Mehmet Nuri GÖMLEKSİZ, Emine Kübra FİDAN

Self-Efficacy Perception Levels of Prospective Classroom Teachers toward Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

The aim of this study is to assess self-efficacy perception levels of prospective classroom teachers toward technological pedagogical content knowledge. Study group consisted of classroom prospective teachers enrolled at Fırat, Cumhuriyet, Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen, Erciyes, Erzincan, Karadeniz Technic and Adıyaman Universities in 2011-2012 academic year. Web Pedagogical Content Knowledge scale, developed by Schmidt and others (2009) and adapted into Turkish by Öztürk and Horzum (2011) was used as the data collection tool in the study. The scale was administered on 628 (349 female and 279 male) prospective teachers. Independent groups t test and one way ANOVA were used to analyze the data. Research results reveal that prospective classroom teachers' self-efficacy perception levels toward technological pedagogical content knowledge differed in terms of gender. But their self-efficacy perception levels did not differ in terms of university variable.

PDF

___

Aladağ, C., & Doğu, S. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji dersinde verilen ödevlerin öğrencigörüşlerine gore değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler EnstitüsüDergisi, 21, 15-23.
Alexander, M., Bartlett, J. E., Truell, A. D., & Ouwenga, K. (2001). Testing in a computertechnology course: An investigation of equivalency in performance between onlineand paper and pencil methods. Journal of Career and Technical Education,18(1), 69-80.
Bauer, W., Benonson, W., & Westfall, G. D. (1992). Multimedia Physics, CDROM.
Bartlett, J. E., II, Reynolds, K A., & Alexander, M. W. (2000). A tool for online learning.Journal of Online Learning, 11(3&4), 22-24. Blackboard, http://www.blackboard.com/International/EMEA.aspx?lang=en-us Retrieved March 10, 2011.
Bonham, S. W., Titus, A., Beichner, R. J., & Martin, J. (2000). Education research using web-based assessment systems. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(1),28-44.
Bonham, S., Beicher, R., & Deardorff, D. (2001). Online homework: Does it make adifference?. Physics Teacher, 39(5), 293-296.
Bonham, S. W., Deardorff, D. L., & Beichner, R. J. (2003). Comparison of studentperformance using web and paper-based homework in college level physics. Journalof Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1050-1071.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırmadeseni, SPSS uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
Campbell, D.T. & Stanley, J.C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs forresearch. Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co. ClassNet, http://classnet.wcdsb.ca/Pages/about.aspx Retrieved March 10, 2011.
Demirci, N. (2006). Developing web-printed homework system to access student'sintroductory physics course performance and compare to paper based homework.Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 105-119.
Demirci, N. (2007). University students' perceptions of web-based vs. paper-basedhomework in a general physics course. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science& Technology Education, 3(1), 29-34.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. London: D. C. Heath & Company.
Heller, P. M., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem-solving throughcooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem-solving. AmericanJournal of Physics, 60(7), 627-636.
Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperativegrouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journalof Physics, 60(7), 637-644.
Heller, K., & Heller, P. (1995). The competent problem solver, a strategy for solvingproblems in physics, calculus version (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: McGraw- Hill.
Hsu, L., & Heller, K. (2009). Computer problem solving coaches. Proceedings of theNational Association for Research in Science Teaching "NARST" 2009 AnnualMeeting, April 17-21, CA.
Hunter, P. W. W. (2000). The use of a computer -assisted personalized approach in a largeenrollment general chemistry course. Chemistry Education, 4(2), 39-44.
Kashy, E., Sherrill, B. M., Tsai, Y., Thaler, D., Weinshank, D., Engelmann, M., & Morissey,D. J. (1993). CAPA, an integrated computer-assisted personalized assignment system. American Journal of Physics, 61, 1124-1130.
Kashy, E. Gaff, S., Pawley, N., Stretch, W. L., Wolfe, S., Morissey, D. J., & Tsai, Y. (1995).Conceptual questions in computer-assisted assignments. American Journal ofPhysics, 63(11), 1000-1005.
Kashy, D. A., Albertelli, G., Kashy, E., & Thoennessen, M. (2001). Teaching with ALNtechnology: Benefits and costs. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(4).
Kortemeyer, G., & Bauer, W. (1999). Multimedia collaborative content creation (mc3). TheMSL LectureOnline System, Journal of Engineering Education, 88(4), 421-427.
Kortemeyer, G., Hall, M., Parker, J., Minai-Bidgoli, B., Albertelli II, G., Bauer, W., &Kashy, E. (2005). Effective feedback to the instructor from on-line homework. JALN,9(2), 19-28.
Kortemeyer, G., Kashy, E., Benonson, W., & Bauer, W. (2008). Experiences using the opensourcelearning content management and assessment system LON-CAPA inintroductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 76(4&5), 438- 444.
Kortemeyer, G. (2009). Gender difference in the use of an online homework system in anintroductory physics course. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 5(010107), 1-8.LON-CAPA, http://www.lon-capa.org/ Retrieved March 10, 2011. MasteringPhysics, http://www.masteringphysics.com/site/index.html Retrieved March 10,2011.
Mendicino, M., Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009). A comparison of traditionalhomework to computer-supported homework. Journal of Research on Technology inEducation, 41(3), 331-358.
Mestre, J., Hart, D.M., Rath, K. A. & Dufresne, R. (2002). The effect of web-basedhomework on test performance in large enrollment introductory physics courses. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(3), 229-251.Moodle, http://moodle.org/ Retrieved March 10, 2011.
Pascarella, A. M. (2004). The influence of web-based homework on quantitative problem-solving in university physics classes. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it. (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
Reif, F., Larkin, J. H., & Brackett, G. C. (1976). Teaching general learning and problemsolvingskills. American Journal of Physics, 44(3), 212-217.
Reif, F. (1995). Millikan Lecture 1994: Understanding and teaching important scientificthought process. American Journal of Physics, 59, 891.
Sarıgöz, O. (2011). Ortaöğretetim öğrencilerinin kimya derslerinde verilen ev ödevlerihakkındaki düşüncelerinin değerlendirilmesi. Electronic Journal of VocationalColleges, 80-87.
Thoennesen, M., & Harrison, M. J. (1996). Computer-assisted assignments in a large physicsclass. Computers & Education, 27(2), 141-147.
Titus, A., Matin, L., & Beichner, R. (1998). Web-based testing in physics education:Methods and opportunities. Computers in Physics, 12(2), 117-123. WebAssign, http://www.webassign.net/ Retrieved March 10, 2011.
Yeşilyurt, S. (2006). Lise öğrencilerinin biyoloji derslerinde verilen ev ödevlerine karşıtutumları üzerine bir çalışma. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 37-53.
Zerr, R. (2007). A quantitative and qualitative analysis of the effectiveness of onlinehomework in first semester calculus. Journal of Computers in Mathematics andScience Teaching, 26(1), 55-73.