Matematik Öğretmen Adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Yeterlilik Düzeyleri ve Öz-Yeterlilik Algı Düzeyleri Arasındaki İlişkilerin İncelenmesi

Year 2019, Volume: 48 Issue: 1, 1 - 31, 21.04.2019

Kübra Açıkgül , Recep Aslaner

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, ilköğretim matematik öğretmen adaylarının Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) yeterlilik düzeyleri ve TPAB öz-yeterlilik algı düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkileri belirlemektir. Araştırmada geometri konularından biri olan çokgenler konusu üzerinde durulmuştur ve öğretmen adaylarının Alan Bilgisi (AB), Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (PAB), Teknolojik Alan Bilgisi (TAB) ve Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) düzeyleri incelenmiştir. Araştırmada korelasyonel araştırma yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri II dersini alan 88 ilköğretim matematik öğretmen adayı oluşturmuştur. Verilerin toplanması aşamasında öğretmen adaylarının AB, PAB, TAB, TPAB yeterlilik düzeylerinin belirlenmesi için Çokgenler Konusunda Çoktan Seçmeli Başarı Testi, Soru Formları, Ders Planı ve Katılımcı Raporu kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmen adaylarının TPAB öz-yeterlilik algı düzeylerinin belirlenmesi için Geometri Konusunda TPAB Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Özetle araştırmada farklı veri kaynaklarından elde edilen sonuçlara göre, hem ön test hem de son test puanları için TPAB yeterlilik puanları ve öz-yeterlilik algı puanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki olmadığı belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi, Matematik Öğretmen Adayı, Öz-Yeterlilik Algısı

Investigation Relations between the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Efficacy Levels and Self-Efficacy Perception Levels of Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to determine relationships between the pre-service math teachers’ TPACK efficacy and self-efficacy perception levels. In the study it was focused on the polygons one of the geometry subjects, and pre-service teachers’ Content Knowledge (CK), Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) levels were examined. Correlational research approach was used in the research. The participants composed of 88 pre-service teachers who were attended in Special Teaching Methods II course. In order to evaluate the pre-service teachers’ CK, PCK, TCK, TPACK efficacy levels in the collection of data, Multiple Choice Achievement Test on Polygons, Question Forms, Lesson Plan Preparation Method and Participant Report were used. Also TPACK Regarding Geometry Instrument was used to evaluate pre-service teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy levels. In conclusion according to the results obtained from different data sources in the study, for the TPACK efficacy scores and self-efficacy scores there is no statistically significant relation for both pre-test and post-test.

Keywords

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Prospective Mathematics Teacher, Perceived Self-efficacy

References

• Abbitt, J. and Klett, M. (2007). Identifying influences on attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs towards technology integration among pre-service educators. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 6, 28-42.
• Abbitt, J. T. (2011a). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(4), 134-143.
• Abbitt, J. T. (2011b). Measuring Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge inpreservice teacher education: A review of current methods and instruments. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 281–300.
• Abdi, H. (2010). Holm's sequential bonferroni procedure. In N. Salkind (Eds.), Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 1–8). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Açıkgül, K. (2012). The investigation of pre-service teachers? problem solving processes on locus problems by dynamic geometry software and their opinions on the processes. Master thesis, İnönü University, Malatya.
• Açıkgül, K. and Aslaner, R. (2015). Investigation of TPACK confidence perception of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 118-152.
• Agyei, D. D. and Keengwe, J. (2014). Using Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge development to enhance learning outcomes. Education and Information Technologies, 19, 155–171.
• Agyei, D. and Voogt, J. (2012). Developing technological pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service mathematics teachers, through collabarative design teams. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 547-564.
• Akkoç, H. (2011). Investigating the development of pre-service mathematics teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Research in Mathematics Education, 13(1), 75-76.
• Akyüz, D. (2018). Measuring technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through performance assessment. Computers & Education, 125, 212-225.
• Alayyar, G., Fisser, P., and Voogt, J. (2012). Developing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in pre-service science teachers: Support from blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(8), 1298-1316.
• Alshehri, K. A. (2012). The influence of mathematics teachers' knowledge in technology, pedagogy and content (TPACK) on their teaching effectiveness in Saudi public schools. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Kansas.
• Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrica, 49(2), 155-173.
• Aquino, A. B. (2015). Self-efficacy on Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) of biological science pre-service teachers. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(4), 150-157.
• Archambault, L. and Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 71-88.
• Archambault, L. M. and Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPCK framework. Computers and Education, 55(4), 1656-1662.
• Baran, E. ve Canbazoğlu Bilici, S. (2015). A Review of the research on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Case of Turkey. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(1), 15-32.
• Baran, E., Chuang, H.H. and Thompson, A. (2011). TPACK: An emerging research and development tool for teacher educators. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 10(4), 370-377.
• Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.
• Bulut, A. (2012). Investigating perceptions of preservice mathematics teachers on their Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) regarding geometry. Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Cameron, A. (2004). Kurtosis. In M. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman and T. Liao (Eds.). Encyclopedia of social science research methods. (pp. 544-545). ThousandOaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
• Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Yamak, H., Kavak, N., S. and Guzey, S. (2013) Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Self-Efficacy Scale (TPACK-SeS) for pre-service science teachers: Construction, validation and reliability. Eurasian Journal of Education Research, 52, 37-60.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Davis, L.L.(1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197.
• Deliceoğlu, G. (2009). The comparison of the reliabilities of the soccer abilities? rating scale based on the classical test theory and generalizability. Doctoral diseertation, Ankara University, Ankara.
• Ebel, R. L. and Frisbie, D. A. (1986). Essentials of educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Erdoğan, A. and Şahin, I. (2010). Relationship between math teacher candidates’ Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) and achievement levels. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2707-2711.
• Erez, M. M. and Yerushalmy, M. (2006).“If you can turn a rectangle into a square, you can turn a square into a rectangle ...” young students experience the dragging tool. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 11(3), 271-299.
• Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N. and Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
• Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
• Graham, C. R.(2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education, 57(3), 1953-1960.
• Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L. and Harris, R. (2009). TPACK development in science teaching: Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers. TechTrends, Special Issue on TPACK, 53(5), 70-79.
• Habre, S. and Grundmeier T. A. (2007). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ views on the role of technology in mathematics education. The Journal, 3, 1-10.
• Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., and Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
• Harris, J., Grandgenett, N. and Hofer, M. (2010). Testing a TPACK-based technology integration assessment rubric. In C. Crawford, D. A. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price and R. Weber (Eds.), Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2010 (pp. 3833– 3840). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
• Harris, J., Mishra, P. and Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.
• Hingorjo, M. R. and Jaleel, F. (2012). Analysis of one-best MCQs: the difficulty index, discrimination index and distractor efficiency. JPMA-Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 62(2), 142-147.
• Holmes, K. (2009). Planning to teach with digital tools: Introducing the IWB to pre-service secondary mathematics teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 351-365.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. and Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
• Jang, S.J., and Tsai, M.F. (2012). Exploring the TPACK of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers with respect to use of interactive whiteboards. Computers and Education, 59(2), 327- 338.
• Jones, K. (2001), Learning geometrical concepts using dynamic geometry software. In: Kay Irwin (Ed), Mathematics Education Research: A catalyst for change. Auckland: University of Auckland, p. 50-58.
• Keser, H., Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G., & Yılmaz, R. (2015). TPACK competencies and technology integration self efficacy perceptions of pre-service teachers. Elementary Education Online, 14(4), 1193-1207.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
• Koehler, M. J. and Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
• Koehler, M. J. and Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
• Koehler, M. J., Shin, T. S., and Mishra, P. (2012). How do we measure TPACK? Let me count the ways. In R. N. Ronau, C. R. Rakes, and M. L. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp. 16-31).
• Kopcha, T. J., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Jung, J., & Baser, D. (2014). Examining the TPACK framework through the convergent and discriminant validity of two measures. Computers & Education, 78, 87–96.
• Kordaki, M. and Balomenou, A. (2006). Challenging students to view the concept of area in triangles in a broader context: Exploiting the tools of Cabri II. Ιnternational Jοurnal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 11(1), 99-135.
• Laborde, C. (2003). Technology used as a tool for mediating knowledge in the teaching of mathematics: the case of Cabri-geometry. Proceedings of 8th. ACTM, Chung Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.
• Lai, K. and White, T. (2012). Exploring quadrilaterals in a small group computing environment. Computers and Education, 59(3), 963–973.
• Leung, A. (2008). Dragging in a dynamic geometry environment through the lens of variation. Int J Comput Math Learning, 13, 135–157.
• Lyublinskaya, I. and Tournaki, N. (2015). Examining the relationship between self and external assessment of TPACK of pre-service special education teachers. Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2015, 29-36.
• Mariotti, M. A. (2000). Introduction to proof: The mediation of a dynamic software environment. Educational Studies in Mathematic, 44, 25–53.
• Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054.
• Nathan, E. J. (2009). An examination of the relationshıp between preservice teachers' level of Technology Integration Self-Efficacy (TISE) and level of Technologıcal Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Doctoral dissertation, University of Houston.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. http://www.nctm.org/standards.htm Accessed 10 May 2011.
• Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509–523.
• Niess, M. L., Ronau, R. N., Shafer, K. G., Driskell, S. O., Harper S. R., Johnston, C., Browning, C.,Özgün Koca, S. A., and Kersaint, G. (2009). Mathematics teacher TPACK standards and development model. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 4–24.
• Niess, M. L., Van Zee, E. H. and Gillow-Wiles, H. (2010). Knowledge growth in teaching mathematics/science with spreadsheets: Moving PCK to TPACK through online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(2), 42-52.
• Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J. and Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
• Shevlin, M. and Miles, J. N. V. (1998). Effects of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), 85-90.
• So, H. J. and Kim, B. (2009). Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology, pedagogy and content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 101–116.
• Spazak, L. (2013). Secondary preservice teachers’ perception of preparedness to integrate technology. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, United States.
• Straesser, R. (2001). Cabrı-géomètre: Does Dynamıc Geometry Software (DGS) change geometry and ıts teaching and learning? International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 6, 319–333.
• Şad, N., Açıkgül, K. and Delican, K. (2015). Senior preservice teachers’ senses of efficacy on their Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 8(2), 204-235.
• Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Wang, L., Ertmer, P. A. and Newby, T. J. (2004). Increasing preservice teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 231-250.
• Wells, C. S. and Wollack, J. A. (2003). An Instructor’s Guide to Understanding Test Reliability. Testing and Evaluation Services. University of Wisconsin. https://testing.wisc.edu/Reliability.pdf Accessed 15 August 2016.
• Van Der Valk, T. A. and Broekman, H. (1999). The lesson preparation method: A way of investigating pre-service teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. European Journal of Teacher Education, 22(1), 11-22.
• Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & Van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge–a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109-121.
• Yiğit, M. (2014). A review of the literature: How pre-service mathematics teachers develop their Technological, Pedagogical, And Content Knowledge. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 2(1), 26-35.