Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2021, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2, 223 - 253, 01.04.2021
https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.906866

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Albayrak, E., Gungoren, O. C., Horzum, M. B. (2014). Algılanan ogrenme olceginin Turkceye uyarlaması. Ondokuz Mayıs Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 33(1), 1-27. Bacon, D. R. (2016). Reporting actual and perceived student learning in education research. Journal of Marketing Education, 38(1), 3–6.
  • Bahcekapılı, E. & Karaman, S. (2015). Uzaktan egitimde kisilik ozellikleri ve akademik basarı: Bir literatur incelemesi. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 4(3), 26-34.
  • Bayram, S., Deniz, L. & Erdogan, Y. (2008). The role of personality traits in web based education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 7(2), 41-50.
  • Belaja, K., Boon Sai, G. T. & Wei Lin, A. L. (2012). Effects of the lecturer’s transactional presence towards learners’ ıntrinsic motivation in learning english as a second language through distance education. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education 14(1), 77-97.

TURKISH ADAPTATION OF THE TRANSACTIONAL PRESENCE SCALE AND AN EXAMINATION OF ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH PERCEIVED LEARNING

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2, 223 - 253, 01.04.2021
https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.906866

Öz

The main purpose of this study is to establish a valid and reliable Turkish version of the Transactional Presence Scale. The study also aims to determine whether learners’ personality structures, age, sex, previous experiences of distance education and perceptions of transactional presence are significant predictors of their perceived learning. The study sample consisted of 467 students who received pedagogical formation training at Sakarya University and agreed to participate in the study. The study used the relational survey model, a general survey model based on the quantitative research paradigm. Data were collected using the Transactional Presence Scale, the Perceived Learning Scale and TIPI-Ten Item Personality Inventory. First, the transactional presence scale was adapted for use in Turkish. Following the validity and reliability tests of the Turkish version of the transactional presence scale, a multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine whether learners’ personality traits, age, sex, previous experience of distance education and perceptions of transactional presence were significant predictors of their perceived learning. The results showed that only institutional transactional presence was a significant predictor of perceived learning. Transactional presence perceptions of the learners in the study explained 29% of the total variance of their perceived learning.

Kaynakça

  • Albayrak, E., Gungoren, O. C., Horzum, M. B. (2014). Algılanan ogrenme olceginin Turkceye uyarlaması. Ondokuz Mayıs Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 33(1), 1-27. Bacon, D. R. (2016). Reporting actual and perceived student learning in education research. Journal of Marketing Education, 38(1), 3–6.
  • Bahcekapılı, E. & Karaman, S. (2015). Uzaktan egitimde kisilik ozellikleri ve akademik basarı: Bir literatur incelemesi. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 4(3), 26-34.
  • Bayram, S., Deniz, L. & Erdogan, Y. (2008). The role of personality traits in web based education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 7(2), 41-50.
  • Belaja, K., Boon Sai, G. T. & Wei Lin, A. L. (2012). Effects of the lecturer’s transactional presence towards learners’ ıntrinsic motivation in learning english as a second language through distance education. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education 14(1), 77-97.
Toplam 4 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Bölüm Articles
Yazarlar

Gulten Kartal

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Nisan 2021
Gönderilme Tarihi 13 Ağustos 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Kartal, G. (2021). TURKISH ADAPTATION OF THE TRANSACTIONAL PRESENCE SCALE AND AN EXAMINATION OF ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH PERCEIVED LEARNING. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 223-253. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.906866