1 / 28

Assoc. Prof. Yasemin KOÇAK USLUEL Hacettepe University , Ankara kocak@hacettepe.tr

HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY Faculty of Education Computer Education and Instructional Technology. WEB 2.0 AWARENESS OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY BASED ON INNOVATION-DECISION PROCESS. Assoc. Prof. Yasemin KOÇAK USLUEL Hacettepe University , Ankara kocak@hacettepe.edu.tr

nibaw
Télécharger la présentation

Assoc. Prof. Yasemin KOÇAK USLUEL Hacettepe University , Ankara kocak@hacettepe.tr

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY Faculty of Education ComputerEducationandInstructionalTechnology WEB 2.0 AWARENESS OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY BASED ON INNOVATION-DECISION PROCESS Assoc. Prof. Yasemin KOÇAK USLUEL HacettepeUniversity, Ankara kocak@hacettepe.edu.tr Pınar NUHOĞLU HacettepeUniversity, Ankara pnuhoglu@hacettepe.edu.tr Esra Telli HacettepeUniversity, Ankara esratelli@hacettepe.edu.tr Gökhan Dağhan HacettepeUniversity, Ankara gokhand@hacettepe.edu.tr EDULEARN12International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies Barcelona/Spain 2 - 4 July2012

  2. Aim of thestudy This study handles time element of DoI and investigates Web 2.0 awareness of preservice teachers based on innovation-decision process within a longitudinal perspective. Innovation Decision Process Stages “No awareness” “Knowledge” “Implementation” “Confirmation” Web 2.0 Technologies social networks, learning management systems, search engines, blogs, podcasts and wikis

  3. InnovationDecisionProcessStages “The innovation-decision process is the process through which an individual passes from first knowledge of an innovation, to forming an attitude toward the innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation of the new idea, and to confirmation of this decision.” (Rogers2003, p.12). TheInnovationDecisionProcess (Rogers, 2003)

  4. InnovationDecisionProcessStages No awareness

  5. InnovationDecisionProcessStages It is aimed to provide findings related web 2.0 adoption processes by determining which of the technologies are at the beginning or end of their diffusion process. Implementation Knowledge Confirmation No awareness Individualbegintousetheinnovation. Individual has not reachedtheknowledgestage Individualexposedtotheinnovationandgainssomeinformationaboutitsfunction Individualseeksreinforcement

  6. Web 2.0 Technologies Social Networks Search Engines Web 2.0 Blogs Wiki LMS Podcasts

  7. MethodStudyGroup The study group comprised of 140 students (73.5% female, 26.5% male) studying at teacher education programs of a public university. The data were collected in two phases in the year 2009 and 2011 from the same preservice teachers. Genders Across to the Education Programs

  8. MethodData Collection Tools“InnovationDecisionProcessQuestionnaire” ‘I heard but I’m not using.’ ‘I never heard.’ Implementation Knowledge Confirmation No awareness Individualbegintousetheinnovation. Individual has not reachedtheknowledgestage in innovation-decisionprocess Individualexposedtotheinnovationandgainssomeinformationaboutitsfunction Individualseeksreinforcement ‘I’m using.’ ‘I used to use.’ > > Implementation 6 Months Confirmation Adoption Confirmation Rejection

  9. Findings Social Network

  10. Findings Blog

  11. Findings Learning Management System

  12. Findings Search Engines

  13. Findings Wiki

  14. Findings Podcast

  15. Conclusion Social Network Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  16. Conclusion Blog Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  17. Conclusion Learning Management System Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  18. Conclusion Search Engines Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  19. Conclusion Wiki Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  20. Conclusion Podcast Based on DoItheory, theinnovation-decisionprocesscouldalso be investigatedwithin a moresimplebinaryclassification as “awareness” and “noawareness”.

  21. Conclusion As observed in thestudy; thediffusion of an innovationmaydifferaccordingtoeachtechnology. Within two years; the percentages of awareness in all web 2.0 technologies are increased.

  22. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Nearly completed.

  23. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Critical mass has been exceeded.

  24. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Progressing slowly.

  25. FutureStudies Social Networks The future studies about the reasons of these differences may contribute to DoI theory. In addition, technology characteristics and individual expectations should be matched with concrete proposals for solutions, because of the possible impact of these characteristics and expectations to the diffusion of technologies. Search Engines Wiki LMS Podcasts Blogs

  26. FutureStudies Social Networks Thus web 2.0 technologies have positive effects on learning and interaction, future studies in educational context could Search Engines determine the advantages and disadvantages of technologies that have slow diffusion process. Wiki In addition to these researches it is needed to be investigated LMS Podcasts how to provide awareness about unknown technologies which could help the actors of the educational system. Blogs

  27. References [1]Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: theory and emprical tests. The Internet and Higher Education 11(2), pp. 71-80. [2]Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2), pp. 179-211. [3]Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research Design Qualitative Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches. London, Sage Publications. [4]Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3), pp. 319-340. [5]Doll, W. J., & Ahmed, M. U. (1983). Managing User Expectations. Journal of Systems Management 34(6), pp. 6-11. [6]Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading MA. [7]Fraenkel, J., & Wallen, N. (2006). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGraw-Hill. [8]Hartshorne, R., & Ajjan, H. (2009). Examining student decisions to adopt Web2.0 technologies: theory and empirical tests. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 21, pp. 183-198. [9]Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., & Gray, K. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24(1), pp. 108-122. [10]Li, Y. & Lindner, J. R. (2007). Faculty adoption behaviour about web-based distance education: a case study from China Agricultural University. British Journal of Educational Techology 38(1), pp. 83-94. [11]Martin, S., Diaz, G., Sancristobal, E., Gil, R., Castro, M., &Peire, J. (2011). New technology trends in education: Seven years of forecasts and convergence. Computers & Education 57(3), pp. 1893-1906. [12]Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press. [13]Simões, L., & Gouveia, L. B. (2008). Web 2.0 and higher education: Pedagogical implications. Higher Education: New Challenges and Emerging Rolesfor Human and Social Development. 4th International Barcelona Conference on Higher Education Technical University of Catalonia (UPC). 31 March, 1-2 April. [14]Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research 79(2), pp. 625–649. [15]Thompson, R. L., & Higgins, C. A. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly 15(1), pp. 125-143. [16]Usluel, Y. K., Mazman, S. G., Arıkan, A. (2009). Prospective teachers’ awareness of collaborative web 2.0 tools. Presented at IADIS International Conference WWW/Internet 2009, Rome, 19 - 22 November, Italy. [17]Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., &Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27(3), pp. 425-478.

  28. HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY Faculty of Education ComputerEducationandInstructionalTechnology THANKS… WEB 2.0 AWARENESS OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY BASED ON INNOVATION-DECISION PROCESS Assoc. Prof. Yasemin KOÇAK USLUEL HacettepeUniversity, Ankara kocak@hacettepe.edu.tr Pınar NUHOĞLU HacettepeUniversity, Ankara pnuhoglu@hacettepe.edu.tr Esra Telli HacettepeUniversity, Ankara esratelli@hacettepe.edu.tr Gökhan Dağhan HacettepeUniversity, Ankara gokhand@hacettepe.edu.tr EDULEARN12International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies Barcelona/Spain 2 - 4 July2012

More Related