Matematik Eğitiminde Teknoloji Entegrasyonu Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması

Year 2025, Issue: 58, 90 - 102, 08.09.2025

Mehmet Fatih Öçal , Ömer Sinan Can , İsak Çevik

https://doi.org/10.33418/education.1639072

Abstract

Teknoloji entegrasyonunun matematik eğitimi ve öğretimi bağlamındaki önemi giderek artmakta, bu durum matematik öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji entegrasyonuna yönelik öz yeterliliklerinin değerlendirilmesini ve ölçülmesini önemli bir ihtiyaç haline getirmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, matematik öğretmenlerine yönelik olarak geliştirilen matematik öğretiminde teknoloji entegrasyonu öz-yeterlilik ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanmasıdır. Uyarlama sürecinde öncelikle ölçeğin dil geçerliliği sağlanmış, ardından açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) uygulanmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirliği ise test-tekrar testi yöntemiyle değerlendirilmiştir. Uyarlama çalışması sonucunda, ölçeğin altı faktörden oluştuğu ve orijinal ölçekle büyük ölçüde benzerlik gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir. Bu faktörler; teknoloji ile öğretim bilgisi, tutum, aile ve toplum katılımı, yapay zekâ kullanımı, mesleki gelişim ve teknoloji ile öğretim farkındalığı olarak belirlenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinden elde edilen sonuçlar modelin geçerli olduğunu göstermiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları doğrultusunda, matematik öğretimine yönelik teknoloji entegrasyonu öz-yeterliliklerini değerlendirmek amacıyla kullanılan ölçeğin, 27 madde ve altı boyuttan oluşan geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olarak kullanılabileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca bu çalışma, matematik öğretmenliği alanında daha fazla araştırma ve pratik uygulamalara olanak vererek alana önemli bir katkı sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

teknoloji entegrasyonu , öz-yeterlilik , ölçek uyarlama , matematik

Turkish Adaptation of the Technology Integration Self-Efficacy Scale for Mathematics Education

Abstract

The importance of technology integration in the context of teaching and learning mathematics is growing increasingly, making it a significant necessity to evaluate and measure the self-efficacy of pre-service mathematics teachers regarding technology integration in mathematics education. The primary aim of this study is to adapt the self-efficacy scale for technology integration in mathematics education, which was originally developed for mathematics teachers, into Turkish. During the adaptation process, first, the language validity of the scale was ensured. It was then followed by exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The reliability of the scale was assessed using the test-retest method. Adaptation findings reveal that the scale consists of six factors and shows substantial similarity to the original scale. These factors were identified as knowledge of teaching with technology, attitude, parental and community involvement, use of artificial intelligence, professional development and support, and awareness of teaching with technology. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicate that the model is valid. The findings of the study show that the scale, consisting of 27 items and six dimensions, can be used as a valid and reliable measurement tool for assessing self-efficacy in technology integration into mathematics education. In addition, this study provides a crucial contribution to the field by enabling further research and practice in mathematics teacher education.

Keywords

Technology integration , self-efficacy , scale adaptation , mathematics

Ethical Statement

Ethics committee approval was obtained from Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen University University Ethics Committee (Date: 22.11.2024, Number: E-95531838-050.99-118588)

Supporting Institution

-

Thanks

Dear Editor, Thank you in advance for possible consideration and further evaluation of our manuscript. Best regards, Dr. Ömer Sinan Can

References

• Awang, L. A., Yusop, F. D., & Danaee, M. (2025). Current practices and future direction of artificial intelligence in mathematics education: A systematic review. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(2), em0823. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/16006
• Bakar, N. S. A., Maat, S. M., & Rosli, R. (2020). Mathematics teacher's self-efficacy of technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 259-276. http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.2.10818.259-276
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
• Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186-3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
• Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
• Blannin J. (2021). Beginning teaching with digital technology. Sage Publications.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Factor analysis: Basic concepts and using to development scale. Educational Administration Theory and Practice, 32(32), 470-483.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2020). Handbook of data analysis for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation (28th ed.). Pegem Academy Press.
• Cirneanu, A. L., & Moldoveanu, C. E. (2024). Use of digital technology in integrated mathematics education. Applied System Innovation, 7(4), 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7040066
• Courtney, S. A., Miller, M. E., & Gisondo, M. J. (2022). The impact of COVID-19 on teachers’ integration of digital technology. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), ep387. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12420
• Cullen, C. J., Hertel, J. T., & Nickels, M. (2020). The roles of technology in mathematics education. The Educational Forum, 84(2), 166-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2020.1698683
• DeVellis R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Dockendorff, M., & Zaccarelli, F. G. (2024). Successfully preparing future mathematics teachers for digital technology integration: A literature review. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2309273
• Drijvers, P., Thurm, D., Vandervieren, E., Klinger, M., Moons, F., van der Ree, H., Mol, A., Barzel, B., & Doorman, M. (2021). Distance mathematics teaching in Flanders, Germany, and the Netherlands during COVID-19 lockdown. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108, 35-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10094-5
• Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299597
• Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551
• Field, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics using SPSS for Windows. Sage Publications.
• Hair J. F., Black W. C., Babin B. J., & Anderson R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning EMEA.
• Hambleton, R. K., & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1, 1-13.
• Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416. http://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536
• Holenstein, M., Bruckmaier, G., & Grob, A. (2022). How do self-efficacy and self-concept impact mathematical achievement? The case of mathematical modelling. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12443
• Kalaycı, Ş. (2018). Multivariate statistical techniques with SPSS. (9th ed.). Asil Press.
• Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
• Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
• Li, M. (2024). Assessing Chinese primary mathematics teachers’ self-efficacy for technology integration: Development and validation of a multifaceted scale. Asian Journal for Mathematics Education, 3(2), 231-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263241254496
• Li, M., Noori, A. Q., & Li, Y. (2023). Development and validation of the secondary mathematics teachers’ TPACK scale: A study in the Chinese context. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(11), em2350. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13671
• Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215-243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8
• Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: Crosscultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311–360. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1
• Martin, C. R., & Newell, R. J. (2004). Factor structure of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in individuals with facial disfigurement. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 9(3), 327-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548500410001721891
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
• Njiku, J., Mutarutinya, V., & Maniraho, J. F. (2022). Exploring mathematics teachers' technology integration self-efficacy and influencing factors. Journal of Learning for Development, 9(2), 279-290. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v9i2.589
• Öçal, M. F. (2022). Digital technologies in mathematics education: A theoretical overview. In M. Şimşek & N. Yazıcı (Eds.), The use of digital tools in mathematics teaching (pp. 1-28). Vizetek Press.
• Öçal, M. F., & Şimşek, M. (2017). Pre-service mathematics teachers' opinions about FATİH project and technology use in mathematics education. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 91-121. https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.288857
• Özgüven, İ. E. (2000). Psychological tests. (4th ed.). PDREM Press.
• Pierce, R., & Ball, L. (2009). Perceptions that may affect teachers' intention to use technology in secondary mathematics classes. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9177-6
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12784
• Schriesheim, C. A., & Eisenbach, R. J. (1995). An exploratory and confirmatory factor-analytic investigation of item wording effects on the obtained factor structures of survey questionnaire measures. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1177-1193. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100609
• Seçer, İ. (2015). Psychological test development and adaptation process: SPSS and LISREL applications. Ani Press.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statics (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Viberg, O., Grönlund, A., & Andersson, A. (2023). Integrating digital technology in mathematics education: a Swedish case study. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(1), 232-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1770801
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Qualitative research methods in social sciences (12th ed.). Seçkin Press.
• Yıldız-Durak, H. (2021). Modeling of relations between K-12 teachers’ TPACK levels and their technology integration self-efficacy, technology literacy levels, attitudes toward technology and usage objectives of social networks. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(7), 1136-1162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619591
• Zelkowski, J., Gleason, J., Cox, D. C., & Bismarck, S. (2013). Developing and validating a reliable TPACK instrument for secondary mathematics preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(2), 173-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782618
• Zhao, Y., & Cziko, G. A. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual control theory perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 5-30.