The History of Turkish Education Course Based on Technopedagogical Education: An Action Research

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 3, 1 - 23, 01.08.2021

Şefika Çam

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.51.8.3

Abstract

This study aimed to (a) determine how The History of Turkish Education course was taught under the current conditions, (b) identify the current status of the second-year student teachers (hereafter student) of preschool education regarding the technopedagogical education, (c) design history of Turkish education course activities based on technopedagogical education and specify its effect on the learning-teaching process, and (d) specify the opinions of students on the subject. Action research was applied to achieve this purpose. The researcher designed an action plan and implemented it into a two-hour history of Turkish education course that lasted 12 weeks in the 2018-2019 spring term. The study was conducted with 30 students. Content analysis was used to analyze the data obtained through semi-structured interviews and open-ended questionnaire forms. Findings displayed that traditional methods were used to teach the history of the Turkish education course. Besides, students were passive and had no training based on technopedagogical education. The course designed based on these findings positively affected the learning environment. The students became active, collaborated with their classmates, and communicated constantly with their friends and lecturers even outside the class through social media. However, those who were familiar with traditional teaching methods had difficulty in adopting technopedagogical methods at the first stage; they were adapted to these innovations over time. It was suggested that a course with emphasis on theoretical knowledge (e.g., the history of Turkish education) should be taught based on technopedagogical education in such a way that students could be active.

Keywords

technopedagogical education, quality of teaching in higher education, action research

References

• Akyüz, Y. (2015). Türk Eğitim Tarihi M.Ö. 1000-M.S.2015 [History of Turkish Education 1000 B.C 2015 A.C]. Ankara: Pegem. Alabas, R. (2016). Türk Eğitim Tarihi dersinin önemi hakkında öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri [Prospective teachers’ perceptions about the importance of History of Turkish Education]. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 5(4), 89-102. doi: 10.30703/cije.321417
• Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 71-88.
• Arıkan, A, Ünver, Ş. & Saraç Süzer, H. S. (2007). Yabancı dil eğitimi programlarında Türk Eğitim Tarihi dersinin önemi ve içeriğine ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri [Students’ views on the importance and content of “Turkish History of Education” course in German and English language teaching curricula]. H. U. Journal of Education, 33, 24-32.
• Aslan, E. (2005). Türkiye’de tarih eğitiminin sorunları [Problems of history education in Turkey]. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 18, 106-114.
• Brinkley-Etzkorn, K. E. (2018). Learning to teach online: Measuring the influence of faculty development training on teaching effectiveness through a TPACK lens. The Internet and Higher Education, 38, 28-35.
• Canbazoğlu-Bilici, S., Yamak, H., & Kavak, N. S., & Guzey, S. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy scale (TPACK-SeS) for preservice science teachers: Construction, validation and reliability. Eurasian Journal of Education Research, 52, 37-60.
• Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers' development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63-73.
• Doğru, E., & Aydın, F. (2017). Examining the skills of geography teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 6(2), 485-506. doi: 10.7596/taksad.v6i2.686
• Ersoy, M., Kabakçı Yurdakul, I. , & Ceylan, B. (2016). Investigating preservice teachers’ TPACK competencies through the lenses of ICT skills: An experimental study. Education and Science, 41(186), 119-135. doi: 10.15390/EB.2016.6345
• Graham, R. C., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers. TechTrends, 53(5), 70-79.
• Graziano, K. J., Foulger, T. S., Schmidt-Crawford, D. A., & Slykhuis, D. (Mart, 2017). Technology integration and teacher preparation: The development of teacher educator technology competencies. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. Austin, United States. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org
• Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based, technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 211-229. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2011.10782570
• Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (Mart, 2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, USA. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org
• İhsan, Ü., Kaşkaya, A. & Coşkun, M. K. (2017). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi yeterliliklerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi [Examining the technological pedagogical field knowledge competencies of social sciences teacher candidates according to some variables]. Erzincan University Faculty of Education Journal, 19(1), 214-228. doi:10.17556/erziefd.295611
• İlter, İ. (2014). Öğretim elemanlarının kullandığı yöntem ve tekniklere ilişkin öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri [Teacher candidates’ opinions related to methods and techniques used by the instructors]. Journal of International Social Research, 7(35), 562- 576.
• Jaipal-Jamani, K., Figg, C., Collier, D., Gallagher, T., Winters, K. L., & Ciampa, K. (2018). Developing TPACK of university faculty through technology leadership roles. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 39-55.
• Jang, S., & Chen, K. (2010). From PCK to TPACK: Developing a transformative model for pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 553–564.
• Johnson, P. A. (2002). Eylem araştırması el kitabı (Y. Uzuner & M. Özten Atay, Çev.). Ankara: Anı Publication. Kabakçı-Yurdakul, I. (Ed.). (2013). Teknopedagojik eğitime dayalı öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı [Designing materials and instructional technologies based on technopedagogical education]. Ankara: Anı.
• Kabakçı Yurdakul, I. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının teknopedagojik eğitim yeterliklerinin bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerini kullanımları açısından incelenmesi [Examining technopedagogical knowledge competencies of preservice teachers based on ICT usage]. H. U. Journal of Education, 40(40), 397-408.
• Kalem, S., & Fer, S. (2003). The effects of active learning model on the learning, teaching and communication process of students. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 3(2), 433-461.
• Keane, G., & Heinz, M. (2019). Differentiated homework: Impact on student engagement. Journal of Practitioner Research, 4(2), 1-23. doi: 10.5038/2164-0866.4.2.1111
• Keengwe, J., & Georgina, D. (2012). The digital course training workshop for online learning and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 17(4), 365-379.
• Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
• Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2014). Teacher clusters and their perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) development through ICT lesson design. Computers & Education, 70, 222-232. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.017
• Kösterelioğlu, İ., Bayar, A., & Akın Kösterelioğlu, M. (2014). Öğretmen eğitiminde etkinlik temelli öğrenme süreci: bir durum araştırması [Activity-based learning process on teacher education: A case study]. Turkish Studies - International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(2), 1035-1047.
• Liberatore, M. W. (2011). Improved student achievement using personalized online homework. Chemical Engineering Education, 45(3), 184-190.
• Liberatore, M. W., Marr, D. W., Herring, A. M., & Way, J. D. (2019). Student-created homework problems based on YouTube videos. Chemical Engineering Education, 47(2), 122-132.
• Martin, B. (2015). Successful implementation of TPACK in teacher preparation programs. International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE), 4(1), 17-26.
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Mills, G. E. (2003). Action Research: A guide for the teachers research. Ohio: Merrill Practice Hall.
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
• Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (Mart, 2008). Introducing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, USA. Retrieved from http://www.matt-koehler.com/publications/ Mishra_Koehler_AERA_2008.pdf
• Mouza, C., Karchmer-Klein, R., Nandakumar, R., Ozden, S. Y., & Hu, L. (2014). Investigating the impact of an integrated approach to the development of preservice teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 71, 206-221. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.02
• Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. California: Sage.
• Schoen, S. F., & Nolen, J. (2004). Action research: Decreasing acting-out behavior and increasing learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(1), 26-29. doi: 10.1177/004005990403700103
• Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. SAGE publications limited.
• Şahin, M. & Güvercin Çetinoğlu, A. (2016). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının bölümlerindeki ders ve uygulamalara ilişkin algıları [Perceptions of social studies prospective teachers related to courses and implementations in their departments]. e-International Journal of Educational Research, 7(1), 50-69.
• Şahin, V., & İnce, Z. Coğrafya bölümü öğrencilerinin ödev destekli öğretim üzerine görüşleri [Opinions of students of geography department on homework-assisted education]. Trakya Journal of Education, 9(4), 696-707.
• Uerz, D., Volman, M., & Kral, M. (2018). Teacher educators' competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 12-23. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.005
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods]. Ankara: Seçkin.
• Yıldırım, V. Y. (2018). Öğretmen, öğrenci ve velilerin ortaokul düzeyinde verilen günlük ödevler hakkındaki görüşleri [The opinions of the students, teachers and parents about the daily assingments given at secondary school level]. Millî Eğitim, 47(220), 201-224.