Attitudes of prospective Turkish language teachers towards instructional technologies and material development course

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1, 265 - 279, 29.03.2020

Sıddık Bakır

https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.712805

Öz

The aim of this study is to analyze the attitudes of prospective Turkish language teachers towards the Course on Instructional Technologies and Material Development and find out whether these attitudes differ on the basis of changes in certain criteria. The sample consisted a total of 161 prospective teachers who took the Course on Instructional Technologies and Material Development offered at the Faculty of Education of a public university in Turkey in the academic year of 2018-2019. In this study, in which the descriptive survey model was used, the data were collected through the “Instructional Technologies and Material Development Course Scale” developed by Çetin et al. (2013). In data analysis, descriptive statistics, independent-samples t-test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were utilized. At the end of the data analysis, it was discerned that, in the attitudes of the prospective Turkish language teachers towards the Course on Instructional Technologies and Material Development, there was a moderate significant difference in terms of the ‘enjoyment’ and ‘denial’ sub-scales, whereas there was a strong significant difference in terms of the ‘usefulness’ sub-scale and the overall scale. In the attitudes of the prospective Turkish language teachers towards the Course on Instructional Technologies and Material Development, there was no significant difference on the basis of the class-year variable, whereas there was a statistically significant difference on the basis of the gender variable in favor of the female participants.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Turkish language education; prospective Turkish language teachers; instructional technologies and material development; attitude.

Kaynakça

• Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). Educational technology in Turkey: Past, present and future. Educational Media International, 39(2), 165-173.
• Alım, M. (2002). Acquisitions of prospective geography teachers in the instructional technology and material design/development course. Eastern Geographical Review, 33, 1-10.
• Alkan, c. (2005). Education technology. Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Altınok, Ş. (2012). Investigation of Turkish language and literature teacher candidates' attitudes towards technology in education. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 3(2), 100-114.
• Bakaç, E., & Özen, R. (2017). Examining preservice teachers’ material design self-efficacy beliefs based on their technological pedagogical content knowledge competencies. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Faculty of Education Journal (KEFAD), 18(2), 613-632.
• Bektaş, F., Nalçacı, A., & Erçoşkun, H. (2009). Classroom teacher candidates’ views on the attainments from “teaching technologies and material development” course. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 2(2), 19-31.
• Bozpolat, E., &. Arslan, A. (2018). Preservice teachers’ views about the course teaching technologies and material design. E-International Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 60-84.
• Çağıltay, K., Çakıroğlu, J., Çağıltay, N., & Çakıroğlu, E. (2001). Teachers’ perspectives about the use of computers in education. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 21(1), 19-28.
• Çelik, L. (2012). Preparation and selection of instructional materials. In Ö. Demirel and E. Altun (Eds.), Instructional technology and material design (pp. 27-66). Ankara: PegemA Publishing.
• Çetin, B., Bağçeci, B., Kinay, İ., & Şimşek, Ö. (2013). Development of attitudes towards instructional technologies and material development course scale (ATITMDCS): A study of validity and reliability. International Journal of Social Science (JASSS), 6(2), 697-713.
• Çevik Kılıç, D. B. (2016). Music prospective teachers’ opinions about instructional technologies and material design course. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5(1), 1-8.
• Çoban, A., & İleri, T. (2013). The level of social studies teachers’ using teaching techniques and materials and the reasons of their inability to use them. Amasya Education Journal, 2(1), 194-213.
• Çubukçu, Z., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., İnci, T., & Kırcaburun, K. (2017). Evaluation of instructional technology and material design course in terms of contribution to technology integration. Anatolian Journal of Educational Leadership and Instruction, 5(2), 29-41.
• Dargut, T., & Çelik, G. (2014). Pre-service Turkish language teachers’ attitudes and thoughts toward use of technology in education. Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 2(2), 28-41.
• Gündüz, Ş., & Odabaşı, F. (2004). The importance of instructional technologies and material development course at pre-service teacher education in information age. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1), 43-48.
• Güneş, G., & İskenderoğlu Aydoğdu, T. (2014). Attitudes of pre-service primary school mathematics teachers towards ınstructional technologies and material design lesson. GEFAD/GUJGEF, 34(3), 469-488.
• Halis, İ. (2001). Instructional technologies and material development. Konya: Mikro Publishing.
• Karasar, N. (2012). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
• Karataş, S., & Yapıcı, M. (2006). The process and application samples of teaching technologies and material development. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 311-326.
• Kaya, Z. (2006). Instructional technologies and material development. Ankara: PegemA Publishing.
• Kinay, İ., Şimşek, Ö., Bağçeci, B., & Çetin, B. (2015). Examination of the attitudes of prospective teachers towards ınstructional technologies and material design (ITMD) course in terms of some variables. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education. 25, 119-135.
• Kolburan Geçer, A. (2010). Experience of technical teacher candidates towards teaching tecnologies and material development course. Journal of Yuzuncu Yil University Faculty of Education, 7(2), 1-25.
• Koşar, E., & Çiğdem, H. (2003). Instructional technologies and material development. Ankara: PegemA Publishing.
• Kürüm, D. (2008). Instructional technologies and material design. (Ed. K. Selvi). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Odabaş, H. (2004). Use of the Internet-based distance learning model in higher education programs for information services. (In) The epic of librarianship. Ankara: A. Ü. DTCF Information and Records Management Department.
• Özen, R. (2013). Preservice teachers’ training and technology use: A case study. International Journal of Human Sciences, 10(2), 147-162.
• Özer, Ö., & Tunca, N. (2014). The opınıon of pre-servıce teachers towards preparating and usıng of materıals. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 1(3), 214-229.
• Saban, A. (2016). Basic concepts related to instructional technology and material design. In K. Selvi (Ed.), Instructional technologies and material design (pp. 51-83). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Saka, A. Z., & Saka, A. (2005). The level of preservice teachers’ professional skills in instructional technology and material development course: Sakarya case. Sakarya University Journal of Education Faculty, 1(10), 81-89.
• Turan, A. H., & Çolakoğlu, B. E. (2008). Faculty’s acceptance and use of technology in higher education: An empirical assessment at Adnan Menderes Unıversıty. Doğuş Univeristy Journal, 9(1), 106-121.
• Uzunöz, A., Aktepe, V., & Gündüz, M. (2017). Candidate teachers’ views on professional achievements in ınstructional technologies and material design a qualitative study. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 5(3), 317-339.
• Ürün Karahan, B. (2016). Analysis of attitudes of Turkish language preservice teachers towards instructional technologies and material design courses (case of Kafkas University). Research in Reading & Writing Instruction, 4(2), 26-35.
• Vatansever Bayraktar, H., & İşleyen, M. (2018). Investigation of teacher candidate’s attitudes towards course of instructional technology and material design. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 6(79), 208-230.
• Yalın, H. İ. (2003). Instructional technologies and material development. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
• Yaman, H. (2007). Candidates of Turkish teachers’ instructional technologies and material development technology in Turkish language teaching in the context of the course qualifications and perceptions related to use. HAYEF Journal of Education, 7, 57-71.
• Yanpar, T. (2009). Instructional technologies and material development. Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Yanpar Yelken, T. (2011). Instructional technologies and material development. Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Yazar, T. (2015). Prospective teachers’ opinions about ınstructional technologies and material design course. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 5(9), 23-34.
• Yenilmez, K., & Uygan, C. (2009). The attitudes of primary mathematics teachers toward using technology in education. 3th International Computer and İnstructional Technologies Symposium. Trabzon.
• YÖK. (1998). Council of Higher Education. Faculty of Education Teacher Training Undergraduate Programs. Ankara.
• YÖK. (2007). Council of Higher Education. Faculty of Education Teacher Training Undergraduate Programs. Ankara.
• Web resources: https://www.anadolu.edu.tr/akademik/fakulteler/ders/82118/ogretim-teknolojileri-ve-materyal-tasarimi/ders-ogrenme-ciktilari was obtained on 22.09.2019. https://obs.atauni.edu.tr/moduller/dbp/eobs/dersDetay/7907/1134? was obtained on 22.09.2019.