Öğretmen Adaylarının Eğitim Teknolojileri Kullanımına Yönelik İstekliliği ve Risk Algıları: Bir İnanç Sistemi Yaklaşımı Çalışması

Öğretmenlerin eğitim teknolojilerine direnç göstermelerinden sorumlu inançlardan birisi de risk algılarıdır. Risk psikolojisi uzmanlarına göre bireyler risk algısını, bir olayın meydana gelme olasılığı ve böyle bir olayın olumsuz sonuçları hakkında ne kadar endişe duydukları ile ilgili bir değerlendirmeyle birlikte tanımlar. Risk algılarının doğası hakkında üç teorik açıklama ileri sürülmüştür. Kültürel teori, ampirik araştırmada sınırlı yordayıcı güce sahip olduğundan, duygusal-sezgi (affect heuristic) teori ise riskleri kapsamakla kalmayıp aynı zamanda faydaları da içerdiği için, bu çalışmada temel olarak psikometrik paradigmaya odaklanılmıştır. Psikometrik paradigma, riskin bilgi, korku, kontrol, yıkıcı potansiyel, eşitlik, gönüllülük ve doğaya müdahale gibi birçok faktörün bir bileşimi olduğunu vurgular. Bu çalışmanın amacı, risk algılarının öğretmen adaylarının eğitim teknolojilerini kullanma istekliliğini yordama gücünü anlamaktır. Bu amaçla kişisel bilgiler, eğitim teknolojilerini kullanma istekliliği ve risk algıları olmak üzere üç bölümden oluşan bir anket geliştirilmiştir. Bu anket, farklı branş geçmişine sahip (STEM ve STEM dışı şubeler) 425 öğretmen adayına uygulanmıştır. Veri analizi için faktör analizi ve hiyerarşik regresyondan yararlanılmıştır. Faktör analizi sonuçları, korku, doğal olmayan sonuçlar, öğrenmeyle ilgili olumsuz etkiler, eğitim dışı amaçlar, geleneksel öğretim ve ilk kez kullanım alt boyutlarının öğretmen adaylarının risk algılarını oluşturduğunu göstermiştir. Regresyon sonuçları ise bazı risk algılama boyutlarının eğitim teknolojilerini kullanma istekliliğini yordadığını göstermiştir. Araştırmanın sonunda, öğretmen epistemolojisini geliştirme ve riski azaltma fırsatlarına yönelik önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Preservice Teachers’ Risk Perceptions and Willingness to Use Educational Technologies: A Belief System Approach

One of the beliefs that is responsible for teachers’ resistance to educationa ltechnologies (Ets) is risk perceptions. Risk psychology scholars describe risk perceptionas people’s informal estimation of the probability of an event happening combined withan evaluation of how concerned they would be about the negative consequences of suchan incident. About the nature of risk perceptions, three theoretical explanations havebeen put forwarded: cultural theory, affect heuristic and psychometric paradigm.Because cultural theory has limited predictive power in the empirical research andbecause affect heuristic not only covers risks but also contains benefits, we focus mainlyon psychometric paradigm in the present study. The psychometric paradigm emphasizesthat risk is a combination of many factors such as knowledge, dread, control,catastrophic potential, equity, voluntariness and tamper with the nature. The purpose ofpresent study was to understand the predictive power of risk perceptions for pre-serviceteachers (PTs)’ willingness to use Ets. We developed a questionnaire covering threesections: personal information, willingness to use Ets and risk perceptions. Weadministered this questionnaire to 425 Turkish PTs from different backgrounds (STEMand non-STEM branches). We benefited from factor analysis and hierarchicalregression for data analyses. The results of factor analyze showed that six dimensions(dread, unnatural consequences, negative impacts on learning, noneducational purposes,traditional education and first-time use) constituted the PTs’ risk perceptions. Theregression results showed that certain risk perception dimensions were predictors ofwillingness to use Ets. At the end of the paper, we suggested implications based onenhancement strategies for teacher epistemology and risk mitigation opportunities.

PDF

___

Abelson, R. P. (1979). Differences between belief and knowledge systems. Cognitive Science, 3, 355– 366.
Almerich, G., Orellana, N., Suárez-Rodríguez, J., & Díaz-García, I. (2016). Teachers’ information and communication technology competences: A structural approach. Computers & Education, 100, 110-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.002.
Demirbag, M. & Kilinc, A. (2015). Beyond TPCK: Exploring a science teacher's technological pedagogical content belief system. Paper Presented at National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Narst 2015 Congress, USA.
Earle, R. S. (2002). The integration of instructional technology into public education: Promises and challenges. Educational Technology-saddle Brook Then Englewood Cliffs nj-, 42(1), 5-13. Retrieved on 10 May 2017 from http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic87187.files/Earle02.pdf.
Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.
Eteokleous, N. (2008). Evaluating computer technology integration in a centralized school system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 669–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.07.004.
Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2012). Spring cleaning for the ‘messy’ construct of teachers’ beliefs: What are they? Which have been examined? What can they tell us? In: K.R. Harris, & T. Urdan (eds.) APA educational psychology handbook: Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp.471–499). New York: APA.
Frewer, L., Lassen, J., Kettlitz, B., Scholderer, J., Beekman, V., & Berdal, K. G. (2004). Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 42(7), 1181-1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2004.02.002.
Gill, M. G., & Fives, H. (2015). Introduction. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Ed.) International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 48-66). New York: Routledge.
Gülcü, İ. (2014). Etkileşimli tahta kullanımının avantajları ve dezavantajlarına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. XVI. Akademik Bilişim Kongresi, 5-7.
Hanley, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From beliefs to actions: The beliefs and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 171- 187. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016565016116
Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1499- 1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.001.
Howard, S. K. (2011). Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers’ technology related risk perceptions. Educational Media International, 48, 261-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2011.632275.
Howard, S. K. (2013). Risk-aversion: Understanding teachers’ resistance to technology integration. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(3), 357–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2013.802995.
Hsu, S., & Kuan, P. Y. (2013). The impact of multilevel factors on technology integration: The case of Taiwanese grade 1-9 teachers and schools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 25–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9269-y
International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). ISTE Standards for Teachers. Retrived on 12 March 2016 from https://www.iste.org/standards/standards. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan: London.
Kılınç, A., Watt, H. M., & Richardson, P. W. (2012). Factors influencing teaching choice in Turkey. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 199-226.
Kılınç, A., Kartal, T., Eroğlu, B., Demiral, Ü., Afacan, Ö., Polat, D., ... & Görgülü, Ö. (2013). Preservice science teachers’ efficacy regarding a socioscientific issue: A belief system approach. Research in Science Education, 43(6), 2455-2475.
Kilinc, A., Ertmer, P., Bahcivan, E., Demirbag, M., Sonmez, A., & Ozel, R. (2016). Factors Influencing Turkish Preservice Teachers’ Intentions to Use Educational Technologies and Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 24(1), 37- 62.
Kilinc, A., Demiral, U., & Kartal, T. (2017). Resistance to dialogic discourse in SSI teaching: The effects of an argumentation‐based workshop, teaching practicum, and induction on a preservice science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(6), 764-789.
Lee, H., & Witz, K. G. (2009). Science teachers’ inspiration for teaching socio-scientific issues: Disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 931–960
Mama, M., & Hennessy, S. (2013). Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT. Computers & Education, 68, 380-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.022.
Ministry of National Education (2014). MEOIT (FATIH) Project. Retrievedon April 12 2016 from http://www.fatihprojesi.org/
Moran, M., Hawkes, M., & Gayar, O. E. (2010). Tablet personal computer integration in higher education: Applying the unified theory of acceptance and use technology model to understand supporting factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(1), 79-101. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.42.1.d
National Education Association [NEA]. (2008). Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access, adequacy, and equity. Retrieved on April 11 2016 from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/PB19_Technology08.pdf
O'bannon, B. W., & Thomas, K. (2014). Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education, 74, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.006.
Offir, B., & Katz, Y.J. (1990). Computer oriented attitudes as a function of risk taking among Israeli elementary school teachers, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 6, 168-173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1990.tb00364.x
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2015). TALIS 2013 Results: Teaching in Focus Brief No. 12 - Teaching with technology. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer selfefficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1084-1091.
Rodriquez, A. J. (2005). Teachers’ resistance to ideological and pedagogical change: Definitions, theoretical framework, and significance. In A. J. Rodriquez & R. S. Kitchen (Eds.), Preparing mathematics and science teachers for diverse classrooms: Promising strategies for transformative pedagogy (pp. 1–16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: a theory of organization and change . San Francisco: Jossey.
Sjöberg L. (2000). The methodology of risk perception research. Quality and Quantity, 34, 407– 418. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004838806793
Sjöberg, L., Moen, B. E., & Rundmao, T. (2004). Explaining risk perception: an evaluation of the psychometric paradigm in risk perception research. Trondheim: Rotunde.
Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(6), 322-325.
Sohn, K. Y., Yang, J. W., & Kang, C. S. (2001). Assimilation of public opinions in nuclear decisionmaking using risk perception. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 28(6), 553-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4549(00)00076-1.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate analysis. California State University Northridge: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Taylor, M. E. (2010). Teaching efficacy, innovation, school culture and teacher risk taking. Unpublished doctorate thesis. University of Louisville. Louisville, Kentucky.
Timucin, M. (2009). Diffusion of technological innovation in a foreign languages unit in Turkey: A focus on risk-aversive teachers. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 18(1), 75-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14759390802704121.
Tsai, M. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Junior high school students’ Internet usage and self-efficacy: A reexamination of the gender gap. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1182-1192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.004.
Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers' perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 173-207.
Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J.L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482–515. Retrieved on 10 May 2017 from http://crcsalon.pbworks.com/f/Conditions+for+Classroom+Technology+Innovations.pdf