Adaptation of flexible thinking in learning scale to Turkish culture

Abstract

This article aims to adapt the Flexible Thinking in Learning (FTL) scale developed by Barak and Levenberg in 2016 to Turkish culture The FTL scale, whose original language is English, consists of three sub-dimensions: “Acceptance of Learning Technologies”, “Open-Mindedness in Learning” and “Adaptation to New Learning Situations”. During the process, language and field experts conducted mutual translations between English and Turkish to assess the language equivalence of the scale. The original scale was supplied to English teachers to measure the degree of similarity between the original language (English version) and the translated language (Turkish version). After a fifteen-day interval, the same teachers were given the adapted version of the scale. The degree of similarity between the scale's original language and its Turkish translation was calculated. Once the scale’s harmony was deemed satisfactory in both languages, a pilot study was conducted to receive feedback and suggestions on the comprehensibility, applicability, and general structure of the scale. After necessary improvements were made, the scale was finalized. The Flexible Thinking in Learning (FTL) scale, which was adapted to Turkish, was applied to 516 volunteer teachers. As per the findings of the analysis, the adapted scale has three sub-dimensions, just like the original scale. The measured structure of the adapted scale was found to be consistent with the original scale’s factor structure.

Keywords

• Flexible Thinking
• Technology Acceptance
• Open-Mindedness
• Scale Adaptation

References

1. Barak, M. (2018). Are digital natives open to change? Examining flexible thinking and resistance to change. Computers & education, 121, 115-123.
2. Barak, M., & Levenberg, A. (2016a). A model of flexible thinking in contemporary education. Thinking skills and creativity, 22, 74-85.
3. Barak, M., & Levenberg, A. (2016b). Flexible thinking in learning: An individual differences measure for learning in technology-enhanced environments. Computers & education, 99, 39-52.
4. Baş, G., Kubiatko, M., & Sünbül, A. M. (2016). Teachers' perceptions towards ICTs in teaching-learning process: Scale validity and reliability study. Computers in human behavior, 61, 176-185.
5. Boyaci, S., & Atalay, N. (2016). A Scale Development for 21st Century Skills of Primary School Students: A Validity and Reliability Study. International journal of instruction, 9(1), 133-148.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. (19. baskı) Ankara: Pegem Akademi
7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
8. Dede, C. (2010). Comparing Frameworks for 21st Century Skills. In J. Bellenca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st century skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (pp. 51-76). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press

9. Ionescu, T. (2012). Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility. New ideas in psychology, 30(2), 190-200.
10. International Standarts Technology in Education (ISTE) (2019) ISTE Standards. https://www.iste.org/standards
11. Karasar, N. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, Teknikler, İlkeler Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım
12. Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same?. The Internet and higher education, 14(2), 129-135.
13. National Research Council (NRC) (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills. In J. W. Pellegrino, & M. L. Hilton (Eds.), Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
14. Osman, K., Hamid, S. H. A. & Hassan A. (2009). Standard setting: inserting domain of the 21st century thinking skills into the existing science curriculum in Malaysia. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 1(1), 2573-2577.
15. Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) (2019). Framework for 21st century learning definitions http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_DefinitionsBFK.pdf
16. Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-Century Skills Requires 21st-Century Teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400203
17. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Teo, T. (2015). Becoming more specific: Measuring and modeling teachers' perceived usefulness of ICT in the context of teaching and learning. Computers & education, 88, 202-214.
18. Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.
19. Tseng, H., Kuo, Y. C., & Walsh, E. J. (2020). Exploring first-time online undergraduate and graduate students’ growth mindsets and flexible thinking and their relations to online learning engagement. Educational technology research and development, 68, 2285-2303.
20. Tugtekin, U. (2023). Factors influencing online learning fatigue among blended learners in higher education. Journal of educational technology & online learning, 6(1), 16-32.
21. Van Laar, E., van Deursen, A. J., van Dijk, J. A., & de Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in human behavior, 72, 577-588.
22. Yildiz Durak, H., & Atman Uslu, N. (2023). The role of flexible thinking and academic achievement emotions in predicting goal-setting, time management, and self-evaluation in online learning: a multi-group analysis. Interactive learning environments, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2214180