Examining the Conceptualization of Instructional Technology in Turkey

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 76 - 98, 16.01.2017

Nuray Gedik

Öz

Instructional Technology is a field having approximately a century old past. From its initial
conceptualization to date, it has been in question in terms of its label, definition, and scope.
Parallel to international interest, Turkey has embraced IT as a field of study and practice.
This qualitative study aims to investigate the existing conceptions of experts on
Instructional Technology in Turkey and reveal the current status of the field from their
perspectives in terms of its definition, purpose, scope, and research approaches. The
experts were chosen from among Turkish academics having a PhD degree in the field. The
results showed that diverse definitions were made with an interchangeable use of the labels
“Educational Technology” and “Instructional Technology”. The emphasis for the purpose
was on “how to” best support/facilitate/enhance/improve instruction and learning in a
broad scope. The experts found gaps on the methodological aspects of existing studies. The
results showed that there existed a dilemma between the conception of what IT should be
and the practical use of what it really is. There were both common concerns with other
countries and concerns unique to Turkey. The main challenges were discussed for further
analysis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

instructional technology, educational technology, instructional design, instructional systems design, conceptualizations of instructional technology

Kaynakça

• Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). Educational technology in Turkey: Past, present and future. Educational Media International, 39(2), 165-174. doi:10.1080/09523980210155352
• Akkoyunlu, B. & Orhan, F. (2001). The use of computers in K-12 schools in Turkey. Techtrends, 45(6), 29-31. doi:10.1007/bf02772018
• Al Lily, A. E. et al. (2016). Academic domains as political battlegrounds: A global enquiry by 99 academics in the fields of education and technology. Information Development, 1-19. doi: 10.1177/0266666916646415
• Alkan, C. (1977). Egitim teknolojisi acisindan Turk egitim politikası [Turkish education politics in terms of educational technology]. Ankara Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi Dergisi [Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Journal], 10(1), 31-47.
• Alkan, C. (1977). Egitim teknolojisi: Kuramlar - yontemler [Educational technology: Theories and methods]. Ankara: Yargıcoglu Matbaasi.
• Alkan, C. (2011). Egitim teknolojisi [Educational technology]. (8thed). Ankara: Ani.
• Baydas, O., Kucuk, S., Yilmaz, R.M., Aydemir, M., & Goktas, Y. (2015). Educational technology research trends from 2002 to 2014. Scientometrics, 105(1), 709-725.
• Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bulfin, S., Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F., & Selwyn, N. (2014). Methodological capacity within the field of “educational technology” research: An initial investigation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 403-414. doi:10.1111/bjet.12145.
• Chitiyo, R. (2010). The conceptualization of instructional technology by teacher educators in Zimbabwe. Education and Information Technologies, 15(2), 109-124. doi:10.1007/s10639-009-9099-7.
• Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rded.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
• Czerniewicz, L. & Carr, T. (2005). Growing communities of practice among educational technology researchers and practitioners in development-oriented contexts: Linking local and global debates. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 1(2), 3-24.
• Definition and Terminology Committee of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (2008). Definition. In A. Januszewski & M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary. (pp. 1-14). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Dimitriadis, Y. A. (2012). The technological dimension of educational technology in Europe. Retrieved on 10 August 2015 from https://www.gsic.uva.es/uploaded_files/45152_A_ Dim12_etm.pdf
• Ely, D. P. (2008). Frameworks of educational technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(2), 244-250. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00810.x
• Gulbahar, Y. & Alper, A. (2009). Ogretim teknolojileri alaninda yapilan araştirmalar konusunda bir içerik analizi [A content analysis of the studies in instructional technologies area]. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Science, 42(2), 93–111.
• Harris, P., & Walling, D.R. (2014). Policies governing educational technology practice and research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. V. Merriënboer, & M. P. Dirscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 627-640). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Hedberg, J. & McNamara, S. (2002). Innovation and re-invention: A brief review of educational technology in Australia. Educational Media International, 39(2), 111-121.
• Hew, K. F., Kale, U., & Kim, N. (2007). Past research in instructional technology: Results of a content analysis of empirical studies published in three prominent instructional technology journals from the year 2000 through 2004. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(3), 269-300.
• Hodgkinson-Williams, C. & Czerniewicz, L. (2007). Educational technologists in higher education institutions in South Africa: Moving beyond random acts of progress. Aper presented at Research Based Elearning. Hogsback. Retrieved on 25 November 2015 from http://www.cet.uct.ac.za/files/Hodgkinson-Williams%20&%20Czerniewicz%20Full% 20paper.pdf
• Hsieh, H. & Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), pp.1277-1288.
• Hsu, Y.C., Hung, J.L., & Ching, Y.H. (2013). Trends in educational technology research: More than a decade of international research in six SSCI-indexed refereed journals. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 685-705, doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9290-9
• Januszewski, A. (2008). Afterword. In A. Januszewski& M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary. (pp. 341-350). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Kinshuk, Huang, H., Sampson, D., & Chen, N. (2013). Trends in educational technology through the lens of the highly cited articles published in the Journal of Educational Technology and Society. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 3-20.
• Kozma, R.B., & Vota, W.S. (2014). ICT in developing countries: policies, implementation, and impact. In J.M. Spector et al. (Eds), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (4th ed.) (pp. 885-894). New York: Springer.
• Kucuk, S., Aydemir, M., Yildirim, G., Arpacik, O., & Goktas, Y. (2013). Educational technology research trends in Turkey from 1990 to 2011. Computers & Education, 68, 42-50. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.016
• Kurt, A. A., Sahin-Izmirli, O. & Karakoyun, F. (2009). Current trends in research in the field of computer education and instructional technologies. Recent Advances in Applied Mathematics and Computational and Information Sciences, Vol II (pp.338-343). Retrieved on 18 March 2015 from http://www.wseas.us/books/2009/houston/ AAMCIS2.pdf
• Latchem, C. (2005). Failure-the key to understanding success. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 665-667.
• Lowenthal, P. & Wilson, B.G. (2010). Labels do matter! A critique of AECT’s redefinition of the field. TechTrends, 54(1), 38-46. doi: 10.1007/s11528-009-0362-y
• Luppicini, R. (2005). A systems definition of educational technology in society. Educational Technology & Society, 8(3), 103-109.
• Luppicini, R. (2008). Educational technology at a crossroads: Examining the development of the academic field in Canada. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 281–296.
• Masood, M. (2004). Trends and issues as reflected in traditional educational technology literature: A content analysis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington., Indiana, USA.
• MEB (2012). FATİH project. Retrieved on 10 August 2015 from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/ tr/english.php
• Meifeng, L., Jinjiao, L., & Cui, K. (2010). Educational technology in China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(4), 541-548. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01094.x
• Molenda, M. (2008). Historical foundations. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. V. Merriënboer, & M. P. Dirscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 3-20). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Ormel, B., Pareja Roblin, N., McKenney, S., Voogt, J., & Pieters, J. (2012). Research–practice interactions as reported in recent design studies: still promising, still hazy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 967-986. doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9261- 6
• Ozkul, A.E. (2001). Anadolu University distance education system from emergence to 21st century. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 2(1), 15-31.
• Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Persichitte, (2008). Implications for academic programs. In A. Januszewski& M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary. (pp. 327-339). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Reeves, T. C. (2000). Enhancing the worth of instructional technology research through “design experiments” and other development research strategies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved on 10 March 2015 from http://treeves.coe.uga.edu/AERA2000Reeves.pdf
• Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64.
• Reiser, R. A. & Ely, D. P. (1997). The field of educational technology as reflected through its definitions. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(3), 63-72.
• Reiser, R. & Dempsey, J. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
• Richey, R. C. & Klein, J. D., (2008). Research on design and development. In M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. V. Merrienboer, & M. Driscoll (Eds). Handbook of Resarch on Educational Communications and Technology, 3rd ed (pp. 748-757). NY: Routledge.
• Robyler, M.D. (2005). Educational technology research that makes a difference: Series introduction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2), 192-201.
• Romiszowski, A. J. (1995). Applications of educational technology: The international perspective. In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (2nd ed.) (pp. 274-281). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
• Ross, S.M., Morrison, G.R., Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17-35.
• Saettler, L. (1990). The evolution of American educational technology. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
• Savenye, W. C. & Robinson, R. S. (2004). Qualitative research issues and methods: An introduction for educational technologists. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 1045-1071). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Schank, R.C. (2001). Educational technology: the promise and the myth. Retrieved on 10 March 2015 from ttp://www.socraticarts.com/docs/Educational_Technology_The_Promise_ and_The_Myth.pdf
• Schiffman, S.S. (1995). Instructional systems design: Five views of the field. In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (2nd ed.) (pp. 131-144). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
• Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. (pp. 170-183). London: Sage.
• Schrum, L. (2005). A proactive approach to a research agenda for educational technology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 217-220.
• Selwyn, N. (2012). Bursting out of the ‘ed-tech’ bubble. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(4), 331-334, doi: 10.1080/17439884.2012.680212
• Simonson, M. (2010). Scientific rigor and contemporary educational technology. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 95-96.
• Surry, D., Baker, F., Morgan, R., LeBlanc, E. & Beck, B. (2014). Content analysis of articles published in open access and traditional access educational technology journals. In M. Searson& M. Ochoa (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1462-1477). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Retrieved on 18 March 2015 from http://www.editlib.org/p/130972.
• Simsek, A., Ozdamar, N., Uysal, O.,Kobak, K., Berk, C., Kilicer, T., & Cigdem, H. (2009). Current trends in educational technology research in Turkey in the new millennium. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9(2), 961-966.
• Simsek, N. (2002). Egitim teknolojisindeki yonelimlerin uluslararasi boyutlari [International aspect of trends in educational technology]. Ankara Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi Dergisi [Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Journal], 34(1-2), 77- 87.
• Teker, N., Bardakci, S., Numanoglu, G., & Kurt, M. (2011). Ogrencilerinin gozuyle Prof.Dr. Cevat Alkan [Prof. Dr. Cevat Alkan through the eyes of his students]. 5th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium. Elazıg, Turkey.
• Tu, C. & Two, H. (2002). Educational technology in Taiwan. Educational Media International, 39(2), 153-164.
• West, R. E. & Borup, J. (2014). An analysis of a decade of research in 10 instructional design and technology journals. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 545-556. doi:10.1111/bjet.12081