Investigating Middle School Students’ Conceptions of Technology: The Effects of Gender and Grade Level

Yıl 2024, , 311 - 359, 30.04.2024

Samet Kaynak , Mustafa B. Aktan

https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1374068

Öz

This study aims to investigate middle school students' conceptions of technology through mental models. Furthermore, it also seeks to determine whether middle school students' conceptions of technology differ according to gender and grade level. The study sample included 1038 middle school students. The research employed a writing-drawing activity and the What is Technology? scale to gather data. When the results were examined, it was determined that only 15.90% of middle school students had good mental models regarding the concept of technology, while 42.48% had medium and 41.62% had poor mental models. Generally, students view technology as a tool that makes people's lives easier and associate technology mostly with electrical and electronic devices such as computers, digital tablets, mobile phones, and televisions. The research revealed that while middle school students exhibited an average grasp of mechanical technologies, they struggled to conceptualize basic technologies. We found that middle school students' understanding of technology did not vary by gender, but did differ statistically significantly by grade level. The findings also showed that higher grade levels were associated with a more sophisticated understanding of technology among middle school students. In conclusion, we observed that the mental models clearly express the dimensions of technology as an artifact, a human practice, and its current role in society. It seems that middle school students' conceptions of technology are limited to these three dimensions, and students have difficulty grasping the nature of technology in all its dimensions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Conception of technology, Mental models, Middle school, Students

Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Teknoloji Anlayışlarının İncelenmesi: Cinsiyet ve Sınıf Düzeyinin Etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışma, ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji kavramlarını zihinsel modeller aracılığıyla belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ayrıca, ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji anlayışlarının cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyine göre farklılık gösterip göstermediği de belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Araştırmaya toplam 1038 ortaokul öğrencisi katılmıştır. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak yazma-çizme etkinliği ve Teknoloji Nedir? ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar incelendiğinde ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji kavramına ilişkin geliştirdikleri zihinsel model düzeylerinin yalnızca %15,90'ının iyi, %42,48'inin orta ve %41,62'sinin düşük düzeyde olduğunu belirledik. Öğrenciler teknolojiyi genellikle insanların yaşamını kolaylaştıran araçlar olarak görmekte ve teknolojiyi daha çok elektrik ve elektronik cihazlarla (bilgisayar, dijital tablet, cep telefonu, televizyon vb.) ilişkilendirmektedir. Ayrıca, öğrencilerin basit teknolojileri kavramsallaştırmakta zorlandıkları, ancak mekanik teknolojiler için ortalama düzeyde performans gösterdikleri belirlenmiştir. Ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji anlayışlarının cinsiyete göre değişmediği, ancak sınıf düzeyine göre farklılaştığı tespit edilmiştir. Bulgular ayrıca, yüksek sınıf seviyelerinin ortaokul öğrencileri arasında daha sofistike teknoloji anlayışlarıyla ilişkili olduğunu göstermiştir. Sonuç olarak, teknolojinin bir eser veya ürün; bir insan uygulaması, pratiği ve teknolojinin toplumdaki güncel rolü boyutlarının zihinsel modellerde açıkça ifade edildiğini gözlemledik. Görünen o ki ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji kavramları bu üç boyutla sınırlı kalmaktadır ve öğrenciler teknolojinin doğasını tüm boyutlarıyla kavramakta zorlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Teknoloji anlayışı, zihinsel modeller, ortaokul, öğrenciler

Kaynakça

• Bacanak, A., Karamustafaoğlu, O., & Köse, S. (2003). Yeni bir bakış: Eğitimde teknoloji okuryazarlığı. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(14), 191-196.
• Blom, N., & Abrie, A. L. (2021). Students’ perceptions of the nature of technology and its relationship with science following an integrated curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 43(11), 1726-1745. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1930273
• Bulut Özek, M. (2019). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji algılarının resimler yoluyla incelenmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 27(3), 1327-1336. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.470318
• Buss, A. H., & Buss, E. H. (1956). The effect of verbal reinforcement combinations on conceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52(5), 283. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045981
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Byrne, J. (2011). Models of micro-organisms: children’s knowledge and understanding of micro-organisms from 7 to 14 years old. International Journal of Science Education, 31(14), 1927-1961. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.536999
• Capobianco, B. M., Diefes‐dux, H. A., Mena, I., & Weller, J. (2011). What is an engineer? Implications of elementary school student conceptions for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 304-328.
• Craik, K. J. W. (1943). The nature of explanation. London: Cambridge U. Press
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Cunningham, C., Lachapelle, C. P., & Lindgren-Streicher, A. (2005, June). Assessing elementary school students' conceptions of engineering and technology. In 2005 Annual Conference (pp. 10-227).
• Dasgupta, C., Magana, A. J., & Vieira, C. (2019). Investigating the affordances of a CAD enabled learning environment for promoting integrated STEM learning. Computers & Education, 129, 122-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.014
• Davis, R., Ginns, I., & McRobbie, C. (2002). Elementary school students' understanding of technology concepts. Journal of Technology Education, 14(1), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v14i1.a.3
• de Vries, M. J. (2018). The T and E in STEM: From promise to practice. Research in Technology Education: International approaches, 10.
• DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337-1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400
• Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. Children’s Ideas in Science, 1-9.
• Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2022). Encyclopaedia Britannica.
• Ergün, A. (2018). Türk ortaokul öğrencilerinin mühendislik ve teknoloji algıları: Sınıf düzeyi ve cinsiyetin etkisi. Journal of Human Sciences, 15(4), 2657-2673. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v15i4.5260
• Erişti, S. D., & Kurt, A. A. (2011). Elementary school students’ perceptions of technology in their pictorial representations. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 2(1), 24-37.
• Fırat, M. (2017). Growing misconception of technology: Investigation of elementary students’ recognition of and reasoning about technological artifacts. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27, 183-199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9351-y
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Gagne, R. M., & Brown, L. T. (1961). Some factors in the programming of conceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(4), 313. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0049210
• Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289976
• Herdem, K., Aygün, H., & Çinici, A. (2014). Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin teknoloji algılarının çizdikleri karikatürler yoluyla incelenmesi. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 232-258.
• Hughes, T. P. (2004). American genesis: A century of invention and technological enthusiasm, 1870-1970. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226772905.001.0001
• International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. 3rd Ed., Reston, VA: International Technology Education Assoc. Retrieved from https://assets-002.noviams.com/novi-file-uploads/iteea/standards/xstnd.pdf
• İmer Çetin, N., & Timur, B. (2020). Conceptual analysis of middle school students’ cognitive structure on the concept of “technology” through word association test. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 49(2), 1098-1125.
• Jocz, J., & Lachapelle, C. (2012). The impact of Engineering is Elementary (EiE) on students’ conceptions of technology. Boston, MA: Museum of Science.
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Harvard University Press.
• Jones, A. (2009). Towards an articulation of students making progress in learning technological concepts and processes. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education (pp. 407–417). Rotterdam: Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087908799_035
• Kabakçı, I., & Odabaşı, H. F. (2004). Teknolojiyi kullanmak ve teknogerçekçi olabilmek. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1.
• Karaçam, S., & Aydın, F. (2014). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin teknoloji kavramına ilişkin algılarının metafor analizi. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(2), 545-572.
• Koul, R. B., Fraser, B. J., Maynard, N., & Tade, M. (2018). Evaluation of engineering and technology activities in primary schools in terms of learning environment, attitudes and understanding. Learning Environments Research, 21, 285-300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-017-9255-8
• Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications.
• Kuhl, P. K., Lim, S. S., Guerriero, S., & van Damme, D. (2019, April 10). Developing Minds in the Digital Age. Educational Research and Innovation. https://doi.org/10.1787/562a8659-en
• Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., & Oh, Y. (2019). What is technology? Development and evaluation of a simple instrument for measuring children's conceptions of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 188-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545101
• Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43, 265-275.
• Li, R. (1996). A theory of conceptual intelligence: Thinking, learning, creativity, and giftedness. Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.
• Liou, P. Y. (2015). Developing an instrument for assessing students’ concepts of the nature of technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 33(2), 162-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2014.996542
• Lottero-Perdue, P. (2009). Children's Conceptions and Critical Analysis of Technology Before and After Participating in An Informal Engineering Club. In 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 14-319).
• McNeil, I. (Ed.). (2002). An encyclopedia of the history of technology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203192115
• Meltzer, D. E. (2002). The relationship between mathematics preparation and conceptual learning gains in physics: A possible “hidden variable” in diagnostic pretest scores. American Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1259-1268. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1514215
• Moreland, J. (2004). Putting students at the Centre: Developing effective learners in primary technology classrooms. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 1, 37-43. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0656
• Moye, J. J., & Reed, P. A. (2020). Standards for technological and engineering literacy: addressing trends and issues facing technology and engineering education. Technology & Engineering Teacher, 80(3), 9-13.
• National Research Council (NRC). (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press.
• Oliveira, A. W., Schneider, E., & Kim, Y. (2020). Curriculum conceptions of technology: Theoretical insights from National Education Policies in Brazil, Korea, and the United States. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(4), 367-376. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.204
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Data analysis in mixed research: a primer. International Journal of Education, 3(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v3i1.618
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48-63.
• Pearson, A., & Young, T. (2002). National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council. Technically speaking: Why all Americans need to know more about technology.
• Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T. (1995a). Children's choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology. Research in Science Education, 25(3), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02357399
• Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T. (1995b). English and Australian children's perceptions about technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 13(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514950130104
• Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students' mental models of the environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 327-348. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20161
• Solomonidou, C., & Tassios, A. (2007). A phenomenographic study of Greek primary school students’ representations concerning technology in Daily life. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17, 113-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-0007-9
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson Pub.
• Türk Dil Kurumu [TDK]. (2022). Güncel Türkçe Sözlük. Türk Dil Kurumu.
• Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.