EDUCATION 4.0: DEFINING THE TEACHER, THE STUDENT, AND THE SCHOOL MANAGER ASPECTS OF THE REVOLUTION

Year 2020, Volume: 21 Issue: Special Issue-IODL, 12 - 28, 17.07.2020

Beyza Hımmetoglu Damla Aydug Coskun Bayrak

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.770896

Cited By: 20

Abstract

In this research, it is aimed to determine the school managers’, teachers’ and students’ characteristics of
Education 4.0 according to opinions of educational experts. The study, which is a qualitative one, was
designed by using basic qualitative research model. Participants of the study consisted of 10 faculty members,
selected with snowball sampling method. Data of the study was collected via semi-structured interview form.
To analyze data, content analysis technique will be used. It is expected to operationalize Education 4.0
revolution in education system for the case of Turkish Education System. According to findings, open access,
individualized education, mental transformation, integration of digital technologies to education, seamless
learning environments, lifelong learning, exploratory education and multidisciplinary education are the
main components defining Education 4.0. It was found that the main qualities expected from the students
of Education 4.0 are cooperation-communication skills, technological skills, learning skills and personal
characteristics. The main qualifications expected from the teachers of Education 4.0 are technological skills,
guidance skills, lifelong learning skills and personal characteristics. Lastly, the main qualifications expected
from the school managers of Education 4.0 are guidance skills, technological skills, learning skills and
technical skills.

Keywords

Education 4.0, teacher, student, school manager

References

• Abersek, B., & Flogie, A. (2017). Evolution of competences for new era or education 4.0. In XXV Conference of Czech Educational Research Association (CERA/CAPV)“Impact of Technologies in the Sphere of Education and Educational Research”, Czech.
• Anggraeni, C. W. (2018). Promoting Education 4.0 in English for survival class: What are the challenges?. Metathesis: Journal of English Language, Literature, and Teaching, 2(1), 12-24.
• Ballantyne, N., Wong, Y. C. ve Morgan, G. (2017). Human services and the fourth industrial revolution: From husITa 1987 to husITa 2016. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 35(1), 1-7.
• Basar, H. (1993). Egitim denetcisi: Roller, yeterlikleri, secilmesi, yetistirilmesi (2. Baski). Ankara: PEGEM.
• Benesova, A., & Tupa, J. (2017). Requirements for education and qualification of people in Industry 4.0. Procedia Manufacturing, 11, 2195-2202.
• Blinder, A. P. (2006). Offshoring: The next industrial revolution?. Foreign Affairs, 85(2), 113-128. 27
• Bloem, J., Van Doorn, M., Duivestein, P., Excoffier, D., Maas, R. & Van Ommeren, E. (2014). The fourth industrial revolution. Things to tighten the link between IT and OT. SOGETI: VINT Research Report 3 of 4.
• Buyukozturk, S., Cakmak, E.K., Akgun, O.E., Karadeniz, S., Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel arastirma yontemleri (10. Baski). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Ciolacu, M., Tehrani, A. F., Beer, R., & Popp, H. (2017). Education 4.0—Fostering student’s performance with machine learning methods. In 2017 IEEE 23rd International Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic Packaging (SIITME) (pp. 438-443). IEEE.
• Collins, A. & Halverson, R. (2010). The second educational revolution: Rethinking education in the age of technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 18-27.
• Cagiltay, K., Yildirim, S., Aslan, I., Gok, A., Gurel, G., Karakus, T., Saltan, F., Uzun, E., Ulgen, E., & Yildiz, I. (2007). Ogretim teknolojilerinin universitede kullanimina yonelik aliskanliklar ve beklentiler: Betimleyici bir calisma. Akademik Bilisim’07 - IX. Akademik Bilisim Konferansi Bildirileri, Kutahya, Dumlupinar Universitesi.
• Drath, R. & Horch, A. (2014). Industrie 4.0: Hit or hype? [industry forum]. IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine, 8(2), 56-58.
• Galetta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design to analysis and publication. New York, USA: New York University Press.
• Garrison, D. R. & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
• Gogebakan-Yildiz, D., Kiyici, G. & Altintas, G. (2016). Ters-yuz edilmis sinif modelinin ogretmen adaylarinin elestirileri ve gorusleri acisindan incelenmesi. Sakarya University Journal of Education 6(3), 186-200.
• Gulicheva, E., Lisin, E., Osipova, M., & Khabdullin, A. (2017). Leading factors in the formation of innovative education environment. Journal of International Studies Vol, 10(2), 129-137.
• Hariharasudan, A., & Kot, S. (2018). A scoping review on Digital English and Education 4.0 for Industry 4.0. Social Sciences, 7(11), 227, 1-13.
• Harkins, A. M. (2008). Leapfrog principles and practices: Core components of education 3.0 and 4.0. Futures Research Quarterly, 24(1), 19-31.
• Hermann, M., Pentek, T. ve Otto, B. (2016). Design principles for industrie 4.0 scenariop. 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (p. 3928-3937). IEEE.
• Hussin, A. A. (2018). Education 4.0 made simple: Ideas for teaching. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(3), 92-98.
• Kilic, T. (2018). Hezarfen egitim modeli. Istanbul: AZ Kitap.
• Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45, 214-222.
• Larson, L. C., & Miller, T. N. (2011). 21st century skills: Prepare students for the future. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(3), 121-123.
• McComas, W. F. (Ed.). (2014). The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publisher.
• Merriam, P. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Miles, B. M. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An extended sourcebook (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
• Moravec, J. W. (2008). Moving beyond Education 2.0. https://www2.educationfutures.com/blog/2008/02/ moving-beyond-education-20/ adresinden 15.04.2020 tarihinde edinilmistir.
• Moravec, J.W. (2013). Rethinking human capital development in Knowmad Society, J.W. Moravec (Ed.), Knowmad society (31-56) icinde, Minneapolis, MN: Education Futurep.
• Partnership for 21st Century Skills-P21. (2009). P21 framework definitions. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ ED519462.pdf adresinden 15.04.2020 tarihinde edinilmistir.
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel arastirma ve degerlendirme yontemleri (3. Baskidan Ceviri). (Cev. Ed. M. Butun ve P.B. Demir). Ankara: Pegem akademi.
• Peters, M. A. (2017). Technological unemployment: Educating for the fourth industrial revolution. Journal of Self-Governance and Management Economics, 5(1), 32-41.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
• Puncreobutr, V. (2016). Education 4.0: New challenge of learning. St. Theresa Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), 92-97.
• Salmon, G. (2019). May the fourth be with you: Creating Education 4.0. Journal of Learning for Development- JL4D, 6(2), 95-115.
• Scanga, D. (2004). Technology competencies for school administrators. Unpublished Dissertation of Doctor of Philosophy. Florida, USA: South Florida University.
• Sendov, B. (1987). Education for an information age. Impact of Science on Society, 37(2), 193-201.
• Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Turan, S. (2002). Teknolojinin okul yonetiminde etkin kullaniminda egitim yoneticisinin rolu. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 30(30), 271-281.
• Wallner, T. & Wagner, G. (2016). Academic education 4.0. Proceedings of the international conference on education and new developments END 2016 icinde (pp. 155-159). Ljubljana, Slovenia, 12–14 Haziran 2016.
• Weng, C. H. & Tang, Y. (2014). The relationship between technology leadership strategies and effectiveness of school administration: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 76, 91-107.
• World Economic Forum. (2017). ASEAN 4.0: What does the Fourth Industrial Revolutaion mean for regional economic integration? https://www.adb.org/publications/asean-fourth-industrialrevolution- regional-economic-integration adresinden 05.03.2018 tarihinde edinilmistir.
• Yaman, F., & Yazar, T. (2015). Ogretmenlerin yasam boyu ogrenme egilimlerinin incelenmesi: Diyarbakir ili ornegi. Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi, 23(4), 1553-1566.
• Yildirim, A., Simsek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastirma yontemleri (8. Tipki Basim). Ankara: Seckin Yayincilik.
• Yildiz-Aybek, H. P. (2017). Universite 4.0’a gecis sureci: Kavramsal bir yaklasim. Acikogretim Uygulamalari ve Arastirmalari Dergisi, 3(2), 164-176.
• Youngkin, C. A. (2014). The flipped classroom: practices and opportunities for health sciences librarians. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 33(4), 367-374.