TURKISH EFL TEACHERS' ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE USE OF INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS AND THE CHALLENGES FACED

Bu çalışmanın amacı İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğreten Türk öğretmenlerin etkileşimli tahta (IWB) kullanımına ilişkin tutumlarını ve derslerde bunları kullanmada çektikleri güçlükleri incelemektir. Bu karma desen çalışmasında veriler iki aşamada toplandı: a) 42 öğretmene IWB'ye ilişkin tutumlarını ve profillerini incelemek için verilen anket, b) IWB kullanımına ilişkin tutumlarını incelemek ve sınıf ortamında kullanmadaki güçlüklerini incelemek için 14 öğretmenle ayrı ayrı yapılan mülakatlar. Nicel sonuçlar bu öğretmenlerin IWB'ye ilişkin olumlu tutamlarının olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca, erkek ve kadın öğretmenler arasında IWB kullanımına ilişkin tutumlar bakımından anlamlı farklılıklar bulunmamıştır. Nitel bulgular, öğretmenlerin destekleyici materyaller, onların IWB'ye entegrasyonu ve kalabalık sınıflardaki oturma düzenleri ile ilgili güçlükler yaşadığını göstermiştir. Öğretmenlerin farklı sınıf ortamlarında IWB'leri daha etkili kullanmaları için eğitim almaları önerilmiştir

İngilizceyi Yabancı Dil olarak Öğreten Türk Öğretmenlerin Etkileşimli Tahta Kullanımanına İlişkin Tutumları ve Karşılaşılan Güçlükler

The purpose of this study is to investigate Turkish English-as-a-foreignlanguage (EFL) teachers' attitudes towards the use of interactive whiteboards (IWB) and the challenges they face while using this equipment in EFL classrooms. In this mixed methods study, the data were gathered in two steps: a) a questionnaire was administered to 42 English teachers to examine their profiles and their attitudes towards IWB, and b) interviews were conducted with 14 EFL teachers separately to examine the challenges in using the IWBs and their attitudes towards using IWBs in their classroom atmosphere. The quantitative results revealed that English teachers' had positive attitudes towards the use of IWBs. Further, there was no significant difference between female and male teachers in terms of attitudes towards the use of IWBs. The qualitative findings showed that the teachers experienced some problems regarding supplementary materials and their integration to IWBs, and seating arrangements in crowded classrooms. It was suggested that teachers should be trained to use the IWBs more effectively in different classroom contexts

PDF

___

AL-FAKI, I. M.- KHAMIS, A. H. A. 2014: "Difficulties Facing Teachers in Using Interactive Whiteboards in Their Classes", American International Journal of Social Science, 23. 136-158.

AYDIN, S. 2007: "Attitudes of EFL Learners towards the Internet". The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 63), 1-9. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov. on 15.02.2015

AYDINLI, J. M.- ELAZIZ, F. 2010: "Turkish students' and teachers' toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms". Computer Assisted Language Learning, (233), 235-252. DOI: 10.1080/09588221003776781

BALL, N. 2011: "Technology in Adult Education ESOL Classes". Journal of Adult Education, 40(1), 12-19.

CARDENASA, J. M. F.- DE LA GARZAB, L. S. 2010: "Disciplinary Knowledge and Gesturing in Communicative Events: A Comparative Study between Lessons Using Interactive Whiteboards and Traditional Whiteboards in Mexican Schools". Technology, Pedagogy and Education, (219), 173-193. DOI: 10.1080/1475939X.2010.491219

CHAPELLE, C. A. 1998: Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be Learned from Research on Instructed SLA. Language Learning and Technology, (2)1, 22-34.

CHAPELLE, C. A. 2001: Computer Application in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139524681.

CLOKE, C., - SHARIF, S. 2001: "Why Use Information and Communications Technology? Some Theoretical and Practical Issues". Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, (110), 7-18. DOI: 10.1080/14759390100200099

CRESWELL, J. W. 2012: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications.

CRESWELL, J.W.- MILLER, D. L. 2000: Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry, 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. DOI:

GAY, L. R.- MILLS, G. E.- AIRASIAN, P. 2009: Educational research. Competencies for analysis and applications (9th Ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

GERARD, F.- WIDENER, J.- GREENE, M. 1999: "Using Smart Board in Foreign Language Classes". Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 10th, San Antonio, TX, (February 28- March 4).

GRAY, C., -VAUGHAN-HAGGER, L.- PILKINGTON, R., - SALLY- ANN, T. 2005. "The pros and cons of interactive whiteboards in relation to the key stage 3 strategy and framework". Language Learning Journal, 32(1), 38-44. DOI: 10.1080/09571730585200171.

GURSUL, F.- TOZMAZ, G. B. 2010. "Which one is smarter? Teacher or Board". Procedia Social and Behavioral Science 2, 5731-5737. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.936

HISMANOĞLU, M. 2012: "Teaching Word Stress to Turkish EFL (English as a Foreign Language) Learners through Internet-Based Video Lessons". US-China Education Review, 26-40. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov. on 15. 02. 2015.

JOHNSON, M. E.- RAMANAIR, J.- BRINE, J. 2010: "It's not necessary to have this board to learn English, but it's helpful': student and teacher perceptions of interactive whiteboard use". Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 43), 199-212. DOI: 10.1080/17501229.2010.51344

KORKMAZ, O.- CAKIL, I. 2013: "Teachers' difficulties about using smart boards", 2nd World Conference on Educational Technology Researches. Procedia-Social 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.113 Behavioral Sciences 83. 595-599. DOI:

LEE, K. W. 2005. "English teachers' barriers to the use of computer assisted language learning". The Internet TESL Journal, 612). Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html. on 18. 10. 2015

MAREK, M. W. 2014: "The integration of technology and language instruction to enhance EFL learning". Paper based on keynote address presented at the Spring 2014 Technology Enhanced Language Learning-Special Interest Group (TELL-SIG) conference, Taichung, Taiwan, June 5, 2014. Available from ERIC database: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED545477.

MATTHEWS, R. J. 2006: "Knowledge of Language and Linguistic Competence". Philosophical Issues, 16: 200-220. DOI: 10.1111/j.1533- 6077.2006.00110.x

MAYER, R. E. 1999: "Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer", International Journal of Educational Research, 317), pp, 611-623.

MAYER, R. E. 2003: "The promise of multimedia: using the same instructional design methods across different media". Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-475202)00016-6.

MAYER, R. E. 2009: Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511811678.

MOSELEY, D.- STEVE, H. 1999: Ways forward with ICT: Effective Pedagogy Using Information and Communications Technology for Literacy and Numeracy http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001369.htm 12.02.2015 Primary Schools. Retrieved from on

MOSS, G.- JEWITT, C.- LEVAÃIÇ, R.- ARMSTRONG, V.- CARDINI, A.- CASTLE, F. 2007: "The interactive whiteboards, pedagogy and pupil performance evaluation": An Evaluation of the Schools Whiteboard Expansion (SWE) Project: London Challenge.

OKATAN, S. (2016). "9th Grade Students' and English Teachers' Attitutudes towards Interactive Whiteboad Usage in EFL Classes", Unpublished MA Thesis, Kafkas University Graduate School of Social Sciences, Kars, Turkey.

ÖZ, H. 2014: "Teachers' and Students' Perceptions of Interactive White Boards in the English as a Foreign Language Classroom". The Turkish Online Educational Technology, (133). 156-177.

PAIVIO, A. 1991: Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, (453), 255-287. DOI: 10.1037/h0084295

PLASS, J.- LINDA. J. 2009. Multimedia Learning in Second Language Acquisition. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

RUTH, K., NEIL, M., PAUL, W., - JUDITH, K. S. 2010. "Can the Interactive Whiteboard Support Young Children's Collaborative Communication and Thinking in Classroom Science Activities?" International Journal of Computer-Supported 10.1007/s11412-010-9096-2 Learning, 54, 359-383. DOI:

RYAN, G. W.- BERNARD, H. R. 2003. "Techniques to identify themes". Field methods, 151, 85-109. DOI: 10.1177/1525822X02239569

SCHMID, E. C. 2006: "Investigating the Use of Interactive Whiteboard Technology in the English Language Classroom through the Lens of a Critical Theory of Technology". Computer Assisted Language Learning, (91), 47-62. DOI: 10.1080/09588220600804012

SCHMID, E. C. 2008: "Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology". Computers and Education 51, 1553- 1586. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.005

SÖZCÜ, Ö. F. - İPEK, İ. 2012: "Instructional, Technological and Psychological Approaches of Using IWBs: A Framework". Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 55, 990 - 999. DOI: 10,1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.589

TÜREL, Y. K.- JOHNSON, T. E. 2012: "Teachers' Belief and Use of Interactive Whiteboards for Teaching and Learning". Educational Technology & Society, 15 1), 381-394.

ZENG, L.- LU, X.- ZUO, M. 2010: Research into application of interactive whiteboard to interactive educational mode. PAPER PRESENTED AT Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering (CISE), International Conference. DOI: 10.1109/cise.2010.5676988.