Öğretmen Adaylarının Teknoloji Yeterliliklerinin Geliştirilmesi: Proje Tabanlı Bir Öğrenme Deneyimi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımıyla tasarlanmış bir öğretim teknolojileri dersinin öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji yeterlilikleri ve eğitimde teknoloji kullanımına yönelik görüşleri üzerindeki rolünü incelemektir. Nitel veri ile desteklenmiş ön deneysel tek grup ön- test son-test araştırma desenine sahip olan bu çalışmaya, büyük bir devlet üniversitesinde çeşitli bölümlerde 3. ve 4. sınıfta öğrenim gören öğretmen adayları (n=40) katılmıştır. Nicel veriler, dönemde iki kez (dersten önce ve dersten sonra) uygulanan Eğitimde Teknoloji Yeterliği (ETY) ve Teknoloji Yeterliği Öz Değerlendirme (TYÖD) ölçekleri aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Nitel veriler ise katılımcıların dönem başında ve sonunda eğitimde teknoloji kullanımına yönelik olarak doldurdukları bir görüş formuna verdikleri cevaplarından oluşmaktadır. Bulgular, katılımcıların hem ETY hem de TYÖD ölçekleri için son test puanlarının istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farkla yüksek olduğunu göstermiştir. Nitel analizden elde edilen bulgular ise, katılımcıların dönem sonunda bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerini etkin bir şekilde kullanma konusunda daha somut fikirler üretebildiğine ve eğitimde teknoloji kullanımına dair görüşlerinin öğretmen merkezliden öğrenci merkezli bir karaktere doğru evirildiğine işaret etmektedir. Bu bulgulara dayanarak katılımcıların teknoloji yeterliklerini geliştirdiği sonucuna ulaşılabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğretmen Eğitimi
• Teknoloji Yeterlilikleri
• Proje Tabanlı Öğrenme.

Developing Pre-service Teachers’ Technology Competencies: A Project-Based Learning Experience

Öz

The purpose of this study is to examine the role of an educational technology course designed with the project-based learning approach on pre-service teachers’ technology competencies and their views on technology use in education. The study employed a pre-experimental one-group pre-test post-test research design supported with qualitative data. The participants were pre-service teachers (n=40) from various departments in a large state university. Quantitative data were collected through the Technology in Education Competency Survey (TECS) and Technology Proficiency Self-Assessment (TPSA) survey, administered at the beginning and the end of the semester. Qualitative data consisted of the participants’ responses to an opinion form that they filled out before and after the intervention. The findings showed that the participants improved their technology competencies because there was a statistically significant difference between participants’ post-test and pre-test TECS and TPSA scores. The qualitative analysis indicated that participants were able to develop more concrete ideas about the use of information and communication technologies effectively at the end of the semester. Their views on the use of technology in education have evolved from teacher-centred to more student-centred approaches.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• teacher education
• technology competencies
• project-based learning

Kaynakça

1. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. M. (2011). Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56(1), 91-100.
2. AlexAnder, C., & Kjellstrom, W. (2014). The influence of a technology-based internship on first-year teachers’ instructional decision-making. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(3), 265-285.
3. Alayyar, G., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2010). Technology integration in the science teachers' preparation program in Kuwait: Becoming TPACK competent through design teams. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, San Diego, CA.
4. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656-1662.
5. Bate, F. (2010). A bridge too far? Explaining beginning teachers’ use of ICT in Australian schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 1042–1061.
6. Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st-century: Skills for the Future, The Clearing House, 83(2), 39-43, https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415.
7. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating PBL: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3&4), 369-398.
8. Borthwick, A. C. & Hansen, R. (2017). Digital Literacy in Teacher Education: Are Teacher Educators Competent? Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33:2, 46-48, DOI: 10.1080/21532974.2017.1291249

9. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2000). Internal consistency reliability for the Technology in Education Competency Survey. Paper presented at the Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers Evaluator’s Workshop, American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.
10. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2001). The Technology in Education Competency Survey (TECS): A self-appraisal Instrument for NCATE standards. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, Orlando, Florida.
11. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2017). Validating the technology proficiency self-assessment questionnaire for 21st-century learning (TPSA C-21). Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(1), 20-31.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Cuhadar, C. (2018). Investigation of Pre-Service Teachers' Levels of Readiness to Technology Integration in Education. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(1), 61-75.
14. Farjon, D., Smits, A., & Voogt, J. (2019). Technology integration of pre-service teachers explained by attitudes and beliefs, competency, access, and experience. Computers & Education, 130, 81-93.
15. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age: The IEA International Computer and Information Literacy Study international report. Springer Open.
16. Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., & Richler, J. J. (2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and
17. interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 2–18.
18. Gay, L., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.
19. Gençtürk, E., Gökçek, T., & Güneş, G. (2010). Reliability and validity study of the technology proficiency self-assessment scale. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2863-2867.
20. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
21. Griffin, P., McGaw, B. & Care, E. (Eds) (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st-century skills. Dordrecht,
22. Holland: Springer.
23. Han, S., & Bhattacharya, K. (2001). Constructionism, Learning by Design, and Project-based Learning. In Orey, M. (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology, Erişim adresi: http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/
24. Han, I., Shin, W. S., & Ko, Y. (2017). The effect of student teaching experience and teacher beliefs on pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and intention to use technology in teaching. Teachers and Teaching, 23(7), 829-842.
25. ISTE (2008). The ISTE National Educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for Teachers (NETS-T).
26. Kalaycı, S., & Humiston, K. R. (2015). Students’ Attitudes Towards Collaborative Tools In A Virtual Learning Environment. Educational Process: International Journal, 4 (1-2), 71-86.
27. Kaufman, K. (2015). Information communication technology: Challenges & some prospects from preservice education to the classroom. Mid-Atlantic Education Review, 2(1), 1-11.
28. Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into preservice education: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38, 383–408.
29. Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169-183.
30. Korkmaz, O. & Demir, B. (2012). The effect of MNE in-service education studies on teachers' attitude and self-effcient upon information and communication technologies [MEB Hizmetici Egitimlerinin Ogretmenlerin Bilgi ve Iletisim Teknolojilerine Iliskin Tutumlarina ve Bilgisayar Oz-Yeterliklerine Etkisi]. Educational Technology, Theory and Practice, 2(1).
31. Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317–334). New York: Cambridge.
32. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429-440.
33. McGarr, O., & Gavaldon, G. (2018). Exploring Spanish pre-service teachers’ talk in relation to ICT: balancing different expectations between the university and practicum school. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 27(2), 199-209.
34. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education: Revised and expanded from case study research in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2017). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri. Ankara: Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Geliştirme Genel Müdürlüğü.
36. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
37. Morales, C., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2008). Self-efficacy ratings of technology proficiency among teachers in Mexico and Texas. Computers in the Schools, 25(1/2), 126-144. doi: 10.1080/07380560802158004
38. Mouza, C. (2016). Developing and assessing TPACK among pre-service teachers: A synthesis of research. In M. C. Herring, M. J. Koehler, and P. Mishra (Eds.), Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) For Educators (2nd ed., pp. 169–190). New York, NY: Routledge
39. Partnership for 21st-century Skills (P21, 2011). Framework for 21st-century Learning. Erişim adresi: http://www.P21.org
40. Polly, D., Mims, C., Shepherd, C. E., & Inan, F. (2010). Evidence of impact: Transforming teacher education with preparing tomorrow's teachers to teach with technology (PT3) grants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 863-870.
41. Ropp, M. M. (1999). Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(4), 402-424.
42. Seferoğlu, S. S. (2004). Öğretmen yeterlilikleri ve mesleki gelişim. Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim, 58, 40-45.
43. Şimşek, O., & Yazar, T. (2019). Examining the Self-Efficacy of Prospective Teachers in Technology Integration According to their Subject Areas: The Case of Turkey. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(3), 289-308.
44. Tezci, E. (2010). Attitudes and knowledge level of teachers in ICT use: The case of Turkish teachers. Journal of Human Sciences, 7(2), 19-44.
45. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
46. Tondeur, J., Aesaert, K., Pynoo, B., Braak, J., Fraeyman, N., & Erstad, O. (2017a). Developing a validated instrument to measure preservice teachers’ ICT competencies: Meeting the demands of the 21st-century. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 462- 472. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12380
47. Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Voogt, J., & Prestridge, S. (2017b). Preparing beginning teachers for technology integration in education: Ready for take-off?. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(2), 157-177.
48. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., Newby, T. & Ertmer, P. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55, 1321-1335.
49. Urbani, J. M., Roshandel, S., Michaels, R., & Truesdell, E. (2017). Developing and modeling 21st-century skills with preservice teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 44(4), 27-50.
50. Ward, G., & Overall, T. (2011). Technology integration for pre-service teachers: Evaluating the team-taught cohort model. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(1), 23-43.
51. Wurdinger, S., & Qureshi, M. (2015). Enhancing college students’ life skills through project based learning. Innovative Higher Education, 40(3), 279-286.
52. Yıldız, H., Sarıtepeci, M., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2013). FATİH projesi kapsamında düzenlenen hizmet-içi eğitim etkinliklerinin öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimine katkılarının ISTE öğretmen standartları açısından incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Hacettepe University Journal of Education], Özel sayı (1), 375- 392.
53. Zajkov, O. & Mitrevski, B. (2012). PBL: Dilemmas and questions! Macedonian Physics Teacher, 48, 1-11.