Development of the Resistance Scale towards Technology Supported Instruction: Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Author :
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to develop a scale to determine the prospective teachers’ resistancetowards technology supported instruction. For this reason, the draft form was applied to 1082prospective teachers being educated at School of Education at a Public University in Mediterraneanregion during 2013-2014 academic year. Exploratory factor analysis based on Varimax rotation hasrevealed the scale has a structure with single factor and five components. The components are calledas “unwilling harmony”, “active resistance”, “complete harmony”, “disproving” and“disregarding”. Reliability parameter of the whole scale has been found as .906; test retest reliabilityparameter has been found as .354 (p<.05). Five components altogether explain 57,136% of the totalvariance. Factor loading distribution differs between .532 and .779. As a result of confirmatory factoranalysis, GFI (.90), CFI (.99), IFI (.99), NFI and NNFI (.98), RMSEA (.057), CFI (.99), AGFI (.88) havebeen calculated and the findings has indicated the harmony between the model and observedstructure. Reliability analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses have indicated thatresistance scale towards technology supported instruction is a valid and reliable measurement tool.
Keywords
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to develop a scale to determine the prospective teachers’ resistancetowards technology supported instruction. For this reason, the draft form was applied to 1082prospective teachers being educated at School of Education at a Public University in Mediterraneanregion during 2013-2014 academic year. Exploratory factor analysis based on Varimax rotation hasrevealed the scale has a structure with single factor and five components. The components are calledas “unwilling harmony”, “active resistance”, “complete harmony”, “disproving” and“disregarding”. Reliability parameter of the whole scale has been found as .906; test retest reliabilityparameter has been found as .354 (p<.05). Five components altogether explain 57,136% of the totalvariance. Factor loading distribution differs between .532 and .779. As a result of confirmatory factoranalysis, GFI (.90), CFI (.99), IFI (.99), NFI and NNFI (.98), RMSEA (.057), CFI (.99), AGFI (.88) havebeen calculated and the findings has indicated the harmony between the model and observedstructure. Reliability analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses have indicated thatresistance scale towards technology supported instruction is a valid and reliable measurement tool.
Keywords
- Abbott, L. (2005). The nature of authentic professional development during curriculum based telecomputing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(4), 379-398.
- Akay, C. (2013). Teknoloji temelli öğretim tasarımları hazırlama ve uygulama ilkeleri. Yanpar Yelken, T., Sancar Tokmak, H., Özgelen, S. ve İncikabı, L. (Ed.) Fen ve matematik eğitiminde teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi temelli öğretim tasarımları, (s.13-34). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
- Alpert, B. (1991). Students' resistance in the classroom. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 22(10), 350-366, doi: 10.1525/aeq.1991.22.4.05x1193w.
- Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D.W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness of fit indices for maximum likelihood comfirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155‐173, doi: 10.1007/BF02294170.
- Bauer, J. & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519-546.
- Bebell, D., Russell, M., & O’Dwyer, L. (2004). Measuring teachers’ technology uses: Why multiple-measures are more revealing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(1), 45–63.
- Burroughs, S. D., Kearney, P. & Plax, T. G. (1989). Compliance resistance in the college students. Communication Education, 38, 214-229.
- Butler, J. W. (2010). Inservice teachers and technology integration: Digital storytelling activities diminish teacher management concerns in the concern’s based adoption model (CRAM). Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, CA, USA, Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32, 470-483.
- Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. London: Continuum,.
- Coakes, S. J. (2005). SPSS: Analysis without Anguish: Version 12.0 for Windows. Melbourne: John Wiley and Sons.
- Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 1019-1031.
- Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813–834.
- Çakır, R. & Yıldırım, S. (2009). Bilgisayar öğretmenleri okullardaki teknoloji entegrasyonu hakkında ne düşünürler? İlköğretim Online, 8(3), 952-964.
- Duyan, V. & Gelbal, S. (2008). Barnett çocuk sevme ölçeği’ni Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(148), 40-48.
- Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology implementation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61, doi:10.1007/BF02299597.
- Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, (53)4, 25-39, doi: 10.1007/BF02504683.
- Ertmer, P. A., Conklin, D., Lewandowski, J., Osika, E., Selo, M. & Wignal, E. (2003). Increasing preservice teachers’ capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models. Teacher Education Querterly, 30(1), 95-112.
- Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E. & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59, 423-435.
- Ferguson, B. (1997). Educational technology: An extended literature review. Retrived from http://www.sdavjr.davis.k12.ut.us/~brian/research/exlitrev.htm.
- Gable, R. K. (1986). Instrument development in the affective domain. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
- Gair, M. (2003). Socrates never took attendance: Hidden curricula in a teacher preparation program. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Arizona State University.
- Giroux, H. A. (2001). Theory and resistance in education. London: Bergin and Garvey.
- Harris, J. B., Mishra, P. & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge: Curriculum based technology integration reframed. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.
- Hennessy, S. Ruthven, K., & Brindley, S. (2005). Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution, and change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 155–192, doi: 10.1080/0022027032000276961.
- Heo, M. (2009). Digital storytelling: An empirical study of the impact of digital storytelling on pre-service teachers’ self efficacy and dispositions towards educational technology. Jl. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 18(4), 405-428.
- 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
- Jacobsen, M. (2001). Building different bridges: Technology integration, engaged student learning and new approaches to professional development. Paper presented at AERA: What We Know and How We Know It, the 82nd Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 10-14 Nisan, Seattle, WA.
- Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Smith, V. R. & Sorensen, G. (1988). Effects of teacher immediacy and strategy type on college student resistance to on-task demands. Communication Education, 40, 325-342.
- Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.
- Lin, C. & Lu, M. (2010). The study of teachers’ task values and self efficacy on their commitment and effectiveness for technology instruction integration. US-China Education Review, 7(5), 1-11.
- Margolis, E. & Romero, M. (1998). The department is very male, very white, very old, and very conservative: the functioning of the hidden curriculum in graduate sociology departments. Harvard Educational Review, 68, 1-32.
- Marsh, H.W. & Hocevar, D. (1988). A new more powerful approach to multitrait multimethod analyses: Application of second order confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73 107-117.
- MEB (2006). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri. http://otmg.meb.gov.tr/YetGenel.html adresinden 27.09.2016 tarihinde ulaşılmıştır.
- Murphy, K. R. & Davidshofer, C. O. (1998). Pschological testing principles and applications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
- Noar, S. M. (2003). The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(4), 622-647.
- Okojie, M. C., & Olinzock, A. (2006). Developing a positive mind-set toward the use of technology for classroom instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(1), 33-41.
- Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 1-6.
- Rosen, L., & Weil, M. M. (1995). Computer availability, computer experience, and technophobia among public school teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 9-31.
- Sancar Tokmak, H., Yanpar Yelken, T., Elmas, N, Hazır, A., Yağmur, P., Altunel, F. & Eker, S. (2012). An investigation about the integration of technology to early childhood teacher education department courses at Mersin University. Uygulamalı Eğitim KongresiAnkara, Türkiye.
- Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., & Zhu, C. (2011). Predicting ICT integration into classroom teaching in Chinese primary schools: Exploring the complex interplay of teacher-related variables. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(2), 160-172.
- Seferoğlu, S. S. & Akbıyık, C. (2005). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin bilgisayara yönelik öz yeterlik algıları üzerine bir çalışma. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 19, 89-101.
- Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, E. S. & Çinko, M. (2010). Sosyal Bilimlerde SPSS’le Veri Analizi. İstanbul: Beta Basım.
- Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
- Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, Allyn & Bacon.
- Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education, 57, 2432-2440, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008.
- Vannatta, R. A., & Fordham, N. (2004). Teacher disposition as predictors of classroom technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 253-271.
- Walsh, W. B. & Betz, N. E. (1995). Tests and assessment. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
- Yüksel, S. (2003). Öğrencilerin öğrenme öğretme sürecine yönelik direnç davranışları. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 235-251.
- Yüksel, S. (2006). The role of hidden curricula on the resistance behavior of undergraduatestudents in psychological counselling and guidance at a Turkish university. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(1), 94107, doi: 10.1007/BF03036788.
- Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. A. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807-840, doi: 10.3102/00028312040004807.