DO THE STUDENT UTILIZE THE TECHNOLOGY FOR THE PRODUCTIVE PURPOSES? STUDENTS’ VIEWS VERSUS LOG RECORDS

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to determine whether students use technology for productive purposes in digital storytelling process and how they use technology from a wider perspective by comparing data obtained from log records and semi-structured interviews. In this context, digital storytelling activity was realized with 29 primary school students. The tablet PC was delivered to the students for use in the digital storytelling process and there was no restriction on their use. Before the tablets were handed over to the students, the “App Usage Tracker”, an open source application, was installed. This application provides log records as to which programs were running in the background during the tablets’ usage. It was therefore possible to determine what the students were doing in the background while they were creating their digital stories. The tablets were delivered to all students with the same standard applications installed; camera, gallery, photo editor, internet and drawing applications. When the logs and interview records regarding the applications that the students used on the tablets are compared, it is noticed that while the logs indicate that the DST applications were used the most, the students had stated that they mostly played games according to the interview transcripts. Consequently, it is deemed important to design activities for students where technology may be utilized for productive purposes, instead of focusing on the risks that technology may bring upon learners and imposing limitations. 

Keywords

• digital storytelling,technology,usage,student opinions

ÖĞRENCİLER TEKNOLOJİYİ ÜRETİM AMAÇLI MI KULLANIYORLAR? LOG KAYITLARINA KARŞI ÖĞRENCİ GÖRÜŞLERİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada, öğrencilerin dijital hikâye anlatımı sürecinde teknolojiyi üretim amaçlı kullanıp kullanmadıklarının, daha geniş bir perspektiften teknolojiyi nasıl kullandıklarının log kayıtları ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelerden elde edilen verilerin karşılaştırılması yoluyla belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda 29 ikinci sınıf öğrencisi ile dijital hikâye anlatımı etkinliği gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öğrencilere DHA sürecinde kullanmaları için tablet PC dağıtılmış ve kullanımları konusunda hiçbir sınırlama getirilmemiştir. Tablet PC’ler verilmeden önce öğrencilerin dijital hikâyelerini oluşturmada kullanabilecekleri standart uygulamalar (kamera, galeri, fotoğraf düzenleyici, internet üç tane ücretsiz çizim uygulaması) ve arka planda yapılanların loglarını kayıt eden bir uygulama yüklenmiştir. Öğrencilerin tablet PC kullanımı konusunda log ve görüşme verileri karşılaştırıldığında log’larda daha çok dijital hikâye anlatımı uygulamalarının kullanıldığı, görüşmelerde ise daha çok oyun oynadıklarını dile getirdikleri dikkati çekmiştir. Sonuç olarak, bu çalışma ile verimsiz çalışma zamanı, ilgi ve motivasyon eksikliği, v.b. olası riskler nedeniyle öğrenenlerin sınırlandırılması yerine uygun etkinlikler tasarlanır ve bununla ilgili yol gösterilirse teknolojinin üretim amaçlı da kullanılabileceği ortaya konulmuştur.   

Anahtar Kelimeler

• dijital hikâye anlatımı,teknoloji,kullanım,öğrenci görüşleri

Kaynakça

1. Adams Becker, S., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Cummins, M., and Yuhnke, B. (2016). NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2016 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Alexander, B. (2011). The new digital storytelling: Creating narratives with new media. England: Praeger.
2. Anderson, R. E. (2008). Implications of the information and knowledge society for education. Editörler J. Voogt, ve G. Knezek, International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 5-22). NY, USA: Springer.
3. Bielefeldt, T. (2002). Teacher outcomes: Improved technology skills. In J. Johnson, & L. Barker (Eds.), Assessing the impact of technology in teaching and learning: A sourcebook for evaluators (pp. 119–137). University of Michigan: Institute for Social Research.
4. Boase, J., ve Ling, R. (2013). Measuring Mobile Phone Use: Self‐Report Versus Log Data. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 18(4), 508-519. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12021
5. Belet, Ş. D., ve Dal, S. (2010). The use of storytelling to develop the primary school students’ critical reading skill: the primary education pre-service teachers’ opinions. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1830–1834. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.409
6. Chang, M. K., ve Law, S. P. M. (2008). Factor structure for young’s internet addiction test: A confirmatory study. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2597–2619. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.001
7. Chung, S. K. (2006). Digital storytelling in integrated arts education. The International Journal of Arts Education, 4(1), 33–50.
8. Davis, A., ve Weinshenker, D. (2012). Digital storytelling and authoring identity. In C.C. Ching, ve B. F. Foley (eds.), Technology and identity: Research on the development and exploration of selves in a digital World (pp.47-64). New York, USA: Cambridge University Press

9. Efimova, L. (2004). Discovering the iceberg of knowledge work. Fifth European Conference on Organisational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities (OKLV 2004) Kongresine Sunulmuş Bildiri.
10. Ergün, E. ve Altun, A. (2012). Öğrenci gözüyle siber aylaklik ve nedenleri. Eğitim Teknolojisi: Kuram ve Uygulama, 2(1), 36-53.
11. Hausknecht, S., Vanchu-Orosco, M., & Kaufman, D. (2016). New Ways to Tell My Story - Evaluation of a Digital Storytelling Workshop for Older Adults. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, 2, 231-239.
12. Hess, M. E. (2014). A new culture of learning: Digital storytelling and faith formation. Dialog, 53(1), 12-22.
13. Frazel, M. (2010). Digital storytelling guide for educators. Washington, DC. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).
14. Gallardo-Echenique, E. E., Marqués-Molías, L., Bullen, M., ve Strijbos, J. W. (2015). Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. The International Review of research in open and distributed learning, 16(3), 156-187.
15. Green, H., ve Hannon, C. (2007). Their space education for a digital generation. London: Demos.
16. Gudanescu, S. (2010). New educational technologies. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5646-5649. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.922
17. Gurung, B., ve Rutledge, D. (2014). Digital learners and the overlapping of their personal and educational digital engagement. Computers ve Education, 77, 91-100. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.012
18. Hung, C.-M., Hwang, G.-J., ve Huang, I. (2012). A Project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students' learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educational Technology ve Society, 15(4), 368–379.
19. Istenic Starčič, A., Cotic, M., Solomonides, I., ve Volk, M. (2016). Engaging preservice primary and preprimary school teachers in digital storytelling for the teaching and learning of mathematics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(1), 29-50. doi:10.1111/bjet.12253
20. Kolikant, Y. B. D. (2010). Digital natives, better learners? Students’ beliefs about how the Internet influenced their ability to learn. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1384-1391. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.04.012
21. Kolikant, Y. B. D. (2012). Using ICT for school purposes: Is there a student-school disconnect?. Computers ve Education, 59(3), 907-914. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.012
22. Kopcha, T. J., ve Sullivan, H. J. (2007). Self-presentation bias in surveys of teachers’ educational technology practices. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(6), 627-646.
23. Lambert, J. (2013). Digital Storytelling: capturing lives, creating community (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.
24. Lenette, C., Cox, L., & Brough, M. (2013). Digital storytelling as a social work tool: learning from ethnographic research with women from refugee backgrounds. The British Journal of Social Work, 45(3), 988-1005.
25. Luckin, R., Clark, W., Graber, R., Logan, K., Mee, A., ve Oliver, M. (2009). Do Web 2.0 tools really open the door to learning? Practices, perceptions and profiles of 11–16‐year‐old students. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 87-104. doi: 10.1080/17439880902921949
26. Luckin, R., Logan, K., Clark, W., Graber, R., Oliver, M. and Mee, A. (2008). Learners’ Use of Web 2.0 Technologies in and out of school in key stages 3 and 4. http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/1476/1/becta_2008_web2_learnersuse_report.pdf adresinden 8 Mart 2015 tarihinde alınmıştır.
27. Malita, L., & Martin, C. (2010). Digital Storytelling as web passport to success in the 21st Century. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3060–3064.
28. Mazman, S. G., & Usluel, Y. K. (2010). Modeling educational usage of Facebook. [doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.008]. Computers & Education, 55(2), 444-453.
29. McGee, P. (2015). The Instructional Value of Digital Storytelling: Higher Education, Professional, and Adult Learning Settings. USA: Routledge.
30. Miller, L. C. (2010). Make me a story: Teaching writing through digital storytelling. USA: Stenhouse Publishers.
31. Mioduser, D., Nachmias, R., ve Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2008). Implications of the information and knowledge society for education. Editörler J. Voogt, ve G. Knezek, International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 23-42). NY, USA: Springer.
32. Ohler, J. (2013). Digital storytelling in the classroom. New media pathways to literacy, learning, and creativity. (2nd ed.) Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
33. Parslow, R. C. , Hepworth, S. J., ve McKinney, P.A. (2003). Recall of past use of mobile phone handsets. Radiat Prot Dosimetry, 106 (3), 233-240.
34. Pedró, F. (2006). The new millennium learners: challenging our views on ICT and learning. Paris: OECD-CERI. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/38358359.pdf
35. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
36. Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
37. de Reuver, M., ve Bouwman, H. (2015). Dealing with self-report bias in mobile Internet acceptance and usage studies. Information ve Management. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.12.002
38. Rideout, V., Roberts, D., ve Foehr, U. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8–18 year-olds. Menlo Park, CA: Henry Kayser Family Foundation.
39. Robin, B. (2006). The Educational uses of digital storytelling. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology ve Teacher Education International Conference, 709-716.
40. Robin, B., R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 220-228. doi: 10.1080/00405840802153916
41. Skinner, E. M., & Hagood, M. C. (2008). Developing literate identities with english language learners through digital storytelling. The Reading Matrix, 8(2), 12-38.
42. Stacey, G., & Hardy, P. (2011). Challenging the shock of reality through digital storytelling. Nurse Education in Practice, 11(2), 159-164. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2010.08.003
43. Stenhouse, R., Tait, J., Hardy, P., & Sumner, T. (2013). Dangling conversations: reflections on the process of creating digital stories during a workshop with people with early‐stage dementia. Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing, 20(2), 134-141.
44. Stewart, K., & Gachago, D. (2016). Being human today: A digital storytelling pedagogy for transcontinental border crossing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(3), 528-542. doi:10.1111/bjet.12450
45. Straub, D., Limayem, M., ve Karahanna-Evaristo, E. (1995). Measuring system usage – implications for IS theory testing. Management Science, 41(8), 1328–2134.
46. Şahin, M. C. (2009). Yeni binyılın öğrencileri’nin özellikleri. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2), 155-172.
47. Şimşek, B. (2018). İletişim çalışmaları bağlamında dijital hikâye anlatımı: Kavramlar ve Türkiye deneyimi. İstanbul: Alternatif Bilişim. https://ekitap.alternatifbilisim.org/dijital_hikâye_anlatimi.html adresinden alınmıştır.
48. Şimsek, B., & Erdener, B. (2012). Digital visual skills education for digital inclusion of elder women in the community. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4107-4113.
49. Taner, S., Özdemir, A. A., ve Özgür, Y. K. (2013). Kendime yolculuk 2.-3. sınıf gönüllü kitabı. İstanbul: Türkiye Eğitim Gönüllüleri Vakfı Yayınları.
50. Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world HC. McGraw-Hill.
51. Teo, T. (2013). An initial development and validation of a Digital Natives Assessment Scale (DNAS). Computers ve Education, 67, 51-57. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.012
52. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers ve Education, 65, 12-33. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022
53. Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S. ve Budgen, D. (2010). Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 52, 463–479
54. Usluel, Y. K., ve Atal, D. (2013). Students’ approach to social network in educational context. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 9(2), 188-198.
55. Usluel, Y. K., Avcı, Ü., Kurtoğlu, M., ve Uslu, N. (2013). Yeniliklerin benimsenmesi sürecinde rol oynayan değişkenlerin betimsel tarama yöntemiyle incelenmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(1), 53-71.
56. Usluel, Y. K., ve Altıntaş, A. (2012). Lise öğrencilerinin Web 2.0 kullanımları Nasıldır? 6. Uluslararası Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Sempozyumuna Sunulmuş Bildiri.
57. Van Galen, J. A. (2017). Agency, shame, and identity: Digital stories of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 84-93.
58. Yang, Y-T. C., & Wu, W-C. U. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & Education, 59, 339–352.
59. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). USA: Sage Publications.
60. Yuksel, P., Robin, B., ve McNeil, S. (2011). Educational uses of digital storytelling all around the world. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology ve Teacher Education International Conference, 2011(1), 1264-1271.