Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Öğretmenliği Bölümleri Mezunların Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri

Hasan KARAL; KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi; Emine TİMUÇİN

Makale detayları

Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Öğretmenliği Bölümleri Mezunların Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri

Yazarlar:

Hasan KARAL | KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi | Emine TİMUÇİN

Yayıncı:

Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. Şti.

Dergi:

Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 2010 Vol.2 Issue 2, pp.277-299

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

2/2010

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2000735422

Sıklık:

Üç Aylık

pISSN:

1300-4832

Özet:

 

Üçüncüsü Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi tarafından düzenlenen Uluslararası Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Sempozyumunun ikinci günüde, 8 farklı üniversitenin BÖTE Bölüm başkanının konuşmacı olarak katıldığı bir panel gerçekleştirilmiştir. Panelin amacı bu alanda görev yapan akademisyen, öğretmen ve Milli Eğitim yetkililerini bir araya getirmek böylece BÖTE Bölümlerinin ve mezunların sorunlarını tartışmaktır. Bu çalışmanın amacı ise düzenlenen panelde yer alan görüşleri irdelemek, belirlenen sorunları vurgulamak ve bu sorunlar için önerilen çözüm önerilerini paylaşmaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda paneldeki tüm konuşmalar, sorular ve cevaplar yazıya geçirilmiş, her bir konuşmacının değindiği önemli noktalar özetlenmiş ve panel sonundaki sorular ve cevaplar tasnif edilmiştir. Ayrıca tüm bu özetlemeler katılımcıların ifadelerinden alıntılarla zenginleştirilmiştir. Panel sonunda; Bölüm mezunlarının Bilişim Teknolojileri Formatör Öğretmeni olma durumları, BÖTE Bölümlerinde anabilim dallarının olmasının gerekliliği, BÖTE bölümlerinin (mevcut sistemde) Sayısal 2 puanıyla öğrenci almasının ve yeni sistemde düzenlemenin bu doğrultuda yapılması gerekliliği, gibi konular ön plana çıkmıştır. Ayrıca panel sırasında ortaya konulan sorunlar için çeşitli çözüm önerilerinde bulunulmuştur.

 

Background. Departments of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies (CEIT) were established within the restructuring process of Turkish universities in 1998. The aim of these departments is to train teachers who will teach computer courses in primary and secondary schools (YÖK, 1998). The teachers who are graduates of these departments were appointed as Computer Teacher in a school's Computer Teaching position. However, in time computer courses changed into elective Information Technologies (IT) courses, reduced to only one hour per week. Furthermore, this course was not reflected on school report cards. This change negatively affected the approaches of IT teachers towards the course; their attitudes about the course, the activities, methods and techniques they used in the course, etc. The Ministry of National Education issued a circular on the job definition of IT teachers and IT Formator Teachers in 1993. Despite all these job definitions, the expectations from IT teachers and IT Formator Teachers serving in primary schools show variations. In addition, the fact that there is no inconsistency between the education these teachers received at university and the duties they are expected to fulfill negatively affects the attitudes of these teachers towards their professions.     The Third International Computer and Instructional Technologies Symposium was held at Karadeniz Technical University on 7-9 October 2009. A panel about the “CEIT Departments, Problems of CEIT Graduates and Solutions” was held on the second day. The aim of the panel was to convene the representatives of the Ministry of Education, Information Technologies (IT) teachers and Formator Teachers to discuss the problems of CEIT departments and the status of the graduates of these departments; to determine the problems the graduates faced during their careers; to suggest solutions for these problems and to enable that these problems and suggestions reach the attention of related authorities at the Ministry of Education.     Method. The CEIT Heads of Departments explained their views on the status of the CEIT graduates and the problems they observed. After the discussions, the chairman allowed the audience to speak and the audience shared their views about the panel and the symposium. Then they asked questions to the participants about the problems they experience. During the panel two cameras were used to record all discussions. Later, all discussions, questions and answers were written down word by word. After that the most important points raised by the speakers were determined and reorganized with quotations from their own statements. The same procedure was applied to the questions and answers to these questions at the end of the panel.     Results. At the end of the panel, the speakers stated that they were already familiar with the majority of the problems and that within the framework of the problems and suggested solutions to be determined following the panel, they will take necessary steps at the Ministry of Education or Council of Higher Education. Furthermore, the speakers shared their views and made observations about the following issues: The Ministry of Education should clearly define the aims of CEIT departments, the changes that were made or will be made in the CEIT teaching program, various and changing roles undertaken by CEIT graduate teachers in primary schools, responsibilities of IT and IT Formator Teachers, Educator IT Formators and their duties. The Ministry should also address contingent problems of CEIT graduates in their appointment as teachers by the Ministry of Education, elimination of the responsibility of CEIT graduates to train teachers from other branches for integrating technology in their courses, the importance of providing technology integration skills to teachers from other fields, the importance of branching of CEIT departments into major degree granting programs, the advantages of this field for prospective teachers, teaching staff and the Ministry of Education. Furthermore, CEIT departments should accept students according to “Quantitative 2” scores instead of “Quantitative 1” score; doctorate programs should be opened for providing qualified teaching staff for the department. In addition, IT teachers and IT Formator teachers who attended the panel as listeners emphasized that they were expected to fulfill a variety of tasks. Furthermore, IT Formator teachers stated that they graduated as Computer Teachers; however, they were appointed as IT Formator teachers against their will and explained the problems they experienced as a result.     Implications. It was suggested that to solve the problems, the universities and the Ministry of Education should act in concert, they should keep in contact to develop methods for a solution and should cooperate by exchanging views. It was also suggested that the responsibilities of CEIT graduate teachers as IT teachers or IT Formator teachers should be clearly defined. Likewise, appropriate conditions should be set to clearly systematize the appointment of IT Formator teachers, appointment of IT Formator teachers in line with their preferences, elimination of compulsory appointments, acceptance of students to CEIT departments according to “Quantitative 2” scores instead of “Quantitative 1” score, branching CEIT departments into major degree granting programs for more efficient functioning of CEIT departments and adding more majors in the future. Flexibility should be provided to the universities that want to open doctorate programs for training qualified teaching staff for CEIT departments.

Makale detayları

Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Öğretmenliği Bölümleri Mezunların Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri

Yazarlar: Hasan KARAL | KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi | Emine TİMUÇİN

Yayıncı: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. Şti.

Dergi: Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 2010 Vol.2 Issue 2, pp.277-299

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 2/2010

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2000735422

Sıklık: Üç Aylık

pISSN: 1300-4832

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Hasan KARAL | KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi | Emine TİMUÇİN

Yayıncı:

Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. Şti.

Dergi:

Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 2010 Vol.2 Issue 2, pp.277-299

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

2/2010

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2000735422

Sıklık:

Üç Aylık

pISSN:

1300-4832