İŞİTME KAYIPLI ÜNİVERSİTE ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN UZAKTAN MESLEKİ EĞİTİM SÜRECİNİN İNCELENMESİ: BİR DURUM ÇALIŞMASI

Abstract

COVID-19 pandemi döneminde dünyadaki birçok ülke gibi Türkiye de tüm kademelerde yüz yüze eğitimden uzaktan eğitime geçiş yapmış, işiten öğrenciler gibi, işitme kayıplı öğrenciler de birçok zorlukla karşı karşıya kalmıştır. Bu süreç, yalnızca mevcut öğretim uygulamalarının çevrimiçi ortama aktarılmasını değil; aynı zamanda işitme kayıplı öğrencilerin öğrenme özelliklerini, iletişim gereksinimlerini ve öğrenme tercihlerini dikkate alan bilinçli öğretim tasarımlarının geliştirilmesini zorunlu kılmıştır. Türkiye’de işitme kayıplı öğrencilere yükseköğretim düzeyinde mesleki eğitim sunan tek kurum olan Engelliler Entegre Yüksekokulu’nda (EEYO) pandemi döneminde gerçekleştirilen uzaktan mesleki eğitim sürecinde meslek derslerinin nasıl gerçekleştirildiğinin belirlenmesini amaçlayan bu çalışma nitel araştırma yöntemiyle gerçekleştirilmiş ve durum çalışması olarak desenlenmiştir. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını 2020-2021 öğretim yılı Anadolu Üniversitesi EEYO Bilgisayar Operatörlüğü 1. Sınıfa devam eden 10 işitme kayıplı öğrenci ve araştırmacı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmacının pandemi döneminde çevrimiçi olarak yürüttüğü meslek derslerine ilişkin çevrimiçi ortamlardan elde edilen veriler ele alınmıştır. Araştırma sürecinde işitme kayıplı gençler için bir çevrimiçi eğitim modeli gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu modelin bileşenleri ve işleyişi kaynağını uzaktan eğitimde öğretim tasarımının ilkeleri oluşturmaktadır. Verilerin analizi, tüm veriler karşılaştırılarak ve bütüncül bakış açısı geliştirilerek yapılmıştır. Modelin bileşenlerini oluşturan derslerin birbirleriyle iş birliği içinde işitme kayıplı öğrencilerin özellikleri ve uzaktan eğitimin ilkeleri doğrultusunda yürütülmesi ile işitme kayıplı yüksekokul öğrencilerinin mesleğin gerektirdiği kavramsal bilgi ve becerilerinin geliştiği, uzaktan eğitimde motivasyonlarının arttığı ve öğrenme ortamından yarar sağladıkları belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

• İşitme Kayıplı Öğrenci
• Çevrimiçi Öğrenme
• Uzaktan Mesleki Eğitim
• Durum Çalışması

Ethical Statement

Bu araştırma, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşerî Bilimler Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Kurulu tarafından 03/03/2021 tarihli 31/61 sayılı Etik Kurul Kararı ile onaylanmıştır.

AN EXAMINATION OF THE DISTANCE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROCESS FOR UNIVERSITY STUDENTS WITH HEARING LOSS: A CASE STUDY

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, like many countries around the world, Türkiye transitioned from face-to-face to online learning at all levels; just like their hearing peers, students with hearing loss, faced numerous challenges. This process has necessitated not only the transfer of existing teaching practices to an online environment, but also the development of thoughtful instructional designs that take the learning characteristics, communication needs and learning preferences of students with hearing loss into account. This study, which aimed to find out how vocational subjects were delivered during the online vocational education process carried out at the School for the Handicapped (SfH) – the only institution in Türkiye offering vocational education at higher education level to students with hearing loss – during the pandemic, was conducted using qualitative research methods and designed as a case study. The participants in the study consisted of 10 students with hearing loss enrolled to the first year of the Computer Operator Training programme at the SfH in Anadolu University for the 2020–2021 academic year, as well as the researcher. The study examined the data obtained from online platforms relating to the vocational courses undertaken by the researcher during the pandemic. During the research process, an online education model was implemented. The components and functioning of this model are based on the principles of instructional design in distance learning. The data were analyzed by comparing all the data and developing a holistic perspective. It was found out that, by conducting the courses which were among the core components of the model in a collaborative manner considering the characteristics of students with hearing loss and the principles of distance education, vocational college students with hearing loss developed the conceptual knowledge and skills required for their profession; experienced increased motivation in distance learning; and benefited from the learning environment.

Keywords

• Student with Hearing Loss
• Online Learning
• Distance Vocational Education
• Case Study

References

1. Adnan, M., ve Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students’ perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 2(1), 45–51. http://www.doi.org/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309
2. Al Hashimi, S. ve Alsindi, D. (2021). Optimizing online learning experiences and outcomes for hearing-impaired art and design students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research. 20. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.7.1
3. Alqurashi, E. (2019). Predicting student satisfaction and perceived learning within online learning environments. Distance Education, 40(1), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553562
4. Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). Athabasca University Press.
5. Ayas, M., Ali Al Amadi, A. M. H., Khaled, D., ve Alwaa, A. M. (2020). Impact of Covid-19 on the access to hearing health care services for children with cochlear implants: A survey of parents. F1000Research, 9, 690. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.24915.1
6. Bartz, J. (2020). All inclusive?! Empirical insights into individual experiences of students with disabilities and mental disorders at german universities and ımplications for ınclusive higher education. Education Sciences, 10(9), 223; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090223
7. Başkale, H. (2016). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlik, güvenirlik ve örneklem büyüklüğünün belirlenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1), 23–28. https://izlik.org/JA73MH48CD
8. Baxter, P., ve Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

9. Bazeley, P., ve Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with Nvivo. (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
10. Bernard, R., ve Abrami, P., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R., Surkes, M., ve Bethel, E. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309333844
11. Bozkurt, A. (2017). Türkiye’de uzaktan eğitimin dünü, bugünü ve yarını. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 85–124.
12. Bozkurt, A., ve Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to coronavirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–6.
13. Creswell, J. W., ve Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
14. Creswell, J. W., ve Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
15. Dray, B. J., Lowenthal, P. R., Miszkiewicz, M. J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., ve Marczynski, K. (2011). Developing an instrument to assess student readiness for online learning: A validation study. Distance Education, 32(1), 29–47.
16. Education Encyclopedia, (2009). Research Methods: Qualitative and Ethnographic. http://www.answers.com/topic/research-methods-qualitative-andethnographics.
17. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., ve Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
18. Gibbs, G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208574
19. Greer, D.L., Rowland, A., ve Smith, S.J. (2014). Critical considerations for teaching students with disabilities in online environments. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 46, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059914528105
20. Hancock, D.R., ve Algozzine, B. (2006). Doing Case Study Research: a Practical Guide for Beginning Researchers. USA: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
21. Händel, M., Bedenlier, S., Kopp, B., Gläser-Zikuda, M., Kammerl, R., ve Ziegler, A. (2022). The webcam and student engagement in synchronous online learning: visually or verbally? Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10405–10428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11050-3
22. Hanjarwati, A., ve Siwi, A. A. (2022). Online learning experiences of students with deaf and speech disabilities during COVID-19 pandemic. ICON-DEMOST Conference Proceedings.
23. Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55.
24. Hung, M.L., Chou, C., Chen, C.H., ve Own, Z.Y. (2010). Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1080–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004
25. Johnson, D. W., ve Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
26. Kent, M., (2015). Disability and elearning: Opportunities and barriers. Disability Studies Quarterly 35(1). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v35i1.3815
27. Keramati, A., Keramati, M. R., ve Arefian, M. H. (2024). Students’ reflection on the effect of collaborative learning on the learning environment and academic achievement in online reflective platforms. Reflective Practice, 25(2), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2024.2305868
28. Lincoln, S. Y., ve Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
29. Martin, F. ve Bolliger, D.U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
30. Martin, F., Sun, T., ve Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
31. McDermid, C. (2020). Educational Interpreters, Deaf Students and Inclusive Education? Turkish Journal of Special Education Research and Practice, 2(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.37233/TRSPED.2020.0107
32. Means, B., Toyama, Y. ve Murphy, R. ve Bakia, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record. 115. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307
33. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. (2nd. Ed.), San Francisco, Calif. : Jossey-Bass.
34. Merriam, S. B., ve Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
35. Moore, M. G. (1989) Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7. http://aris.teluq.uquebec.ca/portals/598/t3_moore1989.pdf
36. Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., ve Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202
37. Nordmann, E., ve Mcgeorge, P. (2018). Lecture capture in higher education: time to learn from the learners. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ux29v
38. Parton, B. S. (2016). Video captions for online courses: Do YouTube’s auto-generated captions meet deaf students’ needs? Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 20(1), 8–18.
39. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
40. Pokhrel, S., ve Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631120983481
41. Shpigelman, C. N., Mor, S., Sachs, D., ve Schreuer, N. (2021). Supporting the development of students with disabilities in higher education: Access, stigma, identity, and power. Studies in Higher Education, 47(9), 1776–1791. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1960303
42. Stahl, N. A., ve King, J. R. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1). http://www.jstor.org/stable/45381095
43. Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
44. Wang, Y.P., ve Wu, T.J. (2022). Effects of online cooperative learning on students’ problem-solving ability and learning satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 13:817968. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.817968
45. Yazçayır, G. (2023). Teachers’ instructional design for e-learning for deaf and hard of hearing students. International Journal of Modern Education Studies, 7(2), 475-498. https://doi.org/10.51383/ijonmes.2023.342
46. Yin, R, Y. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
47. Yuwono, I., Mirnawati, M., Kusumastuti, D. ve Ramli, T. (2022). Challenges of deaf students in online learning at universities. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan. 14. 2291-2298. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i2.1328
48. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2