Student Teachers' Perceptions of Instructional Technology: Developing Materials Based on a Constructivist Approach.

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher: http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/asp/

ABSTRACT
A new course for elementary student teachers has been developed at the Zonguldak Karaelmas University in Turkey. This article reports on a study of the course during the academic year 2000-2001 and concludes that a constructivist approach should be adopted.

INTRODUCTION
    Teacher education programmes need to incorporate technology for teaching and learning across the curriculum. Students on such programmes must have opportunities to apply these new technologies in a classroom setting and must also be shown that the use of technology can be more efficient and effective than traditional methods (Brennan, 2000, 2). The goal of many teacher education programs is to help future teachers to perceive technology as meaningful, authentic and necessary for their work (Duran, 2000, 5).
    Betrus (2000) studied the content and emphasis of the introductory technology course for undergraduate pre-service teachers and found that the current version of the course was focused primarily on computer based content, entailing a decreased emphasis on traditional audiovisual technologies compared to such courses in the past.
    Duran (2000) looked at the integration of technology integration into an elementary teacher education programme. His findings indicated that the preservice elementary teachers were not provided with the experiences they needed to use information technology in their future classrooms. He recommended that, in order to increase new teachers' technological proficiency, the institutions should increase the level of technology integration in their own programmes so that information technology should be integrated into methods and curriculum courses rather than being limited to stand-alone technology classes.
    Shuell and Farber (2001) studied students' perceptions of technology use in college courses. Seven hundred twenty-eight undergraduate and graduate students completed a questionnaire on the use of technology in one of their courses. The respondents were generally very positive about the use of technology, with no major differences across class-level (freshmen to graduate). Computer-based technologies are increasingly being used in classroom teaching at all levels and student teachers have to become familiar with them.
    In Turkey, teacher education programmes include a course on instructional technologies and material development, and in the Higher Education Centre at the Zonguldak Karaelmas University, College of Education the course is given in the 5th semester. The course includes (YÖK, 1998):
    * the characteristics of different instructional technologies
    * uses of these technologies
    * the development of instructional materials (including overhead transparencies, video and computer based materials
    * the evaluation of different materials
    The teaching-learning process was not taken into account in developing the course and all of the instructors' teaching methods are different. Some instructors use computer based methods while others use a range of different media. Since these courses are important, standards covering process as well as content, have been determined by The Higher Education Centre. This article examines the constructivist perspectives for this course.
    Constructivism has been the subject of many research studies over the last decade. A central tenet is that learning is an active process and that learning is determined by the complex interlay among learners' existing knowledge, the social context, and the problem to be solved (Tam, 2000). Constructivism has encouraged teachers and curriculum developers to alter their perceptions of children from individuals who are irrational and unknowing to cognisant beings with well-developed theories. Constructivists have rightly turned their attention to the learner arguing correctly that he or she is responsible for their own learning (Osborne and Wittrock, 1985; Novak and Gowin, 1984; Pope, 1985; White, 1988). The evidence from research on learning styles would suggest that there is no single effective method for teaching and learning since students differ in their preferences (Osborne, 1996).
    Students are active participants in the process of learning, with multiple learning styles, employing group activities, brain storming, interpretive discussion etc. The constructivist teacher encourages students to connect and summarise concepts by analyzing, predicting, justifying, and defending their ideas. The teacher provides opportunities for students to test their hypotheses, especially through group discussion of concrete experiences. The constructivist approach involves students in real-world possibilities, then helps them generate the abstractions that bind phenomena together. In a Constructivist Classroom student autonomy and initiative are accepted and encouraged. The teacher asks open-ended questions and allows time for responses; higher-level thinking is encouraged. Students are engaged in dialogue with the teacher and with each other, and in experiences that challenge hypotheses and encourage discussion. The class uses raw data, primary sources, and physical, and interactive materials (Brooks and Brooks, 1993). The assessment is based on process rather than product Evaluation in this culture is rigorous and multidimensional. It is focused on the quality of the learner's understanding, its depth, and its flexible application to related contexts (Lindschitl, 1999; Hu, 1997; Yen, 1999).
    Constructivism provides ideas and principles about learning that have important implications for the construction of technology supported learning environments (Tam, 2000). One of these implications is the need to embed learning into authentic and meaningful contexts. Another is that learning is a personal, as well as a social activity. There can be more individual learning in a student sitting in front of his or her computer but the technology also allows much more diversified and socially rich learning contexts: for example peer tutoring via computer, computer networks, e-mail, and telecommunications.
    In general, constructivist instructional approaches are criticised because they:
    1. Are costly to develop (because they are inefficient)
    2. Require technology for their implementation and
    3. Are very difficult to evaluate (Tam, 2000).
    The aim of this study was to explore the student teachers' perceptions of the Instructional Technology and Material Development course based on a constructivist approach and to build constructivist perspectives for teaching and learning process of this course.

METHOD
    The study used a sample of 80 student teachers who took the instructional technologies and material development course in an elementary teacher education program at Eregli College of Education in Turkey. The course as scheduled to take 4 hours each week. Thirty of the students were in the 3rd grade and the remaining fifty were in the fourth grade at the beginning of the spring semester in 2000-2001. The learning process was different for the 3rd and for the 4th grade students. The former were taught in small groups while the 4th grade students, who had taken the original version of the course the previous year, were dealt with as individuals. Both sets were in their fifth semester.
    A qualitative research methodology was used: eight open ended questions were used to determine student perceptions:
    1. What was your score on the instructional technologies and material development course?
    2. What the process of the course? What did you do?
    3. When were you active? How? While you were active, what kind of prior knowledge did you use?
    4. Were you happy in this course? What do you think about student activity in this course?
    5. What were the advanteges of this course?
    6. How was the assesment? If you were an instructor for this course, how would you assess it?
    7. What other process could be used in the course?
    8. If you didn't take this course, what would you think about your competency?
    Inductive coding techniques (described by Strauss and Corbin, 1990) were used for the analyses. The responses were collected and encoded and then reviewed line by line, typically within a paragraph. Beside or below the paragraph, categories or labels are reviewed and, typically, a slightly more abstract category is attributed to several incidents or observations. The incidents can then be assigned a qualitative data category. Starting with a working set of codes that describe the phenomena in the transcribed field notes we then move to a second level that is more general and explanatory.
    However, just naming or classifying the responses is usually insufficient: we need to understand the patterns and the underlying reasoning. Pattern codes can be explanatory or inferential, identifying an emergent theme, configuration, or explanation, and groups those summaries into a smaller number of sets, themes, or constructs (Miles and Huberman, 1994). The process is thus to:
    * Underline key terms in the students' responses for eight open-ended questions
    * Restate key phrases
    * Coding key terms in the students' responses for questions
    * Pattern coding
    * Construct themes
    * Summaries for themes
    * Integrating theories in an explanatory framework

PROCEDURES
    The group of third grade students first observed and researched the elementary school, interviewing the elementary teachers in their city. They then acquired theoretical knowledge from textbooks, articles and their lecturer before forming groups of four to five students. In these groups they discussed and researched different learning-teaching materials and technologies, each group producing three or four different sets of materials (for example, some computer based materials for an elementary school course unit, a video, a three dimensional map and a set of transparencies). After showing and discussing the materials they used them in role play and subsequently discussed the process of the lesson and the quality of the materials. Each group was evaluated, both by students from another group and by the lecturer.
    The fourth grade students worked as individuals in the preceding year. Each student prepared one or two sets of teaching materials for a course in elementary education but did not visit a school, observe or carry out interviews. Each student was evaluated, both by other students and by the lecturer.

RESULTS
    The perception of 3rd grade students is given in Table 1 which show some of the codes for the students' responses in the elementary teacher education programme.
    The codes, derived from prior research (Chung, 1991; Copley, 1992; Brooks and Brooks, 1993; Osborne, 1996; Lindschitl, 1999; Windschitl, 1999) focus on two themes. The responses indicate that 92% perceived themselves as being active and preferred group preparation of the materials. Factors that were important for success were enjoyment (80%), group lecturing (72%) and effort (72%). The production of original materials was rated as 68%, followed by research and observation at 56%.
    Some of the third grade students comments were:
    "Effective teaching occurs when effective course materials are used. Being active can be defined as active production. We studied as a group. We made different materials. I learned by seeing, making and living. I like my score. Scores were objective."
    "Being active is fine. We completed our materials and I was pleased with our production."
    "We made research, material. I used my skills. I used computer, video etc other technologies. I enjoyed being active. We have to be active as the teachers of future."
    "Learning is important rather than scores. I learned a lot of knowledge. Concrete materials are important for effective learning. I learned concrete activities. I studied as a teacher. We evaluated our friends."
    We can infer from these results that students liked this approach with group activities that supported cooperation and active learning. The constructivist learning process builds upon their prior knowledge and enables them to construct their materials and activities.
    The perceptions of the fourth grade students is given in Table 2.
    The results imply that the students were in complete agreement with the active lesson process (100%). The individual preparation of materials and the feedback of scores were seen as important by over 93% of the students. Other factors are the enjoyment of the lesson, the individual production of materials and the individual tutorials (all at 86.6%) with other high scores for the meaningful learning of the teaching process and prior knowledge of curriculum development and educational psychology (73.3%).
    Some of the fourth grade students comments were:
    "I made my material. I was an active learner. After I made my material, I presented it to my friends as an example elementary course. I learned the preparation of different materials with different technologies. Also, I observed my friends and evaluated their materials with my class and my lecturer."
    "Students can be evaluated according to the usefulness of their materials and their active participation. I learned curriculum development before the lesson. But these lessons are better than before, because. I learned different materials and technologies in instructional technologies and materials development course."
    "I was active throughout this lesson. Being active is useful for academic self concept and positive attitudes. The students were evaluated with their efforts, their original products and uses of these materials and technologies for the lesson of the elementary school."
    These results show that active learning is important for an instructional technology and material development course. The candidate teachers like the approach because it helped them to prepare different materials in the future. Both group and individual work can support active learning.
    These qualitative findings support the notion of a direct link between active learning and students' positive perceptions of instructional technology and material development course based on constructivist learning.

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
    A new course, using a constructivist approach, in instructional technology and material development for students in elementary teacher education programs in Turkey has been investigated and provided some insights into the constructivist learning process. The data collected on two groups were coded in a search for for evidence of an active approach, the development of materials, and enjoyment of the lesson.
    In general, students perceived the use of the constructivist approach to be very beneficial. Over 90% said that being active is important for this course and those students who were actively engaged were more likely to perceive positive effect of constructivist approach as a learning process, reflecting the importance of active learning. Students in this course were more likely to indicate that the constructivist approach increased the quality of interaction with their peers when studying or developing materials together. The students who agreed strongly that they learn more when the instructor guides course activities responded more favorably to the learning benefits associated with constructivism.
    A theme that developed through the open-ended items was the appreciation for learning by many students. The major outcomes from the research were:
    * That both the interview and writing data appear to confirm that the constructivist practices had a highly positive impact on the way the student teachers perceived the teaching learning processes in the instructional technology and material development course.
    * A suggestion that constructivist learning activities foster active learning. The research provided strong indications for implementation of constructivism in the teacher education.
    * Prior knowledge is very important for a students' subsequent achievement. A constructivist approach can be used because student teachers have prior knowledge and extensive experience. Active participation should be provided continuously. The students can either study in groups or individually. The instructors should be co-learners and guides for the students. Assessment should be based on the lesson process. The efforts of the students, active participation and material development process, cooperation, etc should be evaluated by the other students and instructor.
    * Uses of technology are important for teacher education and so student teachers must learn about technology and its effect on education--and about technology and constructivism. A comprehensive technology laboratory must be available in teacher education faculties to enable student to produce their own materials.
    This study presents a qualitative study for the teacher education program but the generalization of the results may be limited because, the pre-service teacher candidates who participated in the study were enrolled in a single university. Future studies may carry out on different samples.
ADDED MATERIAL
    Address for correspondence: Tugba Yanpar Sahin, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, College of Education, Kdz. Eregli, 67300 Zonguldak, Turkey. Email: tusahin@karaelmas.edu.tr, or tyanpar@yahoo.com
    Table 1: The perceptions of 3rd grade students (N:50)

Code of Perceptions                                                                 Frequencies     %
The development of theoretical knowledge                                                20         40
The preparation of materials in a group                                                 46         92
Lecture in a group                                                                      36         72
Research and observation                                                                28         56
Being active                                                                            46         92
Prior-knowledge is needed from curriculum development                                   18         36
   and educational pschology courses
Lessons are pleasant and enjoyable                                                      40         80
Producing original materials                                                            34         68
Meaningful learning of teaching for elementary students                                 22         44
Assessment of the group with scores of this lesson were given to individuals            26         52
The process is important for assessment                                                 18         36
This lesson must be learned by the individual                                            8         16
This course is useful for teaching development                                          24         48
Instructor is an guide for the student teacher                                          18         36
Make proposals and critiques on course materials prepared by the students               16         32
Sharing and cooperation within the group                                                16         32
This lesson must be group learning                                                      16         32
Effort is very important for success in this lesson                                     36         72

    Table 2: The perceptions of 4th grade students (N:30)

Code of Perceptions                                                                 Frequencies     %
The development of theoretical knowledge                                                12          40.0
The preparation of materials by an individual                                           28          93.3
Lecture by an individual                                                                26          86.6
Materials exhibition                                                                    10          33.3
Being active in this lesson                                                             30         100
Prior knowledge is needed from curriculum development and                               22          73.3
   educational pschology courses.
Lessons are pleasant and enjoyable                                                      26          86.6
Producing original materials as an individual                                           26          86.6
Meaningful learning of teaching for elementary students                                 22          73.3
Scores of this lesson were given as process                                             28          93.3
Assesment was objective                                                                 18          60.0
This lesson must be learned by the individual                                           10          33.3
This course is useful for teaching development                                          18          60.0
Instructor is a guide for student teacher                                               18          60.0
Make proposals and critique on course materials prepared by the students                22          73.3

REFERENCES
    Betrus A K (2000) The content and emphasis of the Introductory Technology course for undergraduate pre-service teachers PhD. Indiana University.
    Brennan J P (2000) Preservice teachers and administrators' perceptions of instructional technology infusion EdD. The University of Southern Mississipi.
    Brooks J G and Brooks M G (1993) In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms Association For The Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandra, VA.
    Chung J (1991) Collaborative learning strategies: the design of instructional environment for the mmerging new school Educational Technology 31 (6) 15-22.
    Copley J (1992) the integration of teacher education and technology: a constructivist model in D Carey, R Carey, D Willis and S Willis (eds) Technology and teacher education, AACE Charlottesville, VA, 681.
    Duran M (2000) Examination of technology integration into an elementary teacher education program: one university's experience PhD. Ohio University.
    Hu C W (1997) Research on elementary teachers'views about constructivist teaching Educational Information and Research 18 21-25.
    Lindschitl M (1999) A vision educators can put into practice: portraying the constructivist classroom as a cultural system School Science and Mathematics 99 (4) 189-197.
    Miles M B and Huberman A M (1994) Qualitative data analysis Sage Publications Inc.
    Novak J D and Gowin D B (1984) Learning how to learn Cambridge University Press.
    Osborne R J and Wittrock M (1985) The generative learning model and its implications for science education Studies in Science Education 12 59-87.
    Osborne J F (1996) Beyond constructivism Science Education 80 (1) 53-82.
    Pope M (1985) Constructivist goggles: implications for process in teaching and learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the British Educational Research Association.
    Shuell T J and Farber S L (2001) Students' perceptions of technology use in college courses Journal of Educational Computing Research 24 (2) 119-138.
    Strauss A and Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and Techniques Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
    Tam M (2000) Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: implications for transforming distance learning Educational Technology and Society 3 2.
    White R T (1988) Learning science Blackwell, Oxford.
    Windschitl M (1999) The challenges of sustaining a constructivist classroom culture Phi Delta Kappan June, 751-755.
    Yen R Y (1999) A study of exemplary elementary science teachers's beliefs, practices, and views about constructivist teaching http://www.narst.org/conference/yenhsiung.htm.
    YÖK (Higher Education Foundation in Turkey) (1998) Programmes for educational faculty Ankara, Turkey.