exposure in Multimedia Listening
• Software. EUROCALL Review. 19 (September). 57-83. Available and retrieved on 12 Oct. 20 http://eurocall-languages.org/review/index.html Turel, V. (2010). Advanced Turkish. ReCALL. 22(3). 396-401. Available from http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7884195 or http://cls.arizona.edu/resources/review-recall-tur3.htm Retrieved on 18 January 20
• Turel. V. (2014). Learners’ perceptions towards interactive multimedia environments.
• Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education]. forthcoming. Turel, V. (2013). The use of educational technology at tertiary level. Hacettepe
• Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education]. 28(2). 482-4 Available from and retrieved on 12 February 2014. http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/201328-2VEHBİ%20TÜREL.pdf.
• Usluel-Koçak, Y.. & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2004). The perceptions of academic staff members in faculties of education regarding their self-efficacy in relation to computer use. their use of IT. and their perceptions of obstacles in the use of IT. and solutions they propose for those problems (in Turkish). Educational Sciences and Practice (Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama). 6(3). pp. 143-157.
• Yanpar, Y. T. (2011). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı (2. baskı) [Instructional technology and material design (2nd ed.)]. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Yeung, A. S.; K. M. Lim.. E. G. Tay.; Chiang. A. C.. & C. Hui. (2012). Relating use of digital technology by pre-service teachers to confidence: A Singapore survey. Australasian
• Journal of Educational Technology. 28(8). 1317-1332.
• Yigit, Y. G.. Zaim. N.. & Yıldırım.. S. (2002). Yükseköğretimde öğretim amaçlı teknoloji kullanımı: Bir durum saptaması [The use of technology for teaching in higher education:
• A case study]. Eğitim ve Bilim. 27(124). 42-51.