Pre-Service Teachers’ Opinions On Learning, Designing, Utilizing Web 2.0 Tools In Education

Yıl 2022, , 83 - 97, 01.12.2022

Ahmet Berk Ustun , Tugba Guler

https://doi.org/10.47157/jietp.1113530

Öz

This was conducted to investigate the views of preservice teachers about learning Web 2.0 tools and using these tools to create educational digital content. The study was designed in qualitative research method. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to collect data from 18 preservice teachers studying in various programs in the faculty of education. The data were analyzed using content analysis. Findings showed that students emphasized the effortlessness of learning Web 2.0 tools and the convenience of designing and integrating educational digital content into the teaching and learning process. Although they indicated their concerns about utilizing these tools, they found these tools useful in terms of attracting attention, increasing learning retention, improving creative thinking and facilitating learning well as practical in terms of saving time, accessing resources and sharing information. They were very contented with using these tools that were supportive to improve the instructional practices in their own field even though very few of them thought differently. Finally, they were willing to utilize these tools in their future classroom settings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning, Designing, Utilizing, Web 2.0 tools, Preservice teachers

Kaynakça

• Al-Maqtri, M. A. T. (2014). How effective is e-learning in teaching English?: A case study. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(2), 647-669.
• Aljawarneh, S. A. (2020). Reviewing and exploring innovative ubiquitous learning tools in higher education. Journal of computing in higher education, 32(1), 57-73.
• Alkhayat, L., Ernest, J., & LaChenaye, J. (2020). Exploring Kuwaiti preservice early childhood teachers’ beliefs about using web 2.0 technologies. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-11.
• Almeida, F., & Simoes, J. (2019). The role of serious games, gamification and industry 4.0 tools in the education 4.0 paradigm. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(2), 120-136.
• An, Y. J., & Williams, K. (2010). Teaching with Web 2.0 technologies: Benefits, barriers and lessons learned. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 7(3), 41-48.
• Azizul, A. F., Ismail, M. I., Othman, P., & Azlan, W. A. S. (2021). The potential of online bulletin platforms for language teaching in classrooms. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(1), 1-14.
• Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 8(2).
• Bolatli, Z., & Korucu, A. T. (2018). Secondary school students' feedback on course processing and collaborative learning with web 2.0 tools-supported STEM activities. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(2), 456-478.
• Cirit, N. C. (2015). Assessing ELT Pre-Service Teachers via Web 2.0 Tools: Perceptions toward Traditional, Online and Alternative Assessment. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(3), 9-19.
• Damyanov, I., & Tsankov, N. (2018). The role of infographics for the development of skills for cognitive modeling in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13(1), 82-92.
• Deni, A. R. M., & Zainal, Z. I. (2018). Padlet as an educational tool: Pedagogical considerations and lessons learnt. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers (pp. 156-162).
• Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22.
• Di Blas, N., Paolini, P., & Sabiescu, A. G. (2012). Collective digital storytelling at school: a whole-class interaction. International Journal of Arts and Technology, 5(2-4), 271-292.
• DiCerbo, K. E. (2014). Game-based assessment of persistence. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 17-28.
• Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
• Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2011). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Pearson Higher Ed.
• Glesne, C. (2013). Introduction to qualitative research (Trans. Ed.: Ersoy, A., & Yalcinoglu, P.). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Goodman, R., & Newman, D. (2014). Testing a digital storytelling intervention to reduce stress in adolescent females. Storytelling, Self, Society, 10(2), 177-193.
• Gursoy, G., & Goksun, D. O. (2019). The Experiences of Pre-Service Science Teachers in Educational Content Development Using Web 2.0 Tools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 10(4), 338-357.
• Halim, M. S. A. A., & Hashim, H. (2019). Integrating web 2.0 technology in ESL classroom: A review on the benefits and barriers. Journal of Counseling and Educational Technology, 2(2), 1-8.
• Haris, M., Yunus, M. M., & Badusah, J. H. (2017). The effectiveness of using Padlet in ESL classroom. International Journal of Advanced Research, 5(2), 783-788.
• Hursen, C. (2020). The effect of problem-based learning method supported by web 2.0 tools on academic achievement and critical thinking skills in teacher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-19.
• Ianos, M. G., & Brezeanu, T. (2020). Web 2.0 potential to support soft skills development. eLearning & Software for Education, 2.
• Jayashankar, S., & Sridaran, R. (2017). Superlative model using word cloud for short answers evaluation in eLearning. Education and Information Technologies, 22(5), 2383-2402.
• Karaoglan-Yilmaz, F. G., Ustun, A. B., & Yilmaz, R. (2020). Investigation of pre-service teachers' opinions on advantages and disadvantages of online formative assessment: an example of online multiple-choice exam. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 2(1), 1-8.
• Kazimirov, A. N. (2018, November). Education at university and industry 4.0. In 2018 Global Smart Industry Conference (GloSIC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
• Lenhart, A. (2015). Teens, social media & technology overview. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/
• Mahapatra, S. (2015). Using Web 2.0 tools for teacher professional development: a case study. Innovation in English Language Teacher Education, 65.
• Mahmoodi, M., & Talang, T. (2013). The effect of using word clouds on EFL students' long-term vocabulary retention. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 11, 74-106.
• Mailizar, A., Abdulsalam, M., & Suci, B. (2020). Secondary school mathematics teachers' views on e-learning implementation barriers during the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of Indonesia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 1-9.
• Major, T. (2018). Problem-based learning pedagogies in teacher education: The case of Botswana. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 12(1), 1.
• Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American psychologist, 63(8), 760.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
• Miley, F., & Read, A. (2011). Using word clouds to develop proactive learners. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 91-110.
• Mishra, L., Gupta, T., & Shree, A. (2020). Online teaching-learning in higher education during lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100012.
• Morocho-Lara, D., Miranda-Ramos, P., Neto-Chusín, H., & Iza-Pazmiño, S. (2022). Collaborative tools web 3.0 in the teaching of mathematics in times of Covid 19 pandemic. In 2022 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 775-779). IEEE.
• Muhaimin, H., Mukminin, A., Pratama, R., & Asrial, H. (2019). Predicting factors affecting intention to use Web 2.0 in learning: evidence from science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(4), 595.
• Ozcinar, Z., Sakhieva, R., Pozharskaya, E., Popova, O., Melnik, M., & Matvienko, V. (2020). Student's Perception of Web 2.0 Tools and Educational Applications. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(23), 220-233.
• Özpınar, İ. (2020). Preservice teachers’ use of web 2.0 tools and perspectives on their use in real classroom environments. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 11(3), 814-841.
• Papcun, P., Kajáti, E., & Koziorek, J. (2018). Human machine interface in concept of industry 4.0. In 2018 World Symposium on Digital Intelligence for Systems and Machines (DISA) (pp. 289-296). IEEE.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Poynter, R. (2010). The handbook of online and social media research: Tools and techniques for market researchers. John Wiley & Sons.
• Rashid, A. A., Yunus, M. M., & Wahi, W. (2019). Using Padlet for collaborative writing among ESL learners. Creative Education, 10(3), 610-620.
• Rhoads, R. A., Berdan, J., & Toven‐Lindsey, B. (2013). The open courseware movement in higher education: Unmasking power and raising questions about the movement's democratic potential. Educational Theory, 63(1), 87-110.
• Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into practice, 47(3), 220-228.
• Scott H., Fawkner S., Oliver C., Murray A. (2016) Why healthcare professionals should know a little about infographics. British Journal of Sports Medicine 50, 1104–1105.
• Singh, M. (2018). Adoption of Web 2.0 tools in higher education in India: a study. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication.
• Songer, N.B. (2007). Digital resources or cognitive tools: A discussion of learning science with technology. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 471–491). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
• Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
• Sumadio, D. D., & Rambli, D. R. A. (2010). Preliminary evaluation on user acceptance of the augmented reality use for education. In 2010 second international conference on computer engineering and applications (Vol. 2, pp. 461-465). IEEE.
• Teo, T., Sang, G., Mei, B., & Hoi, C. K. W. (2019). Investigating pre-service teachers’ acceptance of Web 2.0 technologies in their future teaching: a Chinese perspective. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4), 530-546.
• Tosunoğlu, E., & Ustun, A. B. (2021) Xamarin Çapraz-Platformu ile Gerçek Zamanlı Bulut Veri Tabanı iletişimi: Bütünleşik Akıllı Ev Sistemi. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, (27), 658-664.
• Tuyet, T. T. B., & Khang, N. D. (2020). The influences of the Flipgrid app on Vietnamese EFL high school learners’ speaking anxiety. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(1).
• Ustun, A. B., Simsek, E., Karaoglan-Yilmaz, F. G., & Yilmaz, R. (2022). The effects of AR-enhanced English Language Learning Experience on Students’ Attitudes, Self-Efficacy and Motivation. TechTrends, 1-12.
• Ustun, A. B., & Tracey, M. W. (2020). An effective way of designing blended learning: A three phase design-based research approach. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1529-1552.
• Ustun, A. B., & Tracey, M. W. (2021). An innovative way of designing blended learning through design-based research in higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 126-146.
• Ustun, A. B., Yılmaz, R., & KaraoğlanYılmaz, F. G. (2020). Virtual reality in medical education. In U. Sajid (Ed.), Mobile devices and smart gadgets in medical sciences. IGI Global.
• Wu, T. T. (2018). Improving the effectiveness of English vocabulary review by integrating ARCS with mobile game‐based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 315-323.
• Yang, Y. T. C., & Wu, W. C. I. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & education, 59(2), 339-352.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek. H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık. Ankara.
• Yuen, S. C. Y., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Yuen, P. K. (2011). Perceptions, interest, and use: Teachers and web 2.0 tools in education. International Journal of Technology in Teaching & Learning, 7(2).