Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

ÖĞRETMEN VE ÖĞRENCİLERİN ETKİLEŞİMLİ TAHTA KULLANIMINA YÖNELİK YAŞAMIŞ OLDUKLARI SORUNLAR VE ÇÖZÜM ÖNERİLERİ

PROBLEMS FACED BY TEACHERS AND STUDENTS IN TERMS OF USING INTERACTIVE BOARDS AND SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS RELATED TO THESE PROBLEMS

Journal Name:

  • Turkish Studies

Publication Year:

  • 2013
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.4891

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Interactive boards, which, as in many developed countries, have begun to take its place since 2011 in higher education institutions of our country, are supposed to contribute positively to the process of teaching-learning in general. However, technology, fixing its direction in line with social needs, its fitness for purpose and sustainability are determined by those who make use of it. In this case, applicability of new technology changes in accordance with the social structure and date. Determining the problems during the implementation and taking necessary measures accordingly are of vital importance for the improvement of this change in a positive way. In this study which was carried out in this direction, it is aimed to determine the problems that are encountered by the teachers and students of high education institutions while using interactive boards and to develop solution suggestions for these problems. The study carried out for this purpose has been designed on a case study basis which takes place in qualitative research tradition. Study group for this research is composed of higher education trainers from different branches (f=77) actively using interactive boards in the lectures and their students (f=409) in the academic term of 2012-2013. Data obtained by open-ended questionnaire during the research has been analyzed and interpreted by inductive encoding technique, frequency analysis and descriptive content analysis. As result of the analysis carried out in this research which was performed in this direction, it has been seen that teachers and students evaluate the problems related with interactive boards under the following five sub-dimensions and present solution suggestions accordingly: problems encountered during learning-teaching process, problems related with hardware, problems related with software, problems related with the context, problems in view of ergonomics and health. On top of the problems faced by teachers and students in terms of using interactive boards are the unavailability of materials suitable for lectures, limits on the efficient use caused by the restrictions (software, context and internet), lack of precautions against insufficient knowledge and skills as regards usage, and problems relating to physical environment. Leading solution alternatives suggested by the participants as regards the problems are; needs for comprehensive training of teachers and students, needs for developing appropriate lecture materials, needs for lifting restrictions on software and internet, needs for a fast solution for the existing hardware and software problems.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Gelişmiş birçok ülkede olduğu gibi 2011 yılından itibaren ülkemiz ortaöğretim kurumlarında da yerini almaya başlayan etkileşimli tahtaların genel olarak öğrenme-öğretme sürecine olumlu katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir. Ancak, toplumsal ihtiyaçlar doğrultusunda yönünü belirleyen teknolojinin amaca uygunluğunu ve sürdürebilirliğini yine onu kullananlar belirlemektedir. Bu durumda yeni teknolojinin uygulanabilirliği, toplumun yapısına ve zamana bağlı olarak değişim göstermektedir. Bu değişimin olumlu yönde gelişmesi için uygulamadaki sorunların belirlenmesi ve bu sorunların çözümüne ilişkin önlemlerin alınması oldukça önemlidir. Bu doğrultuda gerçekleştirilen çalışmada ortaöğretim kurumlarında görev yapan öğretmen ve bu kurumlarda öğrenim gören öğrencilerin etkileşimli tahta kullanımı sırasında karşılaştıkları sorunların ve bu sorunlara ilişkin çözüm önerilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Nitel araştırma geleneği içinde yer alan durum incelemesi deseninde tasarlanan araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, 2012-2013 öğretim yılında ortaöğretim kurumlarında görev yapan etkileşimli tahtaları aktif olarak derslerinde kullanan farklı branş öğretmenleri (f=77) ve öğrencileri (f=409) oluşturmuştur. Araştırmada açık uçlu araştırma soruları ile elde edilen veriler, tümevarımsal kodlama tekniği, frekans analizi ve betimsel içerik analizi ile çözümlenmiş ve yorumlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda gerçekleştirilen çalışmada yapılan analizler sonucunda öğretmen ve öğrencilerin etkileşimli tahtalara ilişkin sorunları; öğrenme-öğretme sürecinde yaşanan sorunlar, donanıma yönelik sorunlar, yazılıma yönelik sorunlar, içeriğe yönelik sorunlar, ergonomi ve sağlık açısından yaşanan sorunlar olmak üzere beş alt boyutta ele aldıkları ve bu doğrultuda çözüm önerileri sundukları belirlenmiştir. Etkileşimli tahtalara yönelik öğretmen ve öğrencilerin karşılaştıkları sorunların başında derslere uygun materyal bulunamaması, kısıtlamaların (yazılım, içerik ve internet) etkin kullanımı sınırlandırması, kullanıma yönelik yetersiz bilgi ve becerilere yönelik tedbir alınamaması ve fiziksel ortamdan kaynaklı sorunlar yer almaktadır. Yaşanan sorunlara ilişkin katılımcıların öne çıkan çözüm önerileri ise; öğretmen ve öğrencilere yönelik kapsamlı eğitimler verilmesi gerektiği, uygun ders materyalleri geliştirilmesi gerektiği, yazılım ve internete yönelik kısıtlamaların kaldırılması gerektiği, yaşanan donanımsal ve yazılımsal sorunların kısa zamanda çözülmesi gerektiği şeklindedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon 983807022_24keser_hafize_sos.-377-403.pdf
  • 6
377-403
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

AKBAġ, O. ve PEKTAġ, H. (2011). The effects of using an interactive whiteboard on the academic achievement of university students. Asia-Pacific Forum On Science Learning & Teaching, 12(2), 1-19.
AKDEMĠR, E. (2009). Akıllı Tahta Uygulamalarının Öğrencilerin Coğrafya Ders Başarıları Üzerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Zonguldak.
ALTINÇELĠK, B. (2009). İlköğretim Düzeyinde Öğrenmede Kalıcılığı ve Motivasyonu Sağlaması Yönünden Akıllı Tahtaya İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Sakarya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Sakarya.
AMOLO, S. ve DEES, E. (2007). The influence of interactive whiteboards on fifth-grade student perceptions and learning experiences. Action Research Exchange, 6(1), http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/Vol6no1/PDF%20Articles/AmoloSArticle_ARE_... (ET:17.01.2013)
ATES, M. (2010). Ortaöğretim coğrafya derslerinde etkileĢimli tahta kullanımı. Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi, 22, 409-427.
AVRUPA KOMĠSYONU (2013). ICT in schools survey – many children not getting what they need; teachers need more training and support. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-341_en.htm (ET:30.04.2013)
BEAUCHAMP, G. ve PARKINSON, J. (2005). Beyond the 'wow' factor: Developing interactivity with the interactive whiteboard. School Science Review, 86(3), 97-103.
BEAUCHAMP, G. (2004). Teacher use of the interactive whiteboard in primary schools: Towards an effective transition framework. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13(3), 327-348.
BECTA (2003). What the research says about Interactive Whiteboards. http://partners.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/wtrs_whiteboards.pdf (ET:13.01.2013)
BECTA (2006). Teaching Interactively with Electronic Whiteboards in the PrimaryPhase. http://publications.becta.org.uk/display.cfmresID=25918 (ET:13.01.2013)
BEELAND, W. D. Jr. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: can interactive whiteboards help? Annual Conference of the Association of Information Technology for Teaching Education. Trinity College, Dublin.
BOGDAN, R.C.ve BIKLEN, S.K. (2006). Qualitative Research for Education to Theory and Methods (5th eds.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon A Division of Simon & Schuster Inc.
BULUT, Ġ. ve KOÇOĞLU, E. (2012). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin akıllı tahta kullanımına iliĢkin görüĢleri (Diyarbakır ili örneği). Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19, 242-258.
ÇELĠK, S. ve ATAK, H. (2012). EtkileĢimli tahta tutum ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalıĢması, Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 2(2), 43-60.
DROR, I. E. (2008). Technology enhanced learning: The good, the bad and the ugly. Pragmatics and Cognition, 16, 215-223.
EKHAMI, L. (2002). The power of interactive whiteboards. School Library Media Activities
400 Hafize KESER- Levent ÇETİNKAYA
Turkish Studies
International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 8/6 Spring 2013
Monthly, 18(8), 35-38.
EKĠCĠ, F. (2008). Akıllı Tahta Kullanımının İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Matematik Başarılarına Etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ġstanbul.
ELAZĠZ, F. (2008). Attitudes of students and teachers towards the use of Interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara
ERDURAN, A. ve TATAROGLU, B. (2010). Comparison of the science and mathematics teachers' opinions on the usage of interactive whiteboard in education. 9th International Educational Technology Conference (IETC2009). Ankara.
ERMĠġ, U. F. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji dersinde etkileşimli tahta kullanımının akademik başarı ve öğrenci motivasyonuna etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
FISKE, J. (2002). “Videotech” The Visual Culture Reader. (Ed. M. Nicholas), Second Edition. London and New York: Routledge.
GLOVER, D., MILLER, D., AVERIS, D. ve DOOR, V. (2007). The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard and modern languages: An empirical analysis from the secondary sectors. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 5-20.
HALL, I. ve HIGGINS, S. (2005). Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 21, 102-117.
HERBERT, M. (2012). Whiteboards Engage Autistic Students in Social Learning. District Administration, 48(3), 44.
HIGGINS, S., BEAUCHAMP, G. ve MILLER, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213-225.
HOLMES, K. (2009). Planning to teach with digital tools: Introducing the interactive whiteboard to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 351-365.
HUTCHINSON, A. (2007). Literature Review Exploring the Integration of Interactive Whiteboards in K-12 Education. http://www.innovativelearning.ca/sec-learntech/documents/smart-iwb-litre... (ET:10.01.2013)
KAYA, H. ve AYDIN, F. (2011). Students' views towards interactive white board applications in the teaching of geography themes in social knowledge lessons. Zettschrift für die Wett der Türken-Journal of World of Turks, 3(1), 179-189.
KAYADUMAN, H., SIRAKAYA, M. ve SEFEROĞLU, S. S. (2011). Eğitimde FATĠH projesinin öğretmenlerin yeterlik durumları açısından incelenmesi. XIII. Akademik Bilişim Konferansı (AB11), 2-4 ġubat 2011, Ġnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya.
KEEGAN, P (1999). Culture Quake. Mother Jones, 24(6), 9-42.
KENNEWELL, S. ve BEAUCHAMP, G. (2007). The Features Of Interactive Whiteboards and Their Influence On Learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 227-241.
KENNEWELL, S., TANNER, H., JONES, S. ve BEAUCHAMP, G. (2008). Analysing the use of interactivetechnology to implement interactive teaching. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34, 61-73.
Öğretmen ve Öğrencilerin Etkileşimli Tahta Kullanımına Yönelik Yaşamış… 401
Turkish Studies
International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 8/6 Spring 2013
KESER. H. (2011). Türkiye’de Bilgisayar Eğitiminde Ġlk Adım: Orta Öğretimde Bilgisayar Eğitimi Ġhtisas Komisyonu Raporu. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama. 2(2). 83-94.
KIM. W. (2006). Directions for Web-Based Learning. W.Liu. W.li and R.W.H. Lau (Eds.): Advances in Web Based Learning. ICWL 2006. Springer-Verlag/Heidelberg Pubs.
LAI, H. J. (2010). Secondary school teachers' perceptions of interactive whiteboard training workshops: A case study from Taiwan. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 511-522.
LAU, I. (2011). Teachers for "Smart Classrooms": The Extent of Implementation of an Interactive Whiteboard-based Professional Development Program on Elementary Teachers' Instructional Practices. Interdisciplinary Journal Of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 7, 275-289.
LEE, M. (2010). Interactive whiteboards and schooling: The context. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2), 133-141.
LEVY, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards nn learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: A developmental study. http://dis.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards.htm (ET:16.02.2013)
LEWIN, C., SOMEKH, B. ve STEADMAN, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Education and Information Technologies,13, 291-303.
LIPTON, M. ve LIPTON, L. (2010). Enhancing the radiology learning experience with electronic whiteboard technology. AJR. American Journal Of Roentgenology, 194(6), 1547-1551.
MANNY-IKAN, E., TIKOCHINSKI, T., ZORMAN, R. ve DAGAN, O. (2011). Using the Interactive White Board in Teaching and Learning - An Evaluation of the SMART CLASSROOM Pilot Project. Interdisciplinary Journal Of E-Learning & Learning Objects, 7, 249-273.
MATHEWS-AYDINLI, J. ve ELAZIZ, F. (2010). Turkish students' and teachers' attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 235-252.
MEB (2011). Eğitimde FATĠH Projesi ÇalıĢtayı. http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr/site/haberincele.php?id=12 (ET: 09.01.2013)
MEB (2012). FATĠH Projesi Öğretmen Eğitimi Birimi. http://eogrenim.meb.gov.tr (ET:12.01.2013)
MECHLING, L. C., GAST, D. L. ve KRUPA, K. (2007). “Impact of SMART board technology: An investigation of sight word reading and observational learning”. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1869-1882.
MECHLING, L. C., GAST, D. L. ve THOMPSON, K. L. (2008). Comparison of the Effects of Smart Board Technology and Flash Card Instruction on Sight Word Recognition and Observational Learning. Journal Of Special Education Technology, 23(1), 34-46.
MOHON, E. (2008). SMART moves? A case study of one teacher's pedagogical change through use of the interactive whiteboard. Learning, Media & Technology, 33(4), 301-312.
MORGAN, G. L. (2008). Improving student engagement: Use of the interactive whtteboard as an instructional tool to improve engagement and behavior in the junior high school classroom. PhD Thesis. Liberty University, Virginia.
402 Hafize KESER- Levent ÇETİNKAYA
Turkish Studies
International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 8/6 Spring 2013
NORTHCOTE, M. ve MARSHALL, S. (2010). Interactive whiteboards: Interactive or just whiteboards? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(4), 494-510.
OLGUN, F. (2012). Fizik dersinde ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin akıllı tahta kullanımı ile ilgili algılarının araştırılması. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ġstanbul.
QUASHIE, V. (2009). How interactive is the interactive whiteboard? Mathematics Teaching, 214, 33- 38.
ROSCOE, K., DERKSEN, A. ve CURTIS, K. (2013). Using Presentation Software to Integrate Formative Assessment Into Science Instruction. Science Scope, 36(5), 48-57.
SALTAN, F., ARSLAN, K. ve GOK, A. (2010). Teachers' acceptance of interactive white boards: A case study. In D. Gibson ve B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2010 (pp. 2360-2365). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
SCHMID, E. C. (2006). Investigating the use of interactive whiteboard technology in English language classroom through the lens of critical theory of technology. Computer Assisted Language Learnnng, 19(1), 47-62.
SCHMID, E. C. (2008). Potential pedagogical benefits and drawbacks of multimedia use in the English language classroom equipped with interactive whiteboard technology. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1553-1568.
SLAY, H., SIEBORGER, I. ve HODGKINSON-WILLIAMS, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just "lipstick"? Computers & Education, 51(3), 1321-1341.
SMITH, H. J., HIGGINS, S., WALL, K. ve MILLER, J. (2005) Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91-101.
SOMYÜREK, S., ATASOY, B. ve ÖZDEMĠR, S. (2009). Board's IQ: What makes a board smart? Computers & Education, 53(2), 368-374.
STARKINGS, S. ve KRAUSE, L. (2008). “Chalkboard to smartboard – maths going green?” MSOR Connections, 7(4), 13-15.
STOICA, D., PARAGINA, S., PARAGINA, F., MIRON, C. ve JIPA, A. (2011). ICT, Teaching Physics And The Instructional Design. Elearning & Software For Education, 1-7.
SÜNKÜR, M., ARABACI, Ġ. ve ġANLI, Ö. (2012). Akıllı Tahta Uygulamaları Konusunda Ġlköretim II. Kademe Öğrencilerinin GörüĢleri (Malatya Ġli Örneği). E-Journal Of New World Sciences Academy (NWSA), 7(1), 313-321.
ġAD, S. N. (2012). An attitude scale for smart board use in education: Validity and reliability studies. Computers & Education, 58(3), 900-907.
TATAROĞLU, B. (2009). Matematik Öğretiminde Akıllı Tahta Kullanımının 10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Akademik Başarıları, Matematik Dersine Karşı Tutumları ve Öz- Yeterlik Düzeylerine Etkileri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ġzmir.
TAVġANCIL. E. ve ASLAN. E. A. (2001). İçerik analizi ve Uygulama Örnekleri. Ankara: Epsilon Yayınları.
Öğretmen ve Öğrencilerin Etkileşimli Tahta Kullanımına Yönelik Yaşamış… 403
Turkish Studies
International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic
Volume 8/6 Spring 2013
TEZER, M. ve DENĠZ, K. A. (2009). Matematik Dersinde Ġnteraktif Tahta Kullanarak Yapılan Denklem Çözümünün Öğrenme Üzerindeki Etkisi. Proceedings of 9th International Educational Technology Conference (IETC2009), 500-506.
TORFF, B. ve TIROTTA, R. (2010). Interactive whiteboards produce small gains in elementary students' self-reported motivation in mathematics. Computers & Education, 54(3), 379-383.
TÜREL, Y. K. (2010). Developing Teachers' Utilization of Interactive Whiteboards. In D. Gibson & B. Dodge (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp.3049-3054). Chesapeake, VA: AACE..
TÜREL, Y. K. (2011a). An interactive whiteboard student survey: Development, validity and reliability. Computers & Education, 57, 2441-2450
TÜREL, Y. K. (2011b). An interactive whiteboard evaluation survey for university students: Validity and reliability analyses, e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy Education Sciences, 6(2), 18941903.
TÜREL, Y. K. (2012). Teachers' negative attitudes towards interactive whiteboard use: Needs and problems. İlköğretim-Online, 11(2), 423.
TÜREL, Y. K. ve DEMĠRLĠ, C. (2010). Instructional interactive whiteboard materials: Designers' perspectives, Procedia Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1437-1442.
TÜREL, Y. K. ve JOHNSON, T. E. (2012). Teachers' Belief and Use of Interactive Whiteboards for Teaching and Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 381–394.
WALL, K., HIGGINS, S. ve SMITH, H. (2005). The visual helps me understand the complicated things: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 851-867.
WOLCOTT. H. F. (1990). On seeking-and rejecting-validity in qualitative research. (Ed.) E. W. Eisner. & A. Peshkin Qualititative Inquiry in Education the Coutinuing Debate (pp.121-152). New York: Teachers Collage Press.
XIN, J. F. ve SUTMAN, F. X. (2011). Using the Smart Board in Teaching Social Stories to Students With Autism. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(4), 18-24.
YAKUBOVA, G. ve TABER-DOUGHTY, T. (2012). Brief Report: Learning Via the Electronic Interactive Whiteboard for Two Students with Autism and a Student with Moderate Intellectual Disability.Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 43(6), 1465-1472.
YILDIRIM. A. ve ġĠMġEK. H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (6.baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
ZEVENBERGEN, R. ve LERMAN, S. (2008). Learning environments using interactive whiteboards: new learning spaces or reproduction of old technologies. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(1), 107-125.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com