Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

The Effect of Digital Literacy on Attitudes Towards Distance Education

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 4, 449 - 455, 30.10.2024
https://doi.org/10.22282/tojras.1535338

Öz

This study was conducted to determine the effect of digital literacy on attitudes towards distance education. Relational survey model, one of the quantitative research methods, was used in the study. A total of 281 students studying in the departments of physical education and sports teaching, sports management and coaching at the sports sciences faculty of a state university and selected by convenience sampling method participated in the study. Data were obtained by using ‘Personal Information Form’, ‘Digital Literacy Scale’ and ‘Attitude towards Distance Education Scale’. Pearson correlation analysis was used to determine the relationship between variables; Regression analysis was used to determine the effect of digital literacy level on attitude towards distance education. According to the results of Pearson correlation analysis, the relationship between participants' digital literacy and attitude towards distance education was found to be significant, positive and moderate. When the regression results were analysed, it was determined that digital literacy had a significant positive predictive power on attitude towards distance education. The results of the research indicated that digital literacy should be taken into consideration in attitudes towards distance education.

Kaynakça

  • Phuapan P, Viriyavejakul C, Pimdee P. An analysis of digital literacy skills among thai university seniors. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2016; 11(3): 24-31.
  • Mohammadyari S. Singh H. Understanding the effect of e-learning on individual performance: The role of digital literacy. Computers & Education, 2015; 82:11-25.
  • Helsper EJ, Smahel D. Excessive internet use by young Europeans: psychological vulnerability and digital literacy? Information, Communication & Society, 2020; 23 (9), 1255-1273.
  • Ullrich C, Borau K, Luo H, Tan X, Shen L, Shen R. Why Web 2.0 is good for learning and for research: principles and prototypes Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM: 2008; 705-714.
  • Duran Cuartero M, Prendes Espinosa MP, Gutierrez Porlan I. Teaching digital competence certification: a proposal for university teachers. Rıed-Revısta Iberoamerıcana De Educacıon A Dıstancıa, 2019; 22(1), 187-205.
  • World Economic Forum The Future of Jobs Report 2018, World Economic Forum, Geneva (2018).
  • OCDE O. TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Oecd Publishing. 2014.
  • From J. Pedagogical digital competence--between values, knowledge and skills. Higher Education Studies, 2017; 7(2), 43-50.
  • Floyde A, Lawson G, Shalloe S, Eastgate R, D'Cruz M. The design and implementation of knowledge management systems and e-learning for improved occupational health and safety in small to medium sized enterprises. Safety Science, 2013; 60: 69-76.
  • Belanger F. Crossler RE. Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 2011; 35(4), 1017-1041.
  • Miks J, McIlwaine J. Keeping the world’s children learning through COVID-19. Acesso em, 2020; 6(05).
  • Agnoletto R, Queiroz V. COVID-19 and the challenges in education. The Centro de Estudos Sociedade e Tecnologia (CEST), 2020; 5(2).
  • Gros B, García-Peñalvo FJ. Future trends in the design strategies and technological affordances of e-learning. In Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy (pp. 345-367). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2023.
  • Hong JC, Tai KH, Hwang MY, Kuo YC, Chen JS. Internet cognitive failure relevant to users’ satisfaction with content and interface design to reflect continuance intention to use a government E-learning system. Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 66, 353–362.
  • Aljawarneh SA. Reviewing and exploring innovative ubiquitous learning tools in higher education. Journal of computing in higher education 2020; 32(1), 57–73.
  • Burns M. Distance education for teacher training: Modes, models and methods. Washington, DC: Education Development Center, Inc. 2011.
  • Chopra G, Madan P, Jaisingh P, Bhaskar P. Effectiveness of E-learning portal from students’ perspective: A structural equation model (SEM) approach. Interactive Technology and Smart Education 2019; 16(2), 94–116.
  • Mirkholikovna DK. Advantages and disadvantages of distance learning. Наука и образование сегодня, 2020; 7(54), 70-72.
  • Oliveira MMS, Penedo AST, Pereira VS. Distance education: Advantages and disadvantages of the point of view of education and society. Dialogia. 2017; 139-152.
  • Hammonds S. Impact of internet-based teaching on student achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2003; 34: 95-98.
  • Mosina Y. Dıstance learnıng: Is ıt convenıent or effectıve? Challenges In Scıence Of Nowadays. UDC 2020; 378. 14.
  • Demir E. Uzaktan Eğitime Genel Bir Bakış. Dumlupinar University Journal of Social Science, 2014; 39, 203-211.
  • Davison MM. Distance education in high schools: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Clearing House, 2005; 78: 105-108.
  • Sinecen F. Türk dili dersinin uzaktan eğitim yoluyla verilmesinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Çanakkale, Türkiye. 2019.
  • Huntington-Klein N, Cowan J, Goldhaber D. Selection into online community college courses and their effects on persistence. Research in Higher Education, 2017; 58(3), 244-269.
  • Anayatova D, Kostaubayeva Z. Teachers’perceptıon of lms schoology ın face-to-face and onlıne teachıng modes: advantages and dısadvantages. С. SDU Bulletin: Pedagogy and Teaching methods, 2020; 52(1): 24-33.
  • Lyons JF. Teaching U.S. history online: Problems and prospects. The History Teacher, 2004; 37: 447-456.
  • Reeves K, Brown B. Online adjuncts. School Administrator, 2002; 59: 32-37.
  • Coyner SC. McCann PL. Advantages and challenges of teaching in an electronic environment: The Accommodate model. International Journal of Instructional Media. 2004; 31: 223-228.
  • Can E. Coronavirüs (Covid-19) Pandemisi ve pedagojik yansımaları: Türkiye’de açık ve uzaktan eğitim uygulamaları. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2020; 6 (2), 11-53.
  • Karber DJ. Comparisons and contrasts in traditional versus on-line teaching in management. Higher Education in Europe, 2003; 26: 533-536.
  • Ülkü S. İlkokullarda görev yapan öğretmenlerin uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutumları (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu, Türkiye. 2018.
  • Ertmer P. Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 2005; 53, 25-39.
  • Haddad WD, Jurich S. ICT for Education: Prerequisites and Constrains. 2002.
  • Lee, H. Y., Qu, H., & Kim, Y. S. (2007). A study of the impact of personal innovativeness on online travel shopping behavior-A case study of Korean travelers. Tourism Management, 28(3), 886-897.
  • Arı, E., Yılmaz, V., & Doğan, M. (2015). Üniversite öğrencilerinin internet üzerinden alışverişlerine ilişkin tutum ve davranışların önerilen bir yapısal eşitlik modeliyle araştırılması. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 22(2), 385-399.
  • Kara, A. (2010). Öğrenmeye ilişkin tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(32), 49-62.
  • Birişçi, S., Metin, M., & Demiryürek, G. (2011). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin bilgisayar ve internet kullanımına yönelik tutumlarının incelenmesi: (Artvin ili örneği). Eğitim Teknolojileri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(4).
  • Karasar N. Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (35. Baskı). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. 2020.
  • Karagöz Y. SPSS ve AMOS uygulamalı nitel-nicel-karma bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri ve yayın etiği (1. Baskı). İstanbul: Nobel Kitabevi, 2017.
  • Ng W. Can we teach digital natives digital literacy?. Computers & education, 2012; 59(3), 1065-1078.
  • Hamutoğlu NB, Güngören ÖC, Kaya-Uyanık G, Gür-Erdoğan D. Dijital okuryazarlık ölçeği: Türkçe'ye uyarlama çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 2017; 18(1), 408-429.
  • Arslan R, Bircan H, Eleroğlu H. Uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi örneği. Cumhuriyet Universitesi Journal of Economics & Administrative Sciences (JEAS), 2019; 20(2).
  • George D, Mallery P. IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference. (Sixteenth edition). Routledge, New York, NY 10017. 2019.
  • Ferro E, Helbig NC, Gil-Garcia JR. The role of IT literacy in defining digital divide policy needs. Government Information Quarterly, 2011; 28(1), 3-10.
  • Hargittai E. Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological inquiry, 2010; 80(1), 92-113.
  • Dizlek A, Uzun A. Beden Eğitimi Öğretmenlerinin Uzaktan Eğitime Yönelik Tutumları İle Dijital Okuryazarlıkları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi. Sportive, 2022; 5(2), 23-34.
  • Saban M, Vargün H, Özcan M, Günlük M. Muhasebe akademisyenlerinin dijital okuryazarlik ve uzaktan eğitim memnuniyet düzeylerinin uzaktan eğitimin etkinliği üzerinde etkisi. Dijital Çağda Muhasebe Eğitiminden Beklentiler, 2022; 55.
  • Dahalan, N., Hassan, H., & Atan, H. (2012). Student engagement in online learning: Learners attitude toward e-mentoring. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67, 464-475.
  • Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202.
  • Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS quarterly, 401-426.
  • Hannafin, M. J., & Cole, D. D. (1983). A comparison of factors affecting the elective selection of introductory computer courses. AEDS Journal, 16(4), 218-227.
  • Peng, H., Tsai, C. C., & Wu, Y. T. (2006). University students' self‐efficacy and their attitudes toward the Internet: the role of students' perceptions of the Internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), 73-86.
  • Yang, Y., & Lin, N. C. (2010). Internet perceptions, online participation and language learning in Moodle forums: A case study on nursing students in Taiwan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2647-2651.

Dijital Okuryazarlığın Uzaktan Eğitime Yönelik Tutuma Etkisi

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 4, 449 - 455, 30.10.2024
https://doi.org/10.22282/tojras.1535338

Öz

Bu araştırma dijital okuryazarlığın uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutuma olan etkisini belirlemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden ilişkisel tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmaya bir devlet üniversitesinin spor bilimleri fakültesi beden eğitimi ve spor öğretmenliği, spor yöneticiliği ve antrenörlük bölümlerinde öğrenim gören ve kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilen 281 öğrenci katılmıştır. Veriler “Kişisel Bilgi Formu” ,”Dijital Okuryazarlık Ölçeği” ve “Uzaktan Eğitime Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği” kullanılarak elde edilmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemek amacıyla Pearson korelasyon analizi; Dijital okuryazarlık düzeyinin uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutuma olan etkisini belirlemek için Regresyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Pearson korelasyon analizi sonuçlarına göre katılımcıların dijital okuryazarlıkları ile uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutum arasındaki ilişki anlamlı, pozitif yönde ve orta düzeyde tespit edilmiştir. Regresyon sonuçları incelendiğinde ise dijital okuryazarlığın uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutum üzerinde pozitif yönde anlamlı yordayıcı güce sahip olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçları uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutumda dijital okuryazarlığın göz önünde bulundurulması gerektiğini işaret etmiştir.

Kaynakça

  • Phuapan P, Viriyavejakul C, Pimdee P. An analysis of digital literacy skills among thai university seniors. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2016; 11(3): 24-31.
  • Mohammadyari S. Singh H. Understanding the effect of e-learning on individual performance: The role of digital literacy. Computers & Education, 2015; 82:11-25.
  • Helsper EJ, Smahel D. Excessive internet use by young Europeans: psychological vulnerability and digital literacy? Information, Communication & Society, 2020; 23 (9), 1255-1273.
  • Ullrich C, Borau K, Luo H, Tan X, Shen L, Shen R. Why Web 2.0 is good for learning and for research: principles and prototypes Proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM: 2008; 705-714.
  • Duran Cuartero M, Prendes Espinosa MP, Gutierrez Porlan I. Teaching digital competence certification: a proposal for university teachers. Rıed-Revısta Iberoamerıcana De Educacıon A Dıstancıa, 2019; 22(1), 187-205.
  • World Economic Forum The Future of Jobs Report 2018, World Economic Forum, Geneva (2018).
  • OCDE O. TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Oecd Publishing. 2014.
  • From J. Pedagogical digital competence--between values, knowledge and skills. Higher Education Studies, 2017; 7(2), 43-50.
  • Floyde A, Lawson G, Shalloe S, Eastgate R, D'Cruz M. The design and implementation of knowledge management systems and e-learning for improved occupational health and safety in small to medium sized enterprises. Safety Science, 2013; 60: 69-76.
  • Belanger F. Crossler RE. Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 2011; 35(4), 1017-1041.
  • Miks J, McIlwaine J. Keeping the world’s children learning through COVID-19. Acesso em, 2020; 6(05).
  • Agnoletto R, Queiroz V. COVID-19 and the challenges in education. The Centro de Estudos Sociedade e Tecnologia (CEST), 2020; 5(2).
  • Gros B, García-Peñalvo FJ. Future trends in the design strategies and technological affordances of e-learning. In Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy (pp. 345-367). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2023.
  • Hong JC, Tai KH, Hwang MY, Kuo YC, Chen JS. Internet cognitive failure relevant to users’ satisfaction with content and interface design to reflect continuance intention to use a government E-learning system. Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 66, 353–362.
  • Aljawarneh SA. Reviewing and exploring innovative ubiquitous learning tools in higher education. Journal of computing in higher education 2020; 32(1), 57–73.
  • Burns M. Distance education for teacher training: Modes, models and methods. Washington, DC: Education Development Center, Inc. 2011.
  • Chopra G, Madan P, Jaisingh P, Bhaskar P. Effectiveness of E-learning portal from students’ perspective: A structural equation model (SEM) approach. Interactive Technology and Smart Education 2019; 16(2), 94–116.
  • Mirkholikovna DK. Advantages and disadvantages of distance learning. Наука и образование сегодня, 2020; 7(54), 70-72.
  • Oliveira MMS, Penedo AST, Pereira VS. Distance education: Advantages and disadvantages of the point of view of education and society. Dialogia. 2017; 139-152.
  • Hammonds S. Impact of internet-based teaching on student achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2003; 34: 95-98.
  • Mosina Y. Dıstance learnıng: Is ıt convenıent or effectıve? Challenges In Scıence Of Nowadays. UDC 2020; 378. 14.
  • Demir E. Uzaktan Eğitime Genel Bir Bakış. Dumlupinar University Journal of Social Science, 2014; 39, 203-211.
  • Davison MM. Distance education in high schools: Benefits, challenges, and suggestions. The Clearing House, 2005; 78: 105-108.
  • Sinecen F. Türk dili dersinin uzaktan eğitim yoluyla verilmesinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Çanakkale, Türkiye. 2019.
  • Huntington-Klein N, Cowan J, Goldhaber D. Selection into online community college courses and their effects on persistence. Research in Higher Education, 2017; 58(3), 244-269.
  • Anayatova D, Kostaubayeva Z. Teachers’perceptıon of lms schoology ın face-to-face and onlıne teachıng modes: advantages and dısadvantages. С. SDU Bulletin: Pedagogy and Teaching methods, 2020; 52(1): 24-33.
  • Lyons JF. Teaching U.S. history online: Problems and prospects. The History Teacher, 2004; 37: 447-456.
  • Reeves K, Brown B. Online adjuncts. School Administrator, 2002; 59: 32-37.
  • Coyner SC. McCann PL. Advantages and challenges of teaching in an electronic environment: The Accommodate model. International Journal of Instructional Media. 2004; 31: 223-228.
  • Can E. Coronavirüs (Covid-19) Pandemisi ve pedagojik yansımaları: Türkiye’de açık ve uzaktan eğitim uygulamaları. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2020; 6 (2), 11-53.
  • Karber DJ. Comparisons and contrasts in traditional versus on-line teaching in management. Higher Education in Europe, 2003; 26: 533-536.
  • Ülkü S. İlkokullarda görev yapan öğretmenlerin uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutumları (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu, Türkiye. 2018.
  • Ertmer P. Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 2005; 53, 25-39.
  • Haddad WD, Jurich S. ICT for Education: Prerequisites and Constrains. 2002.
  • Lee, H. Y., Qu, H., & Kim, Y. S. (2007). A study of the impact of personal innovativeness on online travel shopping behavior-A case study of Korean travelers. Tourism Management, 28(3), 886-897.
  • Arı, E., Yılmaz, V., & Doğan, M. (2015). Üniversite öğrencilerinin internet üzerinden alışverişlerine ilişkin tutum ve davranışların önerilen bir yapısal eşitlik modeliyle araştırılması. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 22(2), 385-399.
  • Kara, A. (2010). Öğrenmeye ilişkin tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(32), 49-62.
  • Birişçi, S., Metin, M., & Demiryürek, G. (2011). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin bilgisayar ve internet kullanımına yönelik tutumlarının incelenmesi: (Artvin ili örneği). Eğitim Teknolojileri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(4).
  • Karasar N. Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (35. Baskı). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. 2020.
  • Karagöz Y. SPSS ve AMOS uygulamalı nitel-nicel-karma bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri ve yayın etiği (1. Baskı). İstanbul: Nobel Kitabevi, 2017.
  • Ng W. Can we teach digital natives digital literacy?. Computers & education, 2012; 59(3), 1065-1078.
  • Hamutoğlu NB, Güngören ÖC, Kaya-Uyanık G, Gür-Erdoğan D. Dijital okuryazarlık ölçeği: Türkçe'ye uyarlama çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 2017; 18(1), 408-429.
  • Arslan R, Bircan H, Eleroğlu H. Uzaktan eğitime yönelik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi örneği. Cumhuriyet Universitesi Journal of Economics & Administrative Sciences (JEAS), 2019; 20(2).
  • George D, Mallery P. IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference. (Sixteenth edition). Routledge, New York, NY 10017. 2019.
  • Ferro E, Helbig NC, Gil-Garcia JR. The role of IT literacy in defining digital divide policy needs. Government Information Quarterly, 2011; 28(1), 3-10.
  • Hargittai E. Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological inquiry, 2010; 80(1), 92-113.
  • Dizlek A, Uzun A. Beden Eğitimi Öğretmenlerinin Uzaktan Eğitime Yönelik Tutumları İle Dijital Okuryazarlıkları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi. Sportive, 2022; 5(2), 23-34.
  • Saban M, Vargün H, Özcan M, Günlük M. Muhasebe akademisyenlerinin dijital okuryazarlik ve uzaktan eğitim memnuniyet düzeylerinin uzaktan eğitimin etkinliği üzerinde etkisi. Dijital Çağda Muhasebe Eğitiminden Beklentiler, 2022; 55.
  • Dahalan, N., Hassan, H., & Atan, H. (2012). Student engagement in online learning: Learners attitude toward e-mentoring. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67, 464-475.
  • Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202.
  • Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS quarterly, 401-426.
  • Hannafin, M. J., & Cole, D. D. (1983). A comparison of factors affecting the elective selection of introductory computer courses. AEDS Journal, 16(4), 218-227.
  • Peng, H., Tsai, C. C., & Wu, Y. T. (2006). University students' self‐efficacy and their attitudes toward the Internet: the role of students' perceptions of the Internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), 73-86.
  • Yang, Y., & Lin, N. C. (2010). Internet perceptions, online participation and language learning in Moodle forums: A case study on nursing students in Taiwan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2647-2651.
Toplam 54 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Egzersiz ve Spor Psikolojisi
Bölüm Research Article
Yazarlar

Serhat Turan 0000-0001-6236-3825

Ahmet Dönmez 0000-0001-6754-4369

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Ekim 2024
Gönderilme Tarihi 18 Ağustos 2024
Kabul Tarihi 30 Ekim 2024
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2024 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 4

Kaynak Göster

Vancouver Turan S, Dönmez A. Dijital Okuryazarlığın Uzaktan Eğitime Yönelik Tutuma Etkisi. TOJRAS. 2024;13(4):449-55.