Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

EXPLORING THE WEB 2.0 TECHNOLOGIES AWARENESS, USAGE FREQUENCIES AND COMPETENCIES OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS AND INSTRUCTORS

Yıl 2019, , 553 - 566, 23.04.2019

Erhan Ünal

https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.496655
Cited By: 4

Öz

The purpose of this study is to investigate the web 2.0 technologies awareness, usage frequency and competence of the preservice teachers and instructors studying in the faculty of education. The research was designed as a survey method. A total of 252 preservice teachers and 41 instructors from the faculty of education at a state university participated in the study. The data were collected through with the survey. The results showed that the majority of preservice teachers were aware of social networking sites, used them frequently and had high competency to use those technologies. It was found that the instructors were aware of the web 2.0 technologies except wiki. They used these technologies occasionally and they had high competency in terms of using social networking sites. Some implications were presented based on the results. 


Anahtar Kelimeler

Web 2.0 technologies preservice teacher instructor awareness competency

Kaynakça

  • AHMED, A. M., ALMUNIEM, A. A., & ALMABHOUH, A. A. (2016). The current use of Web 2.0 tools in university teaching from the perspective of faculty members at the college of education. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 179-194.
  • ALHASSAN, R. (2017). Exploring the Relationship between Web 2.0 tools self-efficacy and teachers' use of these tools in their teaching. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 217-228.
  • BARAN, B., & ATA, F. (2013). Üniversite öğrencilerinin web 2.0 teknolojileri kullanma durumları, beceri düzeyleri ve eğitsel olarak faydalanma durumları. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(169), 192-208.
  • BARO, E. E., IDIODI, E. O., & ZACCHEAUS GODFREY, V. (2013). Awareness and use of Web 2.0 tools by librarians in university libraries in Nigeria. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 29(3), 170-188.
  • BOWER, M., HEDBERG, J. G., & KUSWARA, A. (2010). A framework for Web 2.0 learning design. Educational Media International, 47(3), 177-198.
  • CHAFFEY, D. (2018). Global social media research summary 2018. https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/ adresinden 11 Aralık 2018 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
  • CHAWINGA, W. D., & ZINN, S. (2016). Use of Web 2.0 by students in the Faculty of Information Science and Communications at Mzuzu University, Malawi. South African Journal of Information Management, 18(1), 1-12.
  • CORMODE, G., & KRISHNAMURTHY, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(6).
  • DAVISON, D., NAGUSZEWSKI, T., PIASTA, M., SILER, B., & WARE, L. J. (2013). Nursing faculty and use of Web 2.0. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 3(8), 13-17.
  • DIYAOLU, A. M., & RIFQAH, O. O. (2015). Investigating the educational use of Web 2. 0 among undergraduates in Nigerian Private Universities. JLIS. 6(1), 69-97
  • DOHN, N. B. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International journal of computer-supported collaborative learning, 4(3), 343-363.
  • FRANKLIN, T. AND VAN HARMELEN, M. (2007). Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/24ba/620460a6db0bd9284aabf8e286be62ddb77f.pdf adresinden 18 Nisan 2018 tarihinde erişlmiştir.
  • IOANNOU, A., VASILIOU, C., & ZAPHIRIS, P. (2016). Problem-based learning in multimodal learning environments: Learners’ technology adoption experiences. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(7), 1022-1040.
  • JIMOYIANNIS, A., TSIOTAKIS, P., ROUSSINOS, D., & SIORENTA, A. (2013). Preparing teachers to integrate Web 2.0 in school practice: Toward a framework for Pedagogy 2.0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2).
  • KAPUCU, M. S., EREN, E., & AVCI, Z. Y. (2014). Investigation of pre-service science teachers’ opinions about using goanimate to create animated videos. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 23-40.
  • PALAIGEORGIOU, G., & GRAMMATIKOPOULOU, A. (2016). Benefits, barriers and prerequisites for Web 2.0 learning activities in the classroom: The view of Greek pioneer teachers. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 13(1), 2-18.
  • RICHARDSON, W. (2009). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • SAWANT, S. (2012). The study of the use of Web 2.0 tools in LIS education in India. Library Hi Tech News, 29(2), 11-15.
  • SOOMRO, K. A., ZAI, S. Y., & JAFRI, I. H. (2015). Competence and usage of Web 2.0 technologies by higher education faculty. Educational Media International, 52(4), 284-295.
  • ŞENDAG, S., EROL, O., SEZGİN, S., & DULKADİR, N. (2015). Preservice teachers' critical thinking dispositions and web 2.0 competencies. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 172-187.
  • UZUNBOYLU, H., BİCEN, H., & ÇAVUŞ, N. (2011). The efficient virtual learning environment: A case study of web 2.0 tools and Windows live spaces. Computers & Education, 56, 720–726.
  • VONA-KURT, E. (2017). Üniversite öğrencileri perspektifinden web 2.0 uygulamalarının yüksek öğrenime katkısının değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Current Researches on Social Sciences, 7(1), 417-434.

ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARI VE ÖĞRETİM ELEMANLARININ WEB 2.0 TEKNOLOJİLERİ FARKINDALIKLARI, KULLANIM SIKLIKLARI VE YETERLİKLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Yıl 2019, , 553 - 566, 23.04.2019

Erhan Ünal

https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.496655
Cited By: 4

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, eğitim fakültesinde öğrenim
gören öğretmen adaylarının ve görev yapan öğretim elemanlarının web 2.0
teknolojileri farkındalığı, kullanım sıklığı ve yeterliklerini incelemektir.
Araştırma tarama modeli şeklinde tasarlanmıştır. Araştırmaya bir devlet
üniversitesinin eğitim fakültesinde öğrenim gören 252 öğretmen adayı ve görev
yapan 41 öğretim elemanı katılmıştır. Araştırmada veriler araştırmacı
tarafından hazırlanan anket ile toplanmıştır. Araştırmada çıkan sonuçlara göre,
öğretmen adaylarının çoğunluğunun sosyal ağ sitelerinden haberdar oldukları,
bunları sık sık kullandıkları ve bu teknolojiler kullanma yeterliklerinin
yüksek olduğu bulunmuştur. Öğretim elemanlarının ise wiki hariç diğer web 2.0
teknolojilerinden haberdar oldukları, bu teknolojileri ara sıra kullandıkları
ve özellikle sosyal ağ siteleri kullanma bakımından yeterli oldukları
bulunmuştur. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre uygun öneriler sunulmuştur.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

Web 2.0 teknolojileri öğretmen adayı öğretim elemanı farkındalık yeterlik

Kaynakça

  • AHMED, A. M., ALMUNIEM, A. A., & ALMABHOUH, A. A. (2016). The current use of Web 2.0 tools in university teaching from the perspective of faculty members at the college of education. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 179-194.
  • ALHASSAN, R. (2017). Exploring the Relationship between Web 2.0 tools self-efficacy and teachers' use of these tools in their teaching. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(4), 217-228.
  • BARAN, B., & ATA, F. (2013). Üniversite öğrencilerinin web 2.0 teknolojileri kullanma durumları, beceri düzeyleri ve eğitsel olarak faydalanma durumları. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(169), 192-208.
  • BARO, E. E., IDIODI, E. O., & ZACCHEAUS GODFREY, V. (2013). Awareness and use of Web 2.0 tools by librarians in university libraries in Nigeria. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 29(3), 170-188.
  • BOWER, M., HEDBERG, J. G., & KUSWARA, A. (2010). A framework for Web 2.0 learning design. Educational Media International, 47(3), 177-198.
  • CHAFFEY, D. (2018). Global social media research summary 2018. https://www.smartinsights.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-strategy/new-global-social-media-research/ adresinden 11 Aralık 2018 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
  • CHAWINGA, W. D., & ZINN, S. (2016). Use of Web 2.0 by students in the Faculty of Information Science and Communications at Mzuzu University, Malawi. South African Journal of Information Management, 18(1), 1-12.
  • CORMODE, G., & KRISHNAMURTHY, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday, 13(6).
  • DAVISON, D., NAGUSZEWSKI, T., PIASTA, M., SILER, B., & WARE, L. J. (2013). Nursing faculty and use of Web 2.0. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 3(8), 13-17.
  • DIYAOLU, A. M., & RIFQAH, O. O. (2015). Investigating the educational use of Web 2. 0 among undergraduates in Nigerian Private Universities. JLIS. 6(1), 69-97
  • DOHN, N. B. (2009). Web 2.0: Inherent tensions and evident challenges for education. International journal of computer-supported collaborative learning, 4(3), 343-363.
  • FRANKLIN, T. AND VAN HARMELEN, M. (2007). Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/24ba/620460a6db0bd9284aabf8e286be62ddb77f.pdf adresinden 18 Nisan 2018 tarihinde erişlmiştir.
  • IOANNOU, A., VASILIOU, C., & ZAPHIRIS, P. (2016). Problem-based learning in multimodal learning environments: Learners’ technology adoption experiences. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(7), 1022-1040.
  • JIMOYIANNIS, A., TSIOTAKIS, P., ROUSSINOS, D., & SIORENTA, A. (2013). Preparing teachers to integrate Web 2.0 in school practice: Toward a framework for Pedagogy 2.0. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2).
  • KAPUCU, M. S., EREN, E., & AVCI, Z. Y. (2014). Investigation of pre-service science teachers’ opinions about using goanimate to create animated videos. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 23-40.
  • PALAIGEORGIOU, G., & GRAMMATIKOPOULOU, A. (2016). Benefits, barriers and prerequisites for Web 2.0 learning activities in the classroom: The view of Greek pioneer teachers. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 13(1), 2-18.
  • RICHARDSON, W. (2009). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • SAWANT, S. (2012). The study of the use of Web 2.0 tools in LIS education in India. Library Hi Tech News, 29(2), 11-15.
  • SOOMRO, K. A., ZAI, S. Y., & JAFRI, I. H. (2015). Competence and usage of Web 2.0 technologies by higher education faculty. Educational Media International, 52(4), 284-295.
  • ŞENDAG, S., EROL, O., SEZGİN, S., & DULKADİR, N. (2015). Preservice teachers' critical thinking dispositions and web 2.0 competencies. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 172-187.
  • UZUNBOYLU, H., BİCEN, H., & ÇAVUŞ, N. (2011). The efficient virtual learning environment: A case study of web 2.0 tools and Windows live spaces. Computers & Education, 56, 720–726.
  • VONA-KURT, E. (2017). Üniversite öğrencileri perspektifinden web 2.0 uygulamalarının yüksek öğrenime katkısının değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Current Researches on Social Sciences, 7(1), 417-434.
Toplam 22 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Erhan Ünal 0000-0002-5349-4193

Yayımlanma Tarihi 23 Nisan 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019

Kaynak Göster

APA Ünal, E. (2019). ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARI VE ÖĞRETİM ELEMANLARININ WEB 2.0 TEKNOLOJİLERİ FARKINDALIKLARI, KULLANIM SIKLIKLARI VE YETERLİKLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ. Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(17), 553-566. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.496655

Cited By

Sosyal Bilgilerde Kavram Öğretiminde Web 2.0 Araçları: Öğretmen Adaylarının Görüşleri
Pamukkale University Journal of Education
https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.795619
Öğretmen Adaylarının Web 2.0 Araçlarını Kullanabilme Yetkinlikleri: Bir Karma Yöntem Araştırması
Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama
https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.1198098
İngilizce Öğretmenliği Adaylarının Web 2.0 Araçlarını Kullanım Yetkinlikleri
Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education
https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.1126279
Öğretmen Adayı Dijital Yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması
Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.35675/befdergi.883974
Creative Commons Lisansı