Ej1148601

CONTEMPORARY EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 2017, 8(3), 232-248
232
A Comprehensive Analysis on Technopedagogical Education
Competency and Technology Perception of Pre-service
Teachers: Relation, Levels and Views1
Eylem Yalcin Incik & Cenk Akay
Mersin University, Turkey
Abstract
The main purpose of this research is to identify the competency and the perceptions of
pre-service teachers on technopedagogical education. While study group of quantitative
dimension is composed of 626 pre-service teachers; study group of qualitative extent is
composed of 67 pre-service teachers. The sample represents 35% of the population of
1778 students. The quantitative data were collected through Technopedagogical
Education Competency (Tpack-Deep) Scale and Technology Perception Scale and the
qualitative data were collected with an open ended-question form. It was concluded that
pre-service teachers generally regard themselves at a moderate level in the sense of
technopedogogical education competency, have positive perception towards technology
and there is a positive correlation between pre-service teachers’ technopedogogical
educational competency and perception towards technology. According to results of
qualitative analysis of the study, pre-service teachers think that educational technologies
have contributions to preparing information-communication technologies based upon
presentations, developing technology-based materials, preparing homework, doing
research, raising awareness about the importance of educational technology use in the
learning and teaching process, acquiring information about their department, developing
skill of using technology based on information-communication technologies and having
positive attitude.
Keywords: Educational technology; Technopedagogical education competency;
Information technology; Pre-service teacher; Teaching and learning
Introduction
Globalization and technological advances experienced towards the end of 20th
century caused
emergence of new values and trends in social, political, economic and cultural fields. Especially
as a result of technological improvements, access to information continued incrementally, a
new period started in which nature, function and purposes of education systems are reviewed
or altered and technology integration was enabled in education. The integration of technology
can be viewed as a transformational process (Kurt, 2012). The belief that technology can
positively impact student learning has led many governments to create programs for the
integration of technology in their schools (Hew & Brush, 2007). The effective integration of
technology into the educational system is a complex, multifaceted process that involves not
just technology but also curriculum and pedagogy, institutional readiness, teacher
competencies, and long-term financing, among others (Tinio, 2003). Educational environments
1
This paper was presented at the 2nd
International Eurasian Educational Research Congress in Ankara (Turkey), June 08-10, 2015.

233
have witnessed the widening gap between relatively digital immigrant teachers and digital
native students (McClure, 2011).
The preparation of teachers in the educational use of technology appears to be a key
component in almost every improvement plan for education and educational reform programs
(Davis & Falba, 2002; Dawson, Pringle, & Adams, 2003; Thompson, Schmidt, & Davis, 2003).
However, at the same time, government policies and initiatives have encouraged teachers to
engage with their students’ digital worlds (Honan, 2008). It is obvious that, for these reforms
to be successful, teachers need to have the necessary knowledge and skills to integrate ICT in
classroom learning with focus towards facilitating students' knowledge (Chai, Koh & Tsai, 2011,
p. 595). That is because effective teaching certainly requires effective technology use (Ertmer
& Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).
In the studies carried out for technology use of teachers, it is possible to see the criticisms that
teachers use technology restrictedly and in specific periods. The periods in which technology is
used by teachers are for information transmission, instructional preparation, communication
and for non-educational purposes such as administrative purposes, instructional preparation,
teacher-directed instructional delivery, student assignments and instructional assessment
rather than the facilitation of students’ knowledge construction (Cuban, 2001; Gao, Choy,
Wong, & Wu, 2009; Harris, Mishra, & Koehler, 2009; Kurt, 2012; McCannon & Crews, 2000;
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Glazewski, Newby, & Ertmer, 2010; Sang, Valcke, van Braak, & Tondeur,
2010; Seferoglu & Akbiyik, 2005).
It is emphasized in many studies in the literature that the main hindrances against technology
use of teachers in education process are arising from lack of information, skill, experience and
competency for technology; lack of current pedagogical content knowledge to support
learning of students and lack of knowledge about combining technology and negative attitude
and lack of motivation (Bingimlas, 2009; Chen, Looi, & Chen, 2009; Dwyer, Ringstaff &
Sandholtz, 1991; Ertmer et al. 1999; Hew & Brush, 2007; Honan, 2008; Hutchison & Reinking
2011; Lim & Khine, 2006; Lim, 2007; Liu & Szabo 2009; Oncu, Delialioglu & Brown, 2008; Zhao,
2007). According to Bhattacherjee and Premkumar (2004), people’s beliefs, attitudes,
intentions and their use of information technology innovations change over time as they
experience technology first hand. These observations have led to more emphasis on teaching
teachers’ ways of integrating technology in teaching (Angeli & Valanides, 2009; Goktas,
Yildirim, & Yildirim, 2009; Polly & Brantley-Dias, 2009). Ertmer et al. (2001) propose that
teacher educators have a responsibility to create opportunities in which pre-service teachers
can increase their competence and confidence in technology integration. In order to facilitate
teacher development for better integration of technology, teacher educators propose that
teacher education should move away from technocentric approach to emphasize pedagogy
and content (Harris et al., 2009). In view of recognizing the lack of theoretical frameworks to
guide teacher preparation in technology integration, researchers, for the last ten years, have
initiated systematic research for the purpose of developing theory and models to ground
research in the area of teacher cognition about technology integration (Angeli, 2005; Angeli &
Valanides, 2005; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Niess, 2005; Valanides & Angeli, 2008).
TPACK (technological, pedagogical and content knowledge) goes beyond technocentric
strategies and emphasizes the importance of helping teachers develop and apply integrated
and interdependent understandings of technology, pedagogy, content, and context by
describing the different types of technology integration knowledge teachers needed (Angeli &
Valanides 2009; Mishra & Koehler 2006). TPACK ‘connects technology to curriculum content

234
and specific pedagogical approaches, and describes how teachers’ understandings of these
three knowledge bases can interact with one another to produce effective discipline-based
teaching with educational technologies (Shin et al., 2009). Niess (2008) defines TPACK as the
“body of knowledge that teachers now need for teaching with and about technology in their
assigned subject areas and grade levels” (p. 224).
In teachers’ competency report of Turkish Education Association (TED) published in 2009,
TPACK (p.174) is defined as “having knowledge about curriculum and subject area, the way of
teaching program and relation of the field with other fields, tools and structures, integration of
the content to be taught in technology” and it was stated that both pre-service and in-service
teachers should have this capability. Polly and Brantley-Dias (2009) point out that effective
technology integration is the core of TPACK. Finger et al. (2010) state that “We need to
encourage the implementation of strategies to better prepare future teachers for learning and
teaching in the 21st
century. To achieve this, we believe that we need a better, shared
understanding of TPACK to inform teacher education courses and programs, to measure pre-
service teacher education students’ TPACK capabilities throughout their program of study.”
FATIH (Movement of Enhancing Opportunities and Improving Technology) Project was initiated
by the Ministry of National Education in Turkey in 2010. It is aimed with this project to present
equality of opportunity in education and improve the technology at schools by providing pre-
school, primary and secondary schools with laptops, LCD panels, interactive boards and
internet which are for effective use of ICT tools in courses. However, it is not sufficient to
equip schools with only technology. Integration of technology into learning-teaching process is
a complex process and teachers are required to have certain kinds of qualifications and
proficiencies. Therefore, it is quite important to carry out studies which analyze teacher
education process in the sense of technopedagogical education, and determine perception of
pre-service teachers about technology, views of them about education technologies and
competence level of them about technopedagogical education. The significance of the study
relates to the need for future teachers to have the TPACK capabilities which enable them to
enhance and transform learning and teaching by having the necessary technological,
pedagogical and content knowledge. On the other hand, Voogt & McKenney (2017) imply that
empowering teachers for effective technology integration does not mean that they need to
know the TPACK framework as such but implies that teachers need to understand how to
shape instructional practices in which technological, content and pedagogical knowledge are
embedded.
Depending on this requirement and importance, the aim of the current study is to analyze
competence level of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical education, present the
relation with their technological perception and determine their views about educational
technologies. Toward to this aim, research questions are:
1. What is the competency level of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical
education?
2. What are technological perceptions of pre-service teachers?
3. Do the competence levels and technological perceptions of pre-service teachers
about technopedagogical education differ according to variables of gender, class
level and program being taught?
4. Is there a relationship between competence level of pre-service teachers about
technopedagogical education and their technological perceptions?

235
5. What are the views of pre-service teachers about contributions of educational
technologies to education processes?
6. What are the suggestions of pre-service teachers for improving contributions of
education technologies to education processes?
Methodology
Research Model
In this study, the researchers employed both quantitative and qualitative research approaches
in the data collection and data analysis processes. Two questionnaires were applied for the
quantitative data collection from the pre-service teachers. Open-ended questions were used
for the qualitative data collection from the pre-service teachers. By using different approaches,
the researchers intended to strengthen the validity of the results. As Creswell (2003) defines,
the researcher bases the inquiry on the assumption that collecting diverse types of data best
provides an understanding of a research problem in the mixed method. The study begins with
a broad survey in order to generalize results to a population and then focuses, in a second
phase, on detailed qualitative, open-ended interviews to collect detailed views from the
participants.
Participants
While study group of quantitative dimension of study is composed of 626 pre-service teachers
who were having training in the Faculty of Education at Mersin University; study group of
qualitative extent is composed of 67 pre-service teachers who are also included in quantitative
dimension. Population of the research is comprised of 1778 students and the sample
represents 35% of it. 395 (63%) of pre-service teachers are females while 231 of them (37%)
are males. 150 (24%) of pre-service teachers study at Turkish Language Teaching, 139 (22%) at
Elementary School Teaching, 123 (20%) at Pre-school Teaching, 80 (13%) at English Language
Teaching, 68 (11%) at Science Teaching and 66 (11%) at Mathematics Teaching.
The prospective teachers had the opportunity to take School Experience and Teaching Practice
courses at schools where FATIH project is carried out. In Teaching Practice course, the ones of
4th
grade also experienced microteaching practices which enable them to combine content and
pedagogy in real class environment. Therefore, grade variable was included in analysis as it
was predicted that there would be a difference in competency and perceptions of 4th
grade
pre-service teachers who experienced teaching practice and 3rd
grade ones who did not.
Moreover, the department was involved in the research as an independent variable since each
department has distinct learning and teaching processes and benefits from the technology
differently.
While 150 (82%) of pre-service teachers have a personal computer, 116 (19%) of them do not
have a computer. Frequency and percentage distributions about views of pre-service teachers
about computer programs to be used in their future occupational life and their competency
level are given in Table 1.

236
Table 1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution about Views of Pre-Service Teachers about
Computer Programs to Be Used in Their Future Occupational Life and Their Competency Level
Poor Moderate Good
f % f % f %
Basic terms about computer 24 3,8 271 43,3 331 52,9
Hardware 165 26,4 316 50,5 145 23,2
Operating system 86 13,7 317 50,6 223 35,6
Word processor programs 38 6,1 211 33,7 377 60,2
Calculation table programs 156 24,9 301 48,1 169 27
Presentation programs 27 4,3 180 28,8 419 66,9
When Table 1 is examined, it is seen that, in theme of basic terms on computer, 24 (4%) of pre-
service teachers are at poor level, 271 (43%) at moderate level and 331 (53%) at good level. In
hardware theme, 165 (26%) of pre-service teachers are at poor level, 316 (51%) at moderate
level and 145 (23%) at good level. In operating system theme, 86 (14%) of pre-service teachers
are at poor level, 317 (51%) at moderate level and 223 (36%) at good level. In word processor
programs theme, 38 (6%) of pre-service teachers are at poor level, 211 (34%) at moderate
level and 377 (60%) at good level. In calculation table programs theme, 156 (25%) of pre-
service teachers are at poor level, 301 (48%) at moderate level and 169 (27%) at good level. In
presentation programs theme, 27 (4%) of pre-service teachers are at poor level, 180 (29%) at
moderate level and 419 (67%) at good level. When the table is analyzed in general, it can be
said that the field in which pre-service teachers regard themselves competent at good level is
presentation programs, the field in which they regard themselves weak is hardware.
Data Collection
Technopedagogical Education Competency (TPACK-Deep) Scale which was developed by
Kabakci Yurdakul et al. (2012) is comprised of 33 items using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging
from “strongly disagree=1 to strongly agree=5. Cronbach alpha coefficient of the scale is 0.95.
In this study, Cronbach alpha coefficient was found 0.96. The lowest score obtained from scale
is 33, the highest score is 165. Depending on scores obtained from highest and lowest 27% of
groups, if the total scale score of the participant is ≤95, technopedagogical competency of the
participant is considered to be at low level; if between 95 and 130, at a moderate level; and if
more than 130, at an advanced level.
Technology Perception Scale: Technology Perception Scale, which was developed by Tinmaz
(2004), is a 5-point Likert-type scale with 28 items. According to validity and reliability study
carried out by Tinmaz (2004), internal consistency coefficient of the whole scale is 0.86.
Cronbach alpha coefficient was found to be 0.93 in this study.
Open-Ended Question Form: There are two open-ended questions in the form which was
developed by the researchers. These were; “Explain the effect of instructional technology on
your education throughout Faculty of Education” and “What are your suggestions to improve
contributions of instructional technologies to the education of pre-service teachers?” Open-
ended question form was presented to 5 academicians who are experts in the field of
curriculum and instruction. Experts evaluated data collection tool in the sense of fitness for

237
purpose, comprehensibility of the instructions, content and way of answering. Necessary
revisions were made based on the feedback obtained from the field experts.
Data Analysis
Within the general aim of study, SPSS (Statistical Packet for Social Sciences) program was used
for statistical analysis of survey forms, demographic variables were interpreted with frequency
(f) and percentage (%) methods which are of descriptive statistics. Competency level of pre-
service teachers about technopedagogical education and technological perception were
interpreted through mean (M), standard deviation (SD), minimum (min) and maximum (max)
scores. t-test was used to determine the relationship between gender and class of pre-service
teachers and technopedogogical competence level and their technological perception; one-
way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether it differs according to
department. Pearson correlation analysis was done to determine the level of relationship
between competence level of pre-service teachers about technopedogogical education and
their technological perception.
Participants who compose study group in analysis of qualitative data were stated with capital
letters of “pre-service teacher” and their sequence number (eg: PT1, PT2, PT3); in the analysis
of data, content analysis was used which is one of qualitative data analyses. The main purpose
in the content analysis is to assess terms and relationships that would explain collected data.
The process carried out in content analysis is to gather similar data within the frame of specific
terms and themes, to arrange and interpret them in a way that reader would understand
(Yildirim & Simsek, 2008, p.227).
Data obtained from open-ended question form was analyzed in four stages which are (1)
codification of data, (2) finding themes, (3) arrangement of codes and themes and (4)
identification and interpretation of findings (Yildirim & Simsek, 2008, p.228). Answers given to
open-ended survey questions by pre-service teachers were coded and arranged separately by
both researchers. Coded data were analyzed and grouped according to their difference and
similarity, codes which are related with each other were gathered and they formed the
themes. In this process, codes which have agreement and disagreement were calculated
according to Miles and Huberman (1994) reliability formula. Agreement percentages were 0.85
for the first question and 0.83 for the second question. According to Miles Huberman formula,
if the percentage is greater than 0.70, it means that there is an agreement between views of
both researchers in the codification and the codification process is reliable. According to values
obtained as a result of practice of formula for both questions, codifications are reliable.
Findings
The first sub-problem of the study was stated as “What is the competency level of pre-service
teachers about technopedogogical education?” In order to find an answer for this question;
mean (M), standard deviation (SD), minimum (min) score and maximum (max) scores were
calculated, and the results were presented in Table 2.

238
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Service Teachers about Scores Obtained From
Technopedagogical Education Competency (Tpack-Deep) Scale
When descriptive statistics in Table 2 are analyzed; it is seen that the highest score of pre-
service teachers is 165, the lowest score is M=49 and the mean score is M=129. When it is
thought that getting score of M=130 and below in the scale refers to moderate level in
technopedagogical education competency, it can be said that pre-service teachers regard
themselves at a moderate level. Considering gender, it can be said that competency level of
male pre-service teachers is at advanced level while that of female pre-service teachers is at
moderate level. It is seen in terms of class variable that mean scores of pre-service teachers
are so close to each other. Regarding departments variable; it is seen that English Language
Teaching Department has the highest mean and Mathematics Teaching Department has the
lowest mean.
The second sub-problem of the study was stated as “How is technological perception of pre-
service teachers?” In order to seek answer for this question; mean (M), standard deviation
(SD), minimum (min) score and maximum (max) score were calculated and results were
presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Service Teachers about Scores Obtained From Technology
Perception Scale
When descriptive statistics in Table 3 are analyzed, it is seen that the highest score of pre-
service teachers is 140 and the mean score is M=111,78. Considering gender, it can be said
n M SD Min Max
The whole group 626 129 17,73 49 165
Gender Male 231 130,51 19,03 49 165
Female 395 128,76 16,92 59,87 165
Class
3. class 300 129,33 16,08 72 165
4. class 326 129,47 19,16 49 65
Department
Turkish Teac. 150 127,43 18 58 65
Elt. School Teach. 139 128,39 16,97 90 165
Pre-school Teac. 123 128,02 19,94 59,87 165
English Teach. 80 139,40 14,05 105 165
Science Teach. 68 129,47 18,22 49 165
Math. Teach. 66 126,38 13,96 90 165
n M SD Min Max
The Whole Group 626 111,78 14,44 42 140
Gender Male 231 112,65 15,25 42 140
Female 395 111,27 13,94 42 140
Class 3. class 300 112,49 13,58 42 140
4. class 326 111,12 15,18 42 140
Department
Turkish Teach. 150 109,45 15,97 42 140
School Teach. 139 111,44 12,97 58 140
Pre-school Teach. 123 112,14 15,96 60 140
English Teach. 80 120,40 9,27 99 140
Science Teach. 68 111,30 13,96 56 140
Math.Teach. 66 107,15 12,39 66 136

239
that the mean of male pre-service teachers (M=112,65) and female pre-service teachers
(M=111,27) are very close to each other. According to class variable; mean scores of pre-
service teachers who have education at 3rd
class (M=112,49) and 4th
class (M=111,12) are very
close to each other. Regarding departments; it is seen that English Language Teaching
Department has the highest mean (M=120,40) and Mathematics Teaching Department has the
lowest mean (M=107,15).
The third sub-problem of study was stated as “Do the competence levels and technological
perceptions of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical education differ according to
variables of gender, class level, program being taught?” In order to seek answer for this
question; independent samples t-test was used to determine whether competence level of
pre-service teachers on technopedogogical education and perception scores on technology
differ according to gender and class level variables; one-way ANOVA statistics was used in
order to determine whether they differ according to program being taught. The results are
presented in Table 4 and 5.
Table 4. Independent Samples t-Test Results
Gender n M ss SD t p
Competence
about Techno-
pedagogical
Education
Male 231 130,51 19,03
624 1,19 0,233
Female 395 128,76 16,9
Class Level n Mean ss SD t p
3. Class 300 129,33 16,08
624 0,10 0,917
4. Class 326 129,47 19,16
Perception about
Technology
Gender n Mean ss SD t p
Male 231 112,65 15,25
624 1,15 0,259
Female 395 111,27 13,94
Class Level n Mean ss SD t p
3. Class 300 112,49 13,58
624 1,19 0,235
4. Class 326 111,12 15,18
According to the analyses in Table 4, it is seen that there is no significant difference between
the means of competence level index of pre-service teachers about technopedogogical
education in terms of gender (ttpack=1,19; p>0.05) and class level (ttpack=0,10; p>0.05 ). When
descriptive statistics are analyzed with regard to their perception about technology, there is no
significant difference between means of perception index of pre-service teachers about
technology according to gender (ttpack=1,15; p>0.05) and class level (ttpack=0,19; p>0.05 ).
Table 5. ANOVA Results about Pre-Service Teachers’ Score Means of Competency Level about
Technological Education According to Variable of Program Being Taught
Competence
about
Techno
pedagogical
Education
Source of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
SD Mean of
Squares
F p Differences
Intergroup 9559,057 5 1911,811
6,334 0.000
Eng.T>T.T;
M.T.; S.T;
P-S.T.; Sci.T.
Intragroup 187121,914 620 301,810
Total 196680,71 625
Department
Means
English
Teaching
Turkish
Teaching
Elementary
Math. Teach.
School
Teaching
Preschool
Teach.
Science
Teaching
139,40 127,43 126,38 128,39 128,02 129,47

240
Perception
about
Technology
Resource of
Variance
Sum of
Squares
SD Mean of
Squares
F P Differences
Intergroup 8230,603 5 1646,121
8,353 0.000
Eng.T>T.T;
M.T.; S.T;
P-S.T.; S.T.
Intragroup 122185,240 620 197,073
Total 130415,842 625
Department
Means
English
Teaching
Turkish
Teaching
Elementary
Math. Teach.
School
Teaching
Preschool
Teach.
Science
Teaching
120,40 109,45 107,15 111,44 112,14 111,30
Considering the analyses in Table 5, it is seen that there is a significant difference between
mean scores of pre-service teachers’ competency level about technopedagogical education
according to department variable (F(5-620) =6,334, p.01). In other words, pre-service teachers’
competency level about technopedogogical education differs significantly according to their
departments. According to the results of Scheffe test which was carried out to determine
between which departments there are differences, it was found that competency level
(M=139,40) of pre-service teachers who continue their education at English Language Teaching
Department is higher than those who receive education at Turkish Language Teaching
(M=127,43), Elementary Mathematics Teaching (M=126,38), Elementary School Teaching
(M=128,39), Preschool Teaching (M= 128,02) and Science Teaching (M=129,47) departments.
Regarding the analyses in Table 5, it is seen that there is significant difference between mean
scores of pre-service teachers’ perception about technology according to department variable
(F(5-620) =8,353, p.01). In other words, pre-service teachers’ perception about technology
differs significantly according to their departments. According to the results of Scheffe test
which was carried out to determine between which departments there are differences, it was
found that competency level (M=120,40) of pre-service teachers who have education at
English Language Teaching Department is higher than those who receive education at Turkish
Language Teaching (M=109,45), Elementary Mathematics Teaching (M=107,15), Elementary
School Teaching (M=111,44), Preschool Teaching (M= 112,14) and Science Teaching
(M=111,30) departments.
The fourth sub-problem of the study is stated as “Is there a relation between competence level
of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical education and their technological
perceptions?” In order to seek answer for this question, the relationship between competence
level of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical education and their technological
perceptions was analyzed with Pearson Correlation coefficient and the findings are presented
in Table 6.
Table 6. Pearson Correlation Coefficient between Competence Level of Pre-Service Teachers
about Technopedagogical Education and Their Technological Perceptions
r p
Competence about Technopedogogical Education
,584 ,000
Perception about Technology
Taking the analyses in Table 6 into account, it is seen that there is a significant relation in
positive direction between competence level of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical
education and their technological perceptions (r=0.584, p<0.01). According to this, it can be
said that as competence level of pre-service teachers about technopedagogical education
increases, so does their perception about technology.

241
The fifth sub-problem of the study is stated as “What are the views of pre-service teachers
about contributions of educational technologies to education processes?” In order to seek
answer for this question, answers of pre-service teachers given for open-ended questions were
analyzed with content analysis.
When descriptive analyses are examined, it is seen that answers of pre-service teachers gather
under four main themes which are contribution to educational status, contribution to
occupational improvement, contribution to active use of technology and no contribution. For
pre-service teachers, the most common points about contribution of educational technologies
to education processes are preparing information-communication technologies (ICT)-based
presentations (f=12) and developing technology-based materials (f=7) in the sense of
education status, raising awareness about importance of educational technology use in
learning-teaching process (f=13), having information about department (f=4), developing
activities based on in-class visuals (4) in terms of contribution to occupational development,
using practices based on information-communication technologies (f=23) and developing skill
of using technology (f=6) in the sense of effective use of technology. For this question, some of
the pre-service teachers stated their views as that educational technologies have no
contribution to education processes (f=7) and few teachers stated that technology is not used
satisfactorily (f=2). Some of the pre-service teachers’ views about this question are as such:
“I think it enables me to be raised as more qualified teacher. Computer-based education
especially in mathematics teaching would enable both teachers to be more efficient in the
field and students to receive better education.” (PT2)
“In my occupation as a teacher, I will be able to make use of technology (educational
technologies) to provide more efficient learning in shorter time for students. I think
educational technologies will be beneficial first of all for this reason. Throughout my
education, I could use educational technologies effectively while making homework and
preparing projects. In the presentation I have made contribution by using educational
listening, postcards, and PowerPoint presentations.” (PT31)
The sixth sub-problem of study is stated as “What are the suggestions of pre-service teachers
for improving contributions of education technologies to education processes?” In order to
seek answer for this question, answers of pre-service teachers given for open-ended questions
were analyzed with content analysis.
When descriptive statistics are taken into consideration, it is seen that the answers of pre-
service teachers gather under two themes, namely: enhancement of physical infrastructure
and teaching educational technologies. Under the theme of teaching educational technologies,
pre-service teachers stated that educational technologies should be practice-centered (f=14),
more time should be spared for teaching educational technologies (f=11), developments in
educational technologies should be followed more closely (f=5) and technology-based content
in subject fields should be increased (f=4). Under the theme of enhancement of physical
infrastructure, they stated that the number of computers in the university should be increased
(f=5), technological equipment should be increased (f=4) and up-to-date technological
equipment should be used (f=3). The views of some of the teachers for this question are as
such:
“There should be more computer courses. Pre-service teachers can be asked for developing
various projects. The importance of technology can be emphasized through conferences and
seminars.” (PT62)

242
“Pre-service teachers should be given information technology courses from the very
beginning. Teaching period should not be restricted with limited time and the course should
be taught in a permanent way. Practice should be made profoundly.” (PT33)
“I think there should be more space for technological software and hardware use within the
content of courses. Moreover, I believe not being able to exceed standard and common
programs hebetates available potential and tendency. Program usage as taught in the
courses is very superficially explained and students use software without being aware of their
potential power. They cannot show more advanced performance. This is a basic problem to
be solved.” (PT32)
Conclusion and Discussion
In this study, pre-service teachers’ who are at the 3rd
and 4th
year of the Faculty of Education,
competency level about technopedogogical education and their technological perception were
analyzed according to gender, department and class; the relationship between competency
level about technopedogogical education and technological perception and the views of pre-
service teachers about education technologies were also analyzed, and the findings were
discussed below. It was concluded that pre-service teachers generally regard themselves at
moderate level in the sense of technopedogogical education competency. Findings of the
study show that pre-service teachers have positive perception towards technology. It can be
said that findings obtained from the study are parallel with the findings in the literature that
pre-service teachers have positive views about the effective use of technology and integrating
technology into their education (Choy, Wong & Gao, 2009; Gulbahar, 2008). In addition,
according to the research that Gill and Dalgarno (2017) conducted in depth with 6 Australian
pre-service teachers, a range of aspects of university preparation including ICT skill and
pedagogy subject, assignments and lecturer modelling also had a clear effect on the growth of
the pre-service teachers’ TPACK.
The findings of the current study show that pre-service teachers’ competency level about
technopedogogical education and their technological perception do not differ according to
gender and department. This result can be interpreted as that gender and class level variables
are not factors that affect technopedogogical educational competency and perception towards
technology. When similar studies in the literature are analyzed, it is seen that there are results
parallel with this study. For example, in the studies carried out by Akgun (2013), Gomleksiz and
Fidan (2011), Kazu and Erten (2011), Kaya, Ozdemir, Emre and Kaya (2011); it was concluded
that web pedagogical content knowledge of pre-service teachers do not differ according to
gender variable. The qualifications expected to be formed within education process are
determined without making any discrimination between students and it is expected that all
the students should have these qualifications similarly. In the process of teacher education, it
is expected that differences such as gender, department and education type etc. should not
affect the qualifications to be attained and pre-service teachers should be graduated with
similar qualifications. This finding obtained as a result of the study is compatible with the
expectations that pre-service teachers should attain self-sufficiency perceptions without any
discrimination. Furthermore, the results of the research Scherer et al. (2017) carried out with
665 pre-service teachers at 18 teacher training institutions in Belgium indicated that the
measure of the technology-dimensions within the TPACK framework is able to capture pre-
service teachers' general TPACK self-beliefs and their specific self-beliefs in technological
knowledge.

243
The findings of this study show that pre-service teachers’ technopedogogical educational
competency and perception towards technology differ significantly on behalf of pre-service
teachers who study at English Language Teaching Department. One of the most important
factors which have positive effect on competency perception about the use of information and
communication technologies for educational purposes is the utilization of these technologies
in course activities. Lawless and Pellegrino stated “technology can make it quicker or easier to
teach the same things in routine ways, or it can make it possible to adopt new and arguably
better approaches to instruction and/or change the content or context of learning.” (2007,
p.581). Courses of English Language Teaching have included contents and materials which
require intensive use of educational technologies for long years. Education activities of this
department necessitate the use of audio-visual materials and the use of technological tools
and provide original context and technological infrastructure for pre-service teachers at this
department by which they would learn technology through practicing and experiencing.
Bhattacherjee and Premkumar (2004) stated that when pre-service teachers have direct
experience with technology, their attitude towards technology and their use of technology
would change. This may be the reason why both technopedogogical education competency
level and technological perception of pre-service teachers who study at English Language
Teaching Department are significantly different from other departments.
The findings of the current study show that there is a positively significant relationship
between pre-service teachers’ technopedogogical educational competency and perception
towards technology. According to the literature, perception about competency is one of the
important extents of technology integration (Ertmer, Conklin & Lewandowski 2001; Finger,
Jamieson-Proctor & Albion 2010). This result is parallel with the result of research carried out
by Chen (2010) which shows that pre-service teachers’ self-sufficiency about technology has a
very powerful effect on technology use. This finding also matches up with the result of another
study which states that increase of pre-service teachers’ technological knowledge and skill also
enhances their self-sufficiency about technology integration (Lambert & Gong, 2010). Ertmer
et al. state that if teachers do not believe that they can integrate technology, they may not use
it at all.
According to the results of qualitative analysis of the study, pre-service teachers think that
educational technologies have contributions to preparing ICT-based presentations, developing
technology-based materials, preparing homework, doing research, raising awareness about
importance of educational technology use in the learning and teaching process, acquiring
information about their department, developing personal skill of using technology based on
information-communication technologies and having a positive attitude toward technology in
general. Very few of the pre-service teachers think that it has no contribution to education
process. Pre-service teachers also think that technological equipment should be maximized,
up-to-date technological equipment should be used and teaching of educational technologies
should be practice-based in order to improve contribution of educational technologies to
instructional processes.
Recommendations
In light of findings of the current study, the following suggestions have been provided for the
practitioners and researchers:

244
For Practitioners
 One of the important steps about integration of information and communication
technologies into teacher education is to provide original context and technological
infrastructure for pre-service teachers where they can learn through practicing and
experiencing. Progress can be achieved about this issue when curriculum of Faculties
of Education is enriched with optional courses that help or would enable pre-service
teachers’ use of technologies based on pedagogy and content knowledge.
 Different courses of teacher training fields can be implemented with technology (IT)
assisted approach.
 In order to teach pre-service teachers how to integrate learning environments to
technology, practice-oriented activities which include instructional design through
technology should be arranged. In this way, pre-service teachers would have more
opportunity about technology use for educational purposes and they would have a
positive attitude towards technopedogogical education and the use of technology in
education.
 It is important to teach courses in each branch about the execution of technology
integration in curriculum of Faculties of Education and to give students instructions
about how to integrate ICT according to subjects in the classroom.
 It must be paid particular attention in this process that academicians should integrate
technology effectively during their courses and be good role-models for prospective
teachers. Training seminars can be conducted for academicians about integrating
technology and current technology through learning environments.
 Computer laboratories should be open to the use of pre-service teachers apart from
courses so that they can use these technologies more frequently.
 In order to construct education environment suitable to technology use in education,
the number of students in classes should be reduced from 40-50s to 20s, laboratory
and material deficiencies should be overcome, and special classrooms should be
designed according to the quality of courses.
 Projects can be developed by which pre-service teachers can make peer-learning
about current technologies and have information from each other.
 Technology consulting center can be founded in Faculties of Education in order to
provide pre-service teachers with consulting service.
For Researchers
 It is thought that further research should be done in which different variables that
are thought to be effective in perception about technology and technopedogogical
education competency are involved and experimental designs are arranged about
observation of learning-teaching processes.
 Mixed and longitudinal methods may be employed to examine the technological
perceptions of the pre-service teachers.
 Comparative studies may be conducted between the countries which have better
rankings in PISA assessments to identify the effectiveness of technology in teacher
training.

245
References
Angeli, C. & Valanides, N. (2005). Pre-service elementary teachers as information and
communication technology designers: an instructional systems design model based on
an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning, 21(4), 292-302.
Angeli, C. (2005). Transforming a teacher education method course through technology:
effects on pre-service teachers' technology competency. Computers and Education,
45(4), 383-398.
Akgun, F. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ web pedagogical content knowledge and relationship
between teachers’ perception of self-efficacy. Trakya University Journal of Education
3(1), 48-58.
Bhattacherjee, A. & Premkumar, G. (2004). Understanding changes in belief and attitude
toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS
Quarterly, 28(2) 229-254.
Bingimlas, K. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning
environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science &
Technology Education, 5(3), 235-245.
Chai, C.S., Koh, J. H., & Tsai, C. (2011). Exploring the factor structure of the constructs of
technological, pedagogical, content knowledge (TPAC). The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, 20(3), 595-603.
Chen, R. (2010). Investigating models for pre-service teachers’ use of technology to support
student-centered learning. Computers and Education, 55(1), 32-42.
Chen, F., Looi, C., & Chen, W. (2009). Integrating technology in the classroom: A visual
conceptualization of teachers’ knowledge, goals and beliefs. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 25(5), 470-488.
Choy, D., Wong, A.F.L., & Gao, P. (2009). Student teachers’ intentions and actions on
integrating technology into their classrooms during student teaching: A Singapore study.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 175-195.
Cuban, L. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining
an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davis, K.S. & Falba, C.J. (2002). Integrating technology in elementary pre-service teacher
education: orchestrating scientific inquiry in meaningful ways. Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 13(4), 303-329.
Dawson, K., Pringle, R., & Adams, T.L. (2003). Providing links between technology integration,
methods courses, and school-based field experiences: a curriculum-based and
technology-enhanced microteaching. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 20(1),
41-47.
Dwyer, D.C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J.H. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in
technology rich classrooms. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 45-52.

246
Ertmer, P.A., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers’ beliefs
about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-72.
Ertmer, P.A., Conklin, D., & Lewandowski, J. (2001). Increasing pre-service teachers’ capacity
for technology integration through use of electronic models. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of National Convention of the Association for Educational
Communications and Technology. Atlanta, GA.
Ertmer, P.A. & Otternbreit-Leftwich, A.T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge,
confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect, Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 42(3), 255-284.
Finger, G., Jamieson-Proctor, R., & Albion, P. (2010). Beyond pedagogical content knowledge:
The importance of TPACK for informing pre-service teacher education in Australia. In N.
Reynolds, & M. Turcsanyi-Szabo (Eds.), Key competencies in the knowledge society:
Proceedings of IFIP TC 3 International Conference, Volume 324 (pp.114-125). Berlin,
Germany: Springer.
Gao, P., Choy, D., Wong, A.F.L. & Wu, J. (2009). Developing a better understanding of
technology-based pedagogy. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(5), 714-
730.
Gill, L. & Dalgarno, B. (2017). A qualitative analysis of pre-service primary school teachers’
TPACK development over the four years of their teacher preparation programme.
Technology, Pedagogy and Education, (Online), 1-18, doi:10.1080/1475939X.2017.
1287124.
Gomleksiz, M. N. & Fidan, E. K. (2011). Self-efficacy perception levels of prospective teachers’
enrolled at pedagogical formation course toward web pedagogical content knowledge.
Turkish Studies-International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of
Turkish or Turkic, 6(4), 593-620.
Goktas, Y., Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of ICT
integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Educational Technology &
Society, 12(1), 193-204.
Gulbahar, Y. (2008). Improving the technology integration skills of prospective teachers
through practice: A case study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology,
7(4), 71-81.
Harris, J., Mishra, P., & 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.
Hew, K. & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current
knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252.
Honan, E. (2008). Barriers to teachers using digital texts in literacy classrooms. Literacy, 42(1),
36-43.
Hutchison, A. & Reinking, D. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of integrating information and
communication technologies into literacy instruction: a national survey in the United
States. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(84), 312-333.

247
Jordan, K. (2013). The influence of gender on beginning teachers’ perceptions of their
technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Australian Educational
Computing, 28(2), 32-50.
Kabakci Yurdakul, I., Odabasi, H.F., Kilicer, K, Coklar, A.N., Birinci, G., & Kurt, A.A. (2012). The
development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content
knowledge scale. Computers and Education, 58(3), 964-977.
Kaya, Z., Ozdemir, T.Y., Emre, İ., & Kaya, O.N. (2011). Exploring pre-service information
technology teachers’ perception of self-efficacy in web-technological pedagogical
content knowledge. 6th
International Advanced Technologies Symposium (IATS’11),
Elazıg, Turkey.
Kazu, İ. Y. & Erten, P. (2011). The views of elementary pre-service teachers towards web
pedagogical content knowledge. 10th
National Elementary Teaching Education
Symposium. Cumhuriyet University, Sivas, Turkey.
Kurt, S. (2012). Examining teachers’ use of computer-based technologies: A case study.
Education and Information Technologies, 18(4), 557-570.
Lambert, J. & Gong, Y. (2010). 21st century paradigms for pre-service teacher technology
preparation. Computers in the Schools, 27(1), 54-70.
Lawless, K.A, & Pellegrino, J.W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology in
to teaching and learning: knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and
answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575-614.
Lim, C.P. & Khine, M. (2006). Managing teachers' barriers to ICT integration in Singapore
schools. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 97-125.
Lim, C.P. (2007). Effective integration of ICT in Singapore schools: Pedagogical and policy
implications. Education Technology Research & Development, 55(1), 83-116.
Liu, Y. & Szabo, Z. (2009). Teachers’ attitudes toward technology integration in schools: A four
year study. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 5-23.
McCannon, M. & Crews, T.B. (2000). Assessing the technology needs of elementary school
teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 11-121.
McClure, R. (2011). The digital information divide. In S. D’Agustino (Ed.), Adaptation, resistance
and access to instructional Technologies: Assessing future trends in education. Hershey,
PA: IGI Global Information Science Reference.
Miles, M.B. & Hubermann, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework
for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Niess, M.L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology:
Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 21(5), 509-523.
Niess, M.L. (2008). Guiding pre-service teachers in developing TPCK. In AACTE (Eds.), Handbook
of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp.223-250). New
York: Routledge.

248
Oncu, S., Delialioglu, O. & Brown, C.A. (2008). Critical components for technology integration:
How do instructors make decisions? Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science
Teaching, 27(1), 19-46.
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Glazewski, K.D., Newby, T.J., & Ertmer, P.A. (2010). Teacher value
beliefs associated with using technology: addressing professional and student needs.
Computers and Education, 55(3), 1321-1335.
Polly, D. & Brantley-Dias, L. (2009). TPACK: Where do we go now? TechTrends, 53(5), 46-47.
Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes
and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational
technology. Computers and Education, 54(1), 103-112.
Scherer, R., Tondeur, J. & Siddiq, F. (2017). On the quest for validity: Testing the factor
structure and measurement invariance of the technology-dimensions in the
technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK) model. Computers &
Education, 112, 1-17.
Seferoglu, S.S. & Akbiyik, C. (2005). A study on primary school teachers’ perceived computer
self-efficacy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19, 89-101.
Shin, T.S., Koehler, M.J., Mishra, P., Schmidt, D.A., Baran, E., & Thompson, A.D. (2009).
Changing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through course
experiences. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen, & D. A. Willis (Eds.), Society
for ınformation technology and teacher education (pp.4152-4156). Chesapeake, VA:
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Tinio, V. (2003). ICT in education. ICT for development. New York: United Nations Development
Programme.
Tinmaz, H. (2004). An Assessment of Pre-service Teachers’ Technology Perception in Relation
to Their Subject Area (Unpublished master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University.
The Graduate School of Social Sciences. Ankara, Turkey.
Thompson, A.D., Schmidt, D.A., & Davis, N.E. (2003). Technology collaboratives for
simultaneous renewal in teacher education. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 51(1), 124–128.
TED. (2009). Ogretmen yeterlikleri: Ozet rapor (1. baski). ISBN 978-9944-5128-7-9.
Valanides, N. & Angeli, C. (2008). Learning and teaching about scientific models with a
computer modeling tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 220-233.
Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Ankara:
Seckin.
Zhao, Y. (2007). Social studies teachers’ perspectives of technology integration. Journal of
Technology and Teacher Education, 15(3), 311-333.
Correspondence: Cenk Akay, Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Division
of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, Mersin University, Yenisehir Campus,
Mersin, Turkey.

Ej1148601

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Ej1148601

More from Ornrutai

Recently uploaded

Ej1148601