Investigating Computer Attitudes of Special Education Teachers

Öz

-

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Özel Eğitim Öğretmenlerinin Bilgisayar Tutumlarının İncelenmesi

Öz

Türkiye’de son yıllardaki yasal düzenlemelerin de etkisi ile her geçen gün yaygınlaşan ve önem kazanan özel eğitim teknolojik gelişmelerden oldukça etkilenmektedir Özellikle eğitim teknolojileri alanındaki önemli yenilikler özel eğitimde kullanılacak etkili materyallerin geliştirilmesinde yarar sağlamıştır Bilgisayar destekli olarak da üretilen ve kullanılan bu materyallerin özel eğitimde yer alması eğitimin kalitesine önemli katkılar sağlamaktadır Fakat teknolojik altyapı ve materyallere yapılan yatırımların etkili ve yararlı olabilmesi için iyi yetişmiş donanımlı eğitimcilerin varlığı önem kazanmaktadır Bu noktada özel eğitim öğretmenlerinin bilgisayar tutumlarının incelenmesi önemli bir konu olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır Bu amaç doğrultusunda gerçekleştirilen araştırmada Balıkesir ilinde özel eğitim kurumlarında görevli öğretmenlerin bilgisayar tutumları incelenmiştir Genel tarama modelinin kullanıldığı araştırmada örneklem olarak 7 özel eğitim kurumunda çalışan 91 özel eğitim meslek elemanı belirlenmiştir Araştırmada Deniz 1994 tarafından geliştirilen 3 alt boyuta sahip “bilgisayar tutum ölçeği” kullanılmaktadır Toplanan verilerinin değerlendirilmesinde betimsel istatistikler ile tek yönlü varyans analizi LSD testi t Testi ve Anova istatistik tekniklerinden yararlanılmıştır Araştırma sonucunda özel hizmet alanında çalışanların bilgisayar yönelik olumlu tutum geliştirdikleri tespit edilmiştir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Özel Eğitim, Öğretmen, Bilgisayar Tutumları

Kaynakça

1. Agelfors, E., Beskow, J., Karlsson, I. Kewley, J., Salvil, G. Thomas, N., (2006). “User Evaluation of the SYNFACE Talking Head Telephone”, K. Miesenberger et al. (Eds.): ICCHP 2006, LNCS 4061, pp. 579–586, 2006. c_Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
2. Alkan, M., Tekedere, H., Genç, Ö., (2003) İnteraktif Bilgi İletişim Teknolojilerinin Uzaktan Eğitimdeki Uygulamaları, Elektrik, Elektronik, Bilgisayar Mühendislikleri Eğitimi 1. Ulusal Sempozyumu, ODTÜ- Ankara.
3. Alper, S., & Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 47–64.
4. Anderson-Imnan, L., Knox-Quinn, C., & Homey, M. A. (1996). Computer-based study strategies for students with learning disabilities: Individual differences associated with adoption level. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(5), 461-484.
5. Anderson-Inman, L., Knox-Quinn, C., & Szymanski, M. (1999). Computer- supported studying: Stories of successful transition to postsecondary education. Career Development for Exceptional Children, 22(2), 185-212.
6. Ayres, K. M., & Langone, J. (2002). Acquisition and generalization of purchasing skills using a video enhanced computer-based instructional program. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 15-28.
7. Beck, J. (2002). Emerging literacy through assistive technology. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 44–48.
8. Beskow,J., Engwall, O. Granström, B. (2003). “ Simultaneous measurements of facial and intraoral articulation”, Proc of Fonetik, Umeå University, Department of Philosophy and Linguistics” PHONUM 9, 57-60.

9. Blackhurts, A.E. (2005). Perspectives on applicationsof technology in the field of learning disabilities Learning Disability Quarterly 28, 175-178
10. Brodin, J. ve Lindstrand, P.(2003) What about ICT in special education? Special educators evaluate Information and Communication Technology as a learning tool. Europan Journal of Special Needs Education 18, 71-87
11. Calhoon, M. B., Fuchs, L. S., & Hamlett, C. L. (2000). Effects of computer-based test accommodations on mathematics performance assessments for secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 23(4), 271-282.
12. Cavalier, A. R., Ferretti, R. P, & Okolo, C. M. (1994). 1. Technology and individual differences. Journal of Special Education Technology, 12, 175
13. Cavkaytar A. ve Diken İ.H. (2006). Özel Eğitime Giriş Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.
14. Cerrato, L., Skhiri, M. (2003) “ A method for the analysis and measurement of communicative head movements in human dialogues”, Proc of AVSP, 251–256.
15. Cole, R., Villiers, J., Shobaki,K., Massaro,W., Beskow J., Cohen M., (1999) “Demonstrations of Dialogue Design Tools in the CSLU Toolkit”, ESCA Workshop and Research workshop. Interactive Dialogue in Multi-Modal Systems. Kloster Irsee, Germany.
16. Cosive, P. , Cohen, M., Massaro, D. , (2002) “Baldini: Baldi speaks Italian”, In proceedings of 7th International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, (ICSLP„02) (pp.2349-2352). Denver.
17. Çuhadar S. ve Kıyıcı M. (2007) "Zihin Engelliler Öğretmenliği Öğrencilerinin Bilgi Ve İletişim Teknolojilerini Kullanma Durumları", 7th International Educational Technology Conference, Lefkoşa, KKTC,
18. Datfilo, J., Guerin, N., & Cory, L. (2001). Effects of computerized education on self-determination of youth with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 5-17.
19. Davies, D. K, Stock, S. E., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2001). Enhancing independent internet access for individuals with mental retardation through use of a specialized web browser: A pilot study. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 107-113.
20. Demirkıran V., (2005). ” Özel Eğitim Kurumlarında Bilgisayar Kullanımı İle Özel Eğitim Meslek Elemanlarının Bilgisayar Destekli Eğitime İlişkin Görüşleri İle Bilgisayar Tutumlarının Belirlenmesi”, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Özel Eğitim Ana Bilim Dalı Zihinsel Engelliler Öğretmenliği Bilim Dalı, İstanbul.
21. Deniz, L. (1994). “Bilgisayar Tutum Ölçeği (BTÖ-M9‟nin Geçerlik, Güvenirlik; Norm Çalışması ve Bir Örnek Uygulama” Doktora Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimleri Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
22. Edlund, J., Beskow, J. Nordstrand , M. (2002), “GESOM - A Model for Describing and generating Multi-modal Output”, Proc of ISCA Workshop Multi-Modal Dialogue in Mobile Environments.
23. Embregts, PJ.C.M. (2003). Using self-management, video feedback, and graphic feedback to improve social behavior of youth with mild mental retardation. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(3), 283-295.
24. Engwall, O. (2003). ”A revisit to the Application of MRI to the Analysis of Speech Production - Testing our assumptions”, 6th Int Seminar on Speech Production, Sydney, 7-10 December.
25. Epstein, T. N., Willis, M. G., Conners, C. K., & Johnson, D. E. (2001). Use of 'a technological prompting device to aid a student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder to initiate and complete daily tasks: An exploratory study. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 19-28.
26. Ferretti, R. P, MacArthur C. D., & Okolo, C. M. (2001). Teaching for historical understanding in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(1), 59-71.
27. Girgin Ü., Çoklar A.N., Kurt A.A, ve H.F.Odabaşı (2009), "Use of Technology as a Solution to the Problems Faced in Literacy Education by the Teachers of The Hearing Impaired: ISITEK Project", I. International Conference on Computational and Information Science, ABD Houston.
28. Girgin, Ü., Kurt A.A. ve Odabaşı H.F. (2008). "Teachers‟ Points of View Regarding Technology Integration Issues in a Special Education School in Turkey", ABD:Boston Northeastern Universty.
29. Granström, B.,House, D. , (2003). “Multimodality and speech technology: Verbal and non-verbal communication in talking agents”, Proc EuroSpeech, 2901–2904,.
30. Irish, C. (2002). Using peg- and keyword nmemonics and computer-assisted instruction to enhance basic multiplication performance in elementary students with learning and cognitive disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(4), 29-40.
31. Karasar, N. (1999). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi, Ankara: Nobel yayın, ISBN 975- 591-046-8
32. Lacerda F., Sundberg, U. , Carlson, R. Holt, L.. (2004). “Modelling Interactive Language Learning: Project Presentation ”, Proceedings, FONETIK, De pt. of Linguistics, Stockholm University.
33. Lee, H. ve Templeton, R. (2008). Ensuring Equal Access to Technology: Providing Assistive Technology for StudentsWith Disabilities Theory Into Practice, 47,212–219
34. Lindstrand, P.,ve Brodin, J., (2004) Parents and children view ICT. Technology and Disability 16, 179-183
35. McCarthy, P. J. (1998), ―Teacher attitudes toward computers and the relationship between attitudes toward computers and level of involvement with computers among NewYork City special education teachers‖, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University.
36. Mechling, L. C., & Cast, D. L. (2003). Multi-media instruction to teach grocery store word associations and store location: A study of generalization. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38(1), 62-76.
37. Melikian, R. (1994). A survey of computer utilization in teaching literacy skills to deaf students, Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Columbia University Teachers College.
38. Michel, P. (2004). The use of technology in the study, diagnosis and treatment of autism. Final term Paper for CSC350: Autism and Associated Developmental Disorders
39. Odabasi F., Cuhadar, C., Kuzu, A. (2008). Scenario Development For A Mobile Learning Course. Proceedings for Access to Learning for Development The 5th Pan-Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning (PCF5), 13 -17 July, London.
40. Odabaşı, H.F., Kuzu,A., Girgin, C., Çuhadar, C., Kıyıcı, M.&Tanyeri, T. (2009) Reflections of Hearing Impaired Students on Daily and Instructional PDA Use. International Journal of Special Education, 24, (1).
41. Ottolino, P. J. (2000). Availability and use of technology by teachers in training and early career educators of the deaf and hard of hearing: A descriptive analysis. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Northern Illinois University.
42. Owre, K., (2006). The effect of collectıve effıcacy on teachers‟ technology Acceptance. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. University of Saskatchewan.
43. Pillai, P. P. (1998). Instructional technology use among educators of deaf and hard of hearing students in rural Alaskan general education settings, Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Gallaudet University.
44. Raths, J., McAninch A. R., (2003). Teacher beliefs and classroom performance: the impact of teacher education, ISBN: 1-59311-068-5, Information Age Publishing Inc.
45. Roberson, L. (2001). Integration of Computers and Related Technologies into Deaf Education Teacher Preparation Programs. American Annals of the Deaf, 146 (1), 60-66.
46. Sicilian C., Williams, G. , Beskow, J. Faulkner, A. (2002). “Evaluatıon of a multılıngual synthetıc talkıng face as a Communıcatıon aıd for the hearing impaired”, Speech, Hearing and Language: work in progress. Volume 14, Siciliano et al, p51-61.
47. Taber, T A., Alberto, P A., Hughes, M., & Seltzer, A. (2002). A strategy for students with moderate disabilities when lost in the community. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27(2), 141-152.
48. Ünlüer, S. 2010. “Engelliler Entegre Yüksekokulu‟ndaki Bilgi Ve İletişim Teknolojileri Entegrasyonu Sürecinin İncelenmesi”, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskişehir
49. Ysseldyke, J. & Algozzine, B. (2006). A practical approach to special education: Teaching students who are gifted and talented. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
50. Zhang, Y (2000). Technology and the writing skills of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(4), 467