Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Proficiency of Preservice Teachers Who will Perform Language Teaching as a Foreign Language

Öz

In this study, it was attempted to determine the technological pedagogical content knowledge proficiency (TPACK) perceptions of preservice teachers who will perform language teaching as a foreign language. It was detected that they had the proficiency for TPACK. It was also determined that there was statistically no significant difference between the general TPACK proficiency levels of the students and the gender variable. It was determined that gender had no impact on the TPACK general proficiency levels of the students. It was determined that there were statistically significant differences among the TPACK general proficiency levels concerning branch, receiving technology education, having access to internet, ability to use computer, searching for new technologies particular to the field, and ability to use these new technologies in the teaching activities. It was also found that these variables had impacts on the preservice teachers to have the TPACK proficiency concerning the selected languages, which were included in the study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Technological pedagogical content knowledge
• language teaching
• technology integration
• proficiency
• teacher.

Yabancı Bir Dil Olarak Dil Öğretimi Gerçekleştirecek Öğretmen Adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik İçerik Bilgisi (TPİB) Çerçevesinde Yeterlilikleri

Öz

Bu çalışmada, dil eğitim-öğretimi gerçekleştirecek olan öğretmen adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik Içerik Bilgisi (TPİB) alanındaki yeterlilik algıları tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Dil öğretimi konusunda TPİB yeterliklerinin olduğu saptanmıştır. Öğrencilerin TPİB çerçevesindeki genel yeterlikleri ile cinsiyet değişkeni arasında anlamlı bir farklılık tespit edilmemiştir. Cinsiyetin öğrencilerin TPİB genel yeterlilikleri üzerinde bir etkisinin olmadığı saptanmıştır. Bölüm, teknoloji eğitimi alma, internet erişimine sahip olma, bilgisayar kullanım düzeyi, alana yönelik yeni teknolojileri araştırma, alana yönelik yeni teknolojileri eğitim-öğretim faaliyetlerinde kullanma durumuna göre TPİB genel yeterlilikleri arasında anlamlı farklılık tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamına dahil edilen dillerin eğitim-öğretimini alan öğretmen adaylarının TPİB alanındaki yeterliliğe sahip olmada bu değişkenlerin etkilerinin olduğu da bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Teknolojik pedogojik içerik bilgisi
• dil öğretimi
• teknoloji entegrasyonu
• yeterlilik
• öğretmen adayı.

Kaynakça

1. Akdağ, M., Şahan Yılmaz, B., Özhan, U., & Şan, İ. (2014). Üniversite öğrencilerinin internet bağımlılıklarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (İnönü Üniversitesi örneği) [Investigation of university students’ internet addiction in terms of several variables (Inonu University sample)]. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Inonu University Journal of Faculty of Education], 15(1), 73-96. Doi: 10.17679/iuefd.98972.
2. Akkoç, H. (2011). Investigating the development of prospective mathematics teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Mathematics Education, 13(1), 75-76. doi:10.1080/14794802.2011.550729.
3. Aldunate, R., & Nussbaum, M. (2013). Teacher adoption of technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 519-524.
4. Al-Saleem, B. I. A. (2012). The interactive whiteboard in English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom. European Scientific Journal, 8(3), 126-134.
5. Apau, S. K. (2017). Technological pedagogical content knowledge preparedness of student-teachers of the department of arts and social sciences education of University of Cape Coast. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(10), 167–181.
6. Balcin, M. D., & Ergun, A. (2017). Science teacher candidates’ views about technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 13(4), 570–600.
7. Baser, D. (2015). Development and evaluation of a technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment tool for preservice teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Computer Education and Instructional Technology Department, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
8. Baser, D., Kopcha, T. J., & Ozden, M. Y. (2016). Developing a technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) assessment for preservice teachers learning to teach English as a foreign language, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 749-764. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2015.1047456.

9. Başoğlu, E. B. (2010). Cep telefonu ve sözcük kartı kullanan öğrencilerin İngilizce sözcük öğrenme düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması [A comparison of undergraduate students' English vocabulary learning: Using mobiles phones and flashcards]. Unpublished master thesis, Zonguldak Karaelmas University Social Sciences Institute, Zonguldak.
10. Bostancıoglu, A., & Handley, Z. (2018). Developing and validating a questionnaire for evaluating the EFL ‘Total PACKage’: Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for English as a Foreign Language (EFL). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5-6), 572-598. doi:10.1080/09588221.2017.1422524.
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2013). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı istatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Data analysis handbook for social sciences statistics, research design SPSS applications and comments]. (Extended 18th ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.
12. Can, A. (2016). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi [Quantitative data analysis in the scientific research process with SPSS] (4th ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.
13. Can, B., Erokten, S., & Bahtiyar, A. (2017). An investigation of pre-service science teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 51–57. Doi:10.12973/eu-jer.6.1.51.
14. Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., & Baran, E. (2015). The investigation of science teachers’ self-efficacy toward technological pedagogical content knowledge: A longitudinal study. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 35(2), 285-306.
15. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Teo, Y. H. (2018). Enhancing and modeling teachers’ design beliefs and efficacy of technological pedagogical content knowledge for 21st century quality learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 1-25. doi:10.1177/0735633117752453.
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
17. Çavuş, N., & İbrahim, D. (2009). M-learning: An experiment in using sms to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 78-91.
18. Debbagh, M., & Jones, W. M. (2018). Examining English language teachers’ TPACK in oral communication skills teaching. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 27(1), 43-62.
19. Dumanlı Kürkçü, D. (2015, December). İnternette Gazete Takibinde Dijital Yerliler ve Dijital Göçmenler [Digital natives and digital immigrants’ newspaper tracking on the internet]. İnet-Tr’15, XX. Türkiye'de İnternet Konferansı [Internet Conference in Turkey] 1-3 December 2015 (pp. 1-6). Istanbul University, Istanbul. Retrieved October 18, 2018 from http://inet-tr.org.tr/inetconf20/kitap/inet15-DDKurkcu.pdf
20. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
21. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
22. Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2012). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70-105. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315.
23. İşler, C., & Yıldırım, Ö. (2018). Perceptions of Turkish pre-service EFL teachers on their technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Education and Future, 13, 145-160.
24. Jang, S. J., & Chen, K. C. (2010). From PCK to TPACK: Developing a transformative model for pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 553-564. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9222-y.
25. Karakaya, F., & Yazici, M. (2017). Examination of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) self-efficacy for pre-service science teachers on material development. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(3), 252-270. Doi: 10.5281/zenodo.290617.
26. Karasar, N. (2003). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi [Scientific research method] (12th Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
27. Kayacan Köse, N. (2016). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of English language instructors. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in The World, 6(2), 12-19.
28. Knapp, W. M. (2017). The impact of TPACK and teacher technology efficacy on social studies teachers’ use of technology in the classroom. Doctoral dissertation, The Faculty of The University of Minnesota, USA.
29. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy, and technology. Computer & Education, 49(3), 740-762.
30. Leinhardt, G., & Greeno, J. G. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 75-95. Doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.75.
31. Lin, F.-A. (2010). Those who entered through the back door: Characterizing adult ESL teachers and their knowledge. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Texas, Austin.
32. Maněnová, M. & Žembová, N. (2012). Analysis of lessons using interactive whiteboard focused on pedagogical interaction and communication. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 1719-1728. Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.120.
33. Mathews-Aydinli, J. & Elaziz, F. (2010). Turkish students’ and teachers’ attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 235–252.
34. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
35. Mouza, C., Nandakumar, R., Ozden, S. Y., & Karchmer-Klein, R. (2017). A longitudinal examination of preservice teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge in the context of undergraduate teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 39(2), 153-171. doi:10.1080/01626620.2016.1248301.
36. Na, R., Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Yoneda, T., & Li, Z. (2017, December). A study of TPACK structure of outstanding English teacher. The Sixth International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT), 7-9 December 2017 (pp. 299-302). Osaka, Japan. Doi: 10.1109/EITT.2017.78.
37. Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper S. R., Johnston, C., Browning, C., Özgün-Koca, S. A., & Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4-24. Ondrakova, J., & Tauchmanova, V. (2019). Learning and teaching more foreign languages. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences. (pp. 356-366). Doi: 10.15405/epsbs.2019.01.34.
38. Ozudogru, M., & Ozudogru, F. (2019). Technological pedagogical content knowledge of mathematics teachers and the effect of demographic variables. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(1), 1-24. Doi: https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.512515.
39. Özgen, K., Narlı, S., & Alkan, H. (2013). An investigation of mathematics teacher trainees’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and their perception of the frequency of technology use. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 12(44), 31-51.
40. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows. (Version 12). Australia: Allen & Unwin.
41. Paneru, D. R. (2018). Information communication technologies in teaching English as a foreign language: Analysing EFL teachers’ TPACK in Czech elementary schools. CEPS Journal, 8(3), 141-163. Doi: 10.26529/cepsj.499.
42. Ramanair, J., Rethinsamy, S., & Misieng, J. (2017, December). The technological, pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of tertiary level English language instructors in integrating technology in language classrooms. In E-Proceeding of the 6th Global Summit on Education 2017 (GSE 2017), 4th December 2017 (pp. 15-19). Melia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
43. Saran, M. (2009). Exploring the uses of mobile phones for supporting english language learners’ vocabulary acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, METU Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara.
44. Sarı, M. H., & Bostancıoğlu, A. (2018). Application of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework to elementary mathematics teaching: A scale adaptation study. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi [Journal of Theoretical Educational Science], 11(2), 296-317.
45. Scardamalia, M., Bransford, J., Kozma, B., & Quellmalz, E. (2012). New assessments and environments for knowledge building. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 231-300). Springer, Dordrecht. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_5.
46. Schmid, E. C. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1553–1568.
47. Sharp, S. K. (2017). iPads in the second language classroom: An examination of iPad use by teachers through TPACK and teacher perception lenses, Doctoral dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park. Retrieved April 22, 2019 from https://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/handle/1903/20334/Sharp_umd_0117E_18545.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
48. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
49. Srisawasdi, N. (2014). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in using computerized science laboratory environment: An arrangement for science teacher education program. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(1), 123-143.
50. Szeto, E., & Cheng, A. Y. N. (2017). Pedagogies across subjects: What are preservice teachers’ TPACK patterns of integrating technology in practice? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(3), 346-373. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116667370.
51. Szeto, E., Cheng, A. Y. N., & Hong, J.-C. (2016). Learning with social media: How do preservice teachers integrate YouTube and social media in teaching? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(1), 35-44.
52. Tekin, V. N. (2009). SPSS Uygulamalı İstatistik Teknikleri [SPSS Applied statistic techniques]. (Updated 2nd Edition). Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
53. Tercan, S. S., Horzum, M. B., & Uysal, M. (2014). Teknoloji ile öz-yönelimli öğrenme ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması [Adapting self-directed learning using technology scale into Turkish]. Eğitim Teknolojileri Araştırma Dergisi [The Journal of The Educational Technologies Research], 3, 1-19.
54. Tuncay, N. (2016). Smartphones as tools for distance education. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in The World, 6(2), 20-30.
55. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2019). Main Statistics. Retrieved March 24, 2019 from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr.
56. Yang, X., Li, X., & Lu, T. (2015). Using mobile phones in college classroom settings: Effects of presentation mode and interest on concentration and achievement. Computers & Education, 88, 292-302.
57. Yelkikalan, N., Akatay, A., & Altın, E. (2010). Yeni Girişimcilik Modeli ve Yeni Nesil Girişimci Profili: İnternet Girişimciliği ve Y, M, Z Kuşağı Girişimci [A new entrepreneurship model and a new generation entrepreneurship profile: An internet entrepreneurship and Y, M, Z generations entrepreneurs]. Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi [The Journal of Social Economic Research], 10(20), 489-506.
58. Yıldırım, K., Yaşar, Ö., & Duru, M. (2016). Öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşleri temelinde akıllı telefonların eğitim öğretim ortamlarında kullanılmasının ve etkilerinin incelenmesi [Based on the views of teachers and students analysig the usage of smartphones in teaching and learning environments and effects]. International Journal of Education, Science and Technology, 2(2), 72-84.