Sınıf içi etkileşimde elektronik oylama sistemi hakkında öğretmen görüşleri(Teacher...

Cypriot Journal of

Educational Sciences

Volume 9, Issue 2, (2014) 91-100 www.awer-center/cjes

Teacher Perceptions About the Electronic Voting System Used in

Classroom Interaction Mustafa Fidan *, Bartın University, Distance Education, Bartin, Turkey. Murat Debbağ, Bartın University, Distance Education, Bartin, Turkey. Barış Çukurbaşi, Bartın University, Faculty of Education, Bartin, Turkey. Suggested Citation: Fidan, M., Debbağ, M., & Çukurbaşi, B. (2014). Teacher Perceptions about the Electronic Voting System

Used in Classroom Interaction. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences. 9(2), 91-100. Received June 09, 2013; revised April 03, 2014; accepted May 06, 2014. Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Uzunboylu & Asist. Prof. Dr. Cigdem Hursen, Near East University. ©2014 SPROC LTD. Academic World Education & Research Center. All rights reserved. Abstract Electronic voting system used in the study, primary and secondary schools (Elektroy - EOS) use, and on the contributions of the educational environment using the system to investigate teachers' views. Case study used qualitative research methods. In this respect primary and secondary schools in the province of Bolu in Turkey, EOS opinion of the class that implements the different branches were 22 teachers, content analysis was conducted. To increase the interest and motivation of students to EOS result of the study course, the student assessment opportunities offered at the time and concluded that the competitive environment created. In this system, the uses of instructional materials have been identified mostly used as a measurement tool. Sorry did not see top-ranked students fail to hear them, the formation of a noisy environment, such as time consuming problems encountered in the implementation process have been identified. Keywords: electronic voting system, educational technology, classroom interaction, instructional material, instruction *ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Mustafa Fidan, Bartin University, Distance Education and Research Center, Bartin, Turkey, E-mail address: [email protected] /Tel: 03782235137

http://www.awer-center/cjes

mailto:[email protected]

Fidan, M., Debbağ, M., & Çukurbaşi, B. (2014). Teacher Perceptions About the Electronic Voting System Used in Classroom Interaction. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences. 9(2), 91-100.

92

1. Introduction

The rapid changes and developments in the 19th and 20th century had a significant impact on information and communication technologies. These technological developments also changed the structure of the process of education and brough a different perspective to how education is seen (Keser, 1991). Improving the effect of technologies, which has been part of the educational system in a fast pace and became an indispensable part of it, on students and making students responsible individuals in using technology have become important (Ocak & Şahin, 2011). The fact that today’s young people who are named as digital natives by Prensky (2010) are in constant interaction with technology can be considered as a factor for using information and communication technologies in teaching environments. In a study by Çukurbaşı and İşman (2014) it was found that most of the participants used technology in receiving and processing information.

According to Aksoy (2005) the technological tools used in education are: blackboard, paper, pen, typewriter, voice recorders, video recorders, tape recorders, e-mails for written messages, library for recording written texts, voice communication via internet and telephone for tele-conference and newspaper and tv with their functions of access to internet and media. However, lately such new technologies as tablet computers, interactive boards, projections, audience response system and multimedia tools started to be used in education. One of the materials used to see to what extent students participate in the lesson; to determine their problems and to help students progress together is audience response tools.

With such advantages of electronic voting systems as providing simultaneous feedback support between teacher and students, and enabling both individual and group work increased its utilization in educational environments (Davenport, Hayes & Parmar, 2009; Schmidt, 2011). Banks and Monday (2006) stated that audience response system is a technology which presents all students’ opinions into the face-to-face learning practices via sender apparatus. And the main benefit of electronic voting systems is that it gives each student the opportunity to contribute with their own voting device (Donohue, 2014). In addition, electronic voting system is also used for supporting peer interaction among students (Schmidt, 2011). Mccabe (2006) classified response systems as Electronic Voting System, Grup Decision Support System, Individual Response System, Listener Response System, Group Response System and Classroom Communication System. In this study audience response system is mentioned as Electronic Voting System-EOS. The study is done by grounding on Elektroy, which is an EOS used in Turkey.

1.1. Elektroy (Electronic Voting Sysytem)

Elektroy (Figure 1.1) is a system in which each student can choose one of the A, B, C, D, E and EMPTY options in a test question that teacher projected to the board/ screen via the customized remote controller, and student answers are transferred to the software in teacher’s computer via wireless communication technology and in which teacher can report all answers, the ratio of true/false answer rates, the rate of answering each question, the ordering by students’ net true answers and the number of true-false-empty questions of each student. Compared to classical answering systems (raising hands, optic evaluation etc.), Elektroy gives the opportunity to evaluate students collectively in a short time and easily (SYBS, 2012).


93

Figure 1. EOS Working Principle

The evaluation step in the process of teaching is one of the most important elements for effective teaching and it can be used for revealing to what extent the taught subject is learned, whether students understood the subject or not, to order students according to their performances and to give grades (Gülbahar, 2009). Therefore, the use of such systems as Elektroy in classes in order to evaluate the process of instruction is important in terms of ensuring efficient teaching. And so the opinions of the students using the system are important for more efficient use of the system.

The purpose of the existing study is to examine the opinions of all teachers who use the Elektroy system, which is used in primary and secondary schools, in primary and secondary schools in center Bolu province. Accordingly, the answers to the following questions were searched:

1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of EOS? 2. What are teachers’ opinions about the problems faced in EOS in educational

environment? 3. What is teachers’opinions on EOS being an assessment& evaluation and teaching

material? 4. How do teachers evaluate EOS utilization in financial terms?

2. Method

In accordance with the purpose of the study, case study, one of the qualitative research methods, was used as the research model of the existing study. Qualitative research is defined as: “a research in which such data collection methods as observation, interview and document analysis are used and in which a quantitative process towards exposing perceptions and cases in a realistic and holistic way is followed” (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). Depending on the purpose of the study, individual history, indications, behavioral characteristics, reactions or responses are studied in case study (Cozby & Bates, 2011).

2.1. Population

Criterion sampling, which is one of the purposeful sampling methods, is used in this study. The population of the study included the teachers who work in Bolu province in 2012-2013 school years and meet the following criteria:


94

· Working in a school in Bolu province center. · Using EOS in the classes. · Participating totally voluntarily in the research.

Teachers were given the necessary information before the research and those who meet the criteria formed the population of the research. Only two teachers among 24 teachers working in five schools in Bolu province center did not want to participate in the study and therefore, the study was done with the remaining 22 teachers. The information regarding the participants who form the population of the study is given in Table 1.

Table 1. Information on participants Quality Group N %

Gender Male 10 45.45 Female 12 54.55

Branch

Grade 8 36.36 Science and Technology 3 13.64 Mathematics 6 27.28 Turkish 5 22.72

Year of Service

2-5 years 2 9.14 6-10 years 7 31.84 11-20 years 7 31.84 Over 20 years 6 27.28

2.2. Instrument

“Teacher Opinion Survey on Electronic Voting System” was used in this research. The survey form is made by the researchers and analyzed by three academic members and one assessment and evaluation expert. Necessary content and structural changes were made in the survey questions in the light of the feedbacks. The survey form includes four open-ended questions to reach the objectives of the research. There were also closed-end questions including the some demographic characteristics of the participants.

2.3. Data Analysis

Content analysis was made for the analysis of the data in the research. Content analysis has four phases: coding of the data; specifying the themse of the coded data; organizing the themes and codes and defining and interpreting the findings (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). In this context, the collected data is examined thoroughly and coded; the relationship between the codes is analyzed and the themes are found. Later, the relations between the themes are explained. Besides, the results of analysis of the data obtained via data collection tools is analyzed separately by each researcher and then compared; and their relation- if they had any- is revealed without any additional comments.

3. Results

This part includes the findings obtained as a result of the analysis of data from the survey. While interpreting the findings, participant expressions are quoted to support the findings and to represent the teacher using the expression, a code is given to support the teacher’s branch. (Classroom teacher: S1, S2…; Science and Technology Teacher: F1, F2…; Mathematics Teacher: M1, M2…; Turkish Teacher: T1, T2…).


95

3.1. Findings on the Positive and Negative Opinions of Teachers towards EOS Teachers were asked: “What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of Elektroy system?” The themes formed by the analysis of teacher answers are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Themes on the Positive and Negative Opinions of Teachers about EOS Course Student

Positive Negative Positive Negative

Measuring knowledge Possibility to repeat a subject

Immediate feedback Student evaluation Versatile evaluation

High-quality sample questions Questions that fit the

acquisitions inding the subject that is not

understood

Long implementation process

Relevancy of the questions

Inadequate time

Individual evaluation Competition Motivation Practicing

Time management Interest in the course

Participation to the course Attention

Parent follow-up

The feeling of unsuccessful student

Cheating Individual differences

Made up answers

As is seen in Table 2, sub-themes and codes are formed under course and student main

theme groups from the result of the data analysis obtained from positive and negative opinions of teachers about EOS.

Most of the teachers stated that EOS raised students’ interest towards the course and that it increased student participation in the course and that it is effective in assessing student knowledge. It was also said that students could evaluate themselves via EOS; that it increased competition among the students and thus, they revised the subjects more. Among the outstanding findings were immediate feedback in the system increased student motivation and thus, students listened more carefully in the classroom, the evaluation was multi-dimensional and allowed parents to follow the students via internet. The advantages of EOS were said to be that the questions prepared in EOS are of high-quality and appropriate to the acquisitions of the course, and that it helped students to manage time and it helps teachers to identify the subjects that are not well understood by the students.

A big number of teachers expressed that unsuccessful students felt sorry when they were not on the top in the list and that they cheated. Also, the fact that students with a slower question solving speed were not able to adapt to the system, that the practices took long and that students did not give real answers to the questions are expressed as the disadvantages of EOS. Some of the teacher statements regarding the findings within the scope of first research question are as below:

“This system increases students’ interest in the course and thus, they participate more…The fact that students see the ranking among themselves increases competition.” (M3)

“If adequate time is given and students are informed about the aim of these practices well, it provides ease in evaluating students both individually and as a whole. Since it makes the course more entertaining, student interest raises. Teachers are able to form their own questions and make more clear evaluation.” (T4)

“I believe that Electroy is quiet useful for students. It is especially important that they can solve subject-related tests after we finish studying a subject and that they see their level of success.” (T2)

“One course-hour is not enough for this practice. It is more productive when we do it for two consecutive course hours. Another disadvantage is that it causes unsuccessful


96

students to loose their self-confidence within the classroom…Although this practice increases some of the students’ success it might cause to a total decrease in some others.” (M4)

3.2. Findings on Teacher Opinions about the Problems faced in EOS utilization in educational environment

Teachers were asked: “What are your opinions about the problems faced in EOS in

educational environment? The themes formed by the analysis of teacher answers are given in Table 3.

Table 3. Themes regarding Teacher Opinions about the problems faced in EOS

Question Technique Student General

Inadequate number of question

Questions that do not comply with the

curricula Classroom management

Collecting/distributing remote controller

Computer problem

Curiosity Cheating

Incoherent questions Discipline

Individual differences

Inadequate time There are no

problems Classroom

management

As it is seen in Table 3, as a result of the analysis of the data obtained from the teacher

opinions on the problems faced in using EOS, codings under question, technique, student and general theme groups are formed.

Most of the teachers stated that they did not face any problems in using EOS. And a large number of the teachers who had problems stated that the problem was with distributing and collecting the remote controllers. Additionally, that the students had difficulty with the questions which have a time limitation, that they loose interest because of the questions they do not understood, that they make noise because they wonder their friends’ responses and that the students who answer the questions in a shorter period waste the time of the students who need more time to answer are among the outstanding problems. Teachers also stated that the questions in EOS were not well-prepared question and that these questions were not in accordance with the curricula and that there were not high-quality questions in the system. Some of the teacher statements on the findings within the scope of the second research questions are as follows:

“When we are using it in the classroom, students continuously ask each other “What is your answer?” and that causes to noise inside the classroom. It becomes tiring to try to prevent the noise.” (M6)

“Some of the questions are not in accordance with the new curricula. And the students record the number of the remote controller that was given to them and it takes time to find the remote controller that belongs to each student.” (S2)


97

3.3. Findings on teachers’ Opinions on EOS being an assessment& evaluation and teaching material

Teachers were asked: “How do you see the electronic voting system: as an assessment tool or a teaching material? Please explain with reasons.” The themes formed as a result of the analysis of their answers to this question is shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Themes on on teachers’ Opinions on Elektroy Voting System being an assessment & evaluation

and teaching material

General

Assessment tool Teaching Material

Both of them

Most of the teachers expressed that they consider EOS as an evaluation tool. Only seven teachers expressed that they considered EOS as both an assessment and evaluation material. Some of the opinions of teachers regarding the findings of the third research question are as below:

“It is both because we can see the students’ level and readiness and learning levels by making a kind of assessment. I also think that it is a useful teaching material in terms of providing better understanding of the courses and feedback.” (T1)

“I see it as an assessment tool. It is effective in identifying to what extent the subject taught is understood individually and as a whole class. I don’t think it is a teaching material because it is not used in teaching a subject.” (F1)

3.4. Findings on how teachers evaluate EOS utilization economically?

Teachers were asked: “When you evaluate electronic voting system economically, do you think that it can be used at every school and in every course? Please give your reasons.” The themes formed of the analysis of teacher responses are shown in Table 3.4.

Tablo 5.Themes on how teachers evaluate EOS economically

Positive Negative

It can be used in all schools It can be used in all courses It is low-cost for branch teachers Cost-effective

It can not be used in all schools It can not be used in all courses It costs high for classroom teachers

As it is seen in Table 3.4 there are both positive and negative themes formed as a result of the

analysis of teacher responses regarding the evaluation of EOS economically. Most of the teachers stated that EOS costs high and thus it can not be used at every school or in every course and that it is unnecessary to use it in courses other than main courses. Some of the teachers stated that EOS can be used at every school and in every course. Besides, another finding of the study is that the cost is high for classroom teachers; and low for branch teachers. Some of the teachers’ statements on the findings of the fourth research question of the study are as follows:


98

“It costs high. It can not be implemented at every school and school’s budget would not be enough for it. And it is not necessary to use it in all courses except the five main courses.” (M3)

“When I evaluate electronic voting system economically, I believe that it can not be used at every school and in each course. It is expecially difficult to implement it at rural schools.” (S7)

4. Conclusion and Discussion

According to the findings of the study, the advantages of EOS are that it increases student participation to and interest in the course; it is effective in assessing what students’ know; it increases competition among students and enables revision of the subject; it increases student motivation and helps students to listen more carefully; it enables parents to follow the student via internet; it teaches students how to manage time while the disadvantages are listed as: unsuccessful students feel unhappy about their ranking; the students who are not fast in solving questions can not keep up with the system; students do not reply sincerely to the questions; questions are prepared according to the old system and chosen randomly. Isman, Baytekin, Balkan & Horzum (2002) points to the importance of technology, which takes an active role in learning process, in student’s communication and in the formation of learning results. The advantages of the system are parallel to the findings of Yıldırım’s research (2008) (active participation, increase in motivation, instant feedback) and to the problems he stated in his study (cost, cheating, technological problems). Sample conclusions were found some studies (Miller, Ashar & Getz, 2003; Kennedy & Cuts, 2005; Preszler, Dawe, Shuster, & Shuster, 2007; Cain, Black & Rohr, 2009; Kay & Lesage, 2009; Gok, 2011; Yıldırım & Karaman, 2012) in terms of it’s positiviness. Besides, Mayer Stull, DeLeeuw, Almeroth, Bimber, Chun, Bulger, Campbell, Knight and Zhang (2009) stated in their study that students who used electronic voting system learned more cognitively compared to other who did not use the system.

In the study, the problems faced in using EOS are stated as: some teachers said that students had difficulty in questions with a time limitation while others did not; that there was a problem with distributing and collecting the remote controllers; that students were discourages when they did not understand the question; that the questions were not according to the curriculum; that those students who solved the questions faster delayed other students; and that there was problem with high-quality questions in the system. As a result of the study, it is found that this system is used more like an assessment tool rather than a teaching material. Additionally, in Beatty et al.’s study (2006) and Yıldırım’s study (2008) in higher education it was found that the system did not cause to noise and waste of time. In contrast, it was found that this system caused aforementioned problems in primary and secondary schools.

The ratio of using these systems which are considered as a good meants of practice for teachers around the world has been increasing recently (Oswald & Rhoten, 2014). However, it Turkey, it is found that the system is not appropriate for every school and every course because of its high cots. The availability of the tools in education is stated as: “Educational tools should be useable, protectable, and healthy and economic.” in the 10th article of the Educational Tools Examination Regulation of the Ministry of National Education (MEB, 2012). Thus, it is found that the system is easy to use in schools at which the parents are mostly economically wealthy.

As a result, today when the FATIH Project started to be implemented, this system should be integrated into the project with an agreement with the Ministry of National Education and thus, the system should be implemented at all schools and equal opportunities should be provided for all students. The questions in this system should be in accordance with the new curriculum and the technical problems should be minimized. Teachers should be provided with in-service trainings and informed about the new technologies. In order for the electronic voting system designs to be successful, it is necessary to plan and design them carefully and to make revisions based on the feedbacks from students (Donohue, 2014).


99

References Aksoy, H. (2003). Eğitim Kurumlarında Teknoloji Kullanımı ve Etkilerine İlişkin Bir Çözümleme. Eğitim Bilim

Toplum, 1(4), 4-23. Banks, D.A., & Monday A. (2006). Audience Response System in practice: Improving Hong Kong Student‟s Understanding of Decission Support Systems, Proceedings Of The 23rd Annual Ascilite Conferance: Who‟s

learning? Whose technology? Ascilite 2006, The University of Sidney. Beatty, I.D., Leonard, W.J., Grace W.J., & Dufresne, R.J. (2006). Question Driven Instruction: Teaching

Science (Well) With an Audience Response System, Chapter7, Audience Response System in Higher Education: Aplication and Cases.

Cain, J., Black, E.P., & Rohr, J. (2009). An audience response system strat-egy to improve student motivation,attention, and feedback. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(2), 1–7.

Cozby, P. C., & CE Bates, S. C. (2011). Methods in Behavioral Research (Eleventh Edition). New York: The McGraw Hill Companies. Çukurbaşı, B., & İşman, A. (2014). Öğretmen Adaylarının Dijital Yerli Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi (Bartın

Üniversitesi Örneği). Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakütesi Dergisi, 3(1), p. 28-54. Davenport, J.H., Hayes, A., & Parmar, N.R. (2009). The Use of an Electronik Voting System to Enhance

Student Feedback. Proceeding of 4th Plymouth e-learning conference: Boundary changes: Redefining learning spaces. Plymouth.

Donohue, S. (2014). Supporting active learning in an undergraduate geotechnical engineering course using group-based audience response systems quizzes. European Journal of Engineering Education. 39(1), 45-54.

Gok, T. (2011). An Evaluation of Student Response Systems from the Viewpoint of Instructors and Students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 67-83.

Gülbahar, Y. (2009). E-öğrenme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. Isman, A., Baytekin, Ç., Balkan, F., & Horzum, B. (2002). Fen Bilgisi Eğitimi ve Yapısalcı Yaklaşım. The

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 1(1), 41-47. Kay, R.K., & Lesage, A. (2009). A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher

education, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 235-249. Kennedy, G.E., & Cutts, Q.I. (2005). The association between students' use of an electronic voting system and their learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 260-268. Keser, H. (1991). Eğitimde nitelik geliştirmede bilgisayar destekli eğitim ve ders yazılımlarının rolü,

eğitimde arayışlar. 1. Sempozyumu'nda Sunulan Bildiri Metinleri, Özel Kültür Okulları Eğitim-Araştırma-Geliştirme Merkezi, İstanbul

Mayer, R.E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fosterin learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, p. 51-57.

McCabe, M. (2006). Live Assessment by Questioning in an Interactive Classroom Chapter 18, Audience Response System in Higher Education: Aplication and Cases Miller, R., Ashar , B.H., Getz, K.J. (2003). Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing

education of health professionals. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 23(2), 109-115.

MEB (2012). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Eğitim Araçları İnceleme Yönetmeliği. Retrieved November, 12 2013 from: http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/egitimarac.html

Ocak, M.A., & Şahin, S. (2011). Teknolojide Fırsat Eşitliği ve Telif Hakkı. Perkmen, S., & Tezci, E. inside, Eğitimde Teknoloji Entegrasyonu: Materyal Geliştirme ve Çoklu Ortam Tasarımı, 81-94.

Oswald, K.M., & Rhoten S.E. (2014). Improving Classroom Clicker Practices: Effects of Incentives and Feedback on Retention. North American Journal of Psychology, 16(1), 79-88.

Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching Digital Natives: Partnering for Real Learning. California: Corwin A SAGE Company.

Preszler, R.W., Dawe, A., Shuster, C.B., & Shuster, M. (2007). Assessment of the effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes over a broad range of biology courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 29–41.

Schmidt, B. (2011). Teaching Engineering Dynamics by Use of Peer Instruction Supported by an Audience Response System. European Journal of Enginnering Education, 35(5), 413-425.

http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/egitimarac.html


100

SYBS. Elektroy. (2012). Elektronik Veri Toplama ve Değerlendirme Sistemi. Retrieved October 28, 2013 from: http://www.elektroy.com/nedir

Yıldırım, S. (2008). Sınıf İçi Etkileşim Uygulaması: Dinleyici Yanıt Sistemi ve Değerlendirilmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Atatürk Üniversitesi.

Yıldırım, S., & Karaman, S. (2012). Sınıf İçi Etkileşim Uygulaması: Dinleyici Yanıt Sisteminin Kullanımı ve Değerlendirilmesi. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 32(3) 571-587. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8. Basım). Ankara: Seçkin

Yayıncılık.

http://www.elektroy.com/nedir

Sınıf içi etkileşimde elektronik oylama sistemi hakkında öğretmen görüşleri(Teacher...

Documents

Transcript of Sınıf içi etkileşimde elektronik oylama sistemi hakkında öğretmen görüşleri(Teacher...