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

joben
Download Presentation

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 Thisstudyhandles time element of DoIandinvestigatesWeb 2.0 awareness of preserviceteachersbased on innovation-decisionprocesswithin a longitudinalperspective. • InnovationDecisionProcessStages • “No awareness” • “Knowledge” • “Implementation” • “Confirmation” Web 2.0 Technologies • social networks, learning management systems, search engines, blogs, podcasts and wikis

  3. InnovationDecisionProcessStages “Theinnovation-decisionprocessis 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 Itis aimedtoprovidefindingsrelated web 2.0 adoptionprocessesbydeterminingwhich of thetechnologiesare at thebeginningorend of theirdiffusionprocess. Implementation Confirmation Knowledge 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 Thestudygroupcomprised of 140 students (73.5% female, 26.5% male) studying at teachereducationprograms of a publicuniversity. Thedata werecollected in twophasesin theyear2009and2011fromthesamepreserviceteachers. Genders Across to the Education Programs

  8. MethodData Collection Tools“InnovationDecisionProcessQuestionnaire” ‘I heard but I’m not using.’ ‘I neverheard.’ Implementation Confirmation Knowledge No awareness Individualbegintousetheinnovation. Individual has not reachedtheknowledgestage in innovation-decisionprocess Individualexposedtotheinnovationandgainssomeinformationaboutitsfunction Individualseeksreinforcement ‘I usedtouse.’ ‘I’m using.’ > > Implementation 6 Months Confirmation Adoption Confirmation Rejection

  9. Findings • Social Network

  10. Findings • Blog

  11. Findings • Learning Management System

  12. Findings • SearchEngines

  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 • SearchEngines 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. Withintwoyears; thepercentages of awareness in all web 2.0 technologiesareincreased.

  22. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Nearlycompleted.

  23. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Critical mass has beenexceeded.

  24. Conclusion TheDiffusionProcess Progressingslowly.

  25. FutureStudies • Social • Networks Thefuturestudiesaboutthereasons of thesedifferencesmaycontributetoDoItheory. Inaddition, technologycharacteristicsandindividualexpectationsshould be matchedwithconcreteproposalsforsolutions, because of thepossibleimpact of thesecharacteristicsandexpectationstothediffusion of technologies. • Search • Engines • Wiki • LMS • Podcasts • Blogs

  26. FutureStudies • Social • Networks Thusweb 2.0 technologieshavepositiveeffects on learningandinteraction, futurestudies in educationalcontextcould • Search • Engines determinetheadvantagesanddisadvantages of technologiesthathaveslowdiffusionprocess. • Wiki Inadditiontotheseresearches it is neededto be investigated • LMS • Podcasts how toprovideawarenessaboutunknowntechnologieswhichcouldhelptheactors of theeducationalsystem. • 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