Main Article Content
FATIH Project is regarded as one of the most inclusive ICT integration attempts in the history of Turkish education. This nation-wide project entails equipping each classroom with an interactive whiteboard and supplying each student with a Tablet PC. The in-service teacher training courses are by far the most crucial component of the project as teachers are the end-users of those facilities in classrooms. Despite the abundance of studies on the opinions and attitudes of teachers towards the use of ICT technologies in general, to our knowledge, there exists no research study which specifically investigates whether the views and in-service training needs of teachers differ according to their distinct subject areas. With this in mind, this qualitative study aims to explore the perceptions and needs of 35 Turkish in-service teachers from different branches about in-service training courses within the scope of FATIH project. The study adopted a case study design. The research site and participants were selected purposefully. The data were mainly collected through questionnaires, and the accuracy of these data was validated through semi-structured interviews conducted with 30% of the participants. The collected data were analysed through the content analysis method. The study findings revealed a good deal of research evidence on the divergent training needs of teachers from various subject areas. Thus, it suggested that in-service training courses should be planned and organised as branch-specific.
Keywords: FATIH project, information and communication technologies (ICT), in-service teacher training, integration of ICT into education, interactive whiteboard (IWB)
Authors retain copyright to their work, licensing it under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License and grant the journal exclusive right of first publication with the work simultaneously and it allows others to copy and redistribute the work for non-commercial purposes, with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in IOJET and provided that no changes were made on the article.
Adıgüzel, T., Gürbulak, N., & Sarıçayır, H. (2011). Smart boards and their instructional uses. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(15), 457-471.
Akcaoglu, M., Gumus, S., Bellibas, M. S., & Boyer, D. M. (2015). Policy, practice, and reality: Exploring a nation-wide technology implementation into Turkish schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(4), 477-491.
Alkan, T., Bilici, A., Akdur, T. E., Temizhan, O., & Cicek, H. (2011). Increasing opportunities improving technology movement (FATIH) project. In Z. Genc (Ed.), Proceedings of 5th international computer & instructional technologies symposium (pp. 370–375). Elazig, Turkey: Firat University.
Altın, H. M., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2015). Fatih Projesi ile ilgili Öğrenci ve Öğretmen Görüşleri. Başkent University Journal of Education, 2(1), 91-108.
Bacon, D. (2011). The interactive whiteboard as a force for pedagogic change. Information Technology in Education Journal, 15, 18.
BECTA. (2003). What the research says about interactive whiteboards. Retrieved April 12, 2010, from http://partners.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/wtrs_whiteboards.pdf
Cheng, Y. C. (2009). Hong Kong educational reforms in the last decade: Reform syndrome and new developments. The International Journal of Educational Management, 23(1), 65-86.
Chow, A. S. (2013). One educational technology colleague's journey from dotcom leadership to university e-learning systems leadership: merging design principles, systemic change and leadership thinking. TechTrends, 57(5), 64-73.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education
Çiftçi, S., Taşkaya, S. M., & Alemdar, M. (2013). The opinions of classroom teachers about Fatih Project. Elementary Education Online, 12(1), 227-240.
Drexler, W., Baralt, A., & Dawson, K. (2008). The teach web 2.0 consortium: A tool to promote educational social networking and web 2.0 use among educators. Educational Media International, 45(4), 271-283.
Dursun, Ö. Ö., Kuzu, A., Kurt, A. A., Güllüpınar, F., & Gültekin, M. (2013). Okul yöneticilerinin FATİH Projesinin pilot uygulama sürecine ilişkin görüşleri. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(1), 100-113.
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.
Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. London: Continuum.
Glover, D., & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: The pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(3), 257-276.
Gök, A., & Yıldırım, Z. (2015). Investigation of FATİH project within the scope of teachers, school administrators and YEGITEK administrators’ opinions: A multiple case study. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 11(2), 487-504.
Gur, B., Ozoglu, M., & Baser, T. (2010). Okullarda bilgisayar teknolojisi kullanımı ve karsilasilan sorunlar [Usage of ICT in schools and problems faced]. In 9. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Eğitimi Sempozyumu [9th National Teacher Education Symposium] (pp. 1–48). Elazig, Turkey.
Güngör, S. K., & Yıldırım, Y. (2015). The views of information technologies guide teachers on Fatih Project. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 40, 45-58.
Kurt, A. A., Kuzu, A., Dursun, Ö. Ö., Güllepınar, F., & Gültekin, M. (2013). FATİH projesinin pilot uygulama sürecinin değerlendirilmesi: Öğretmen görüşleri. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 1(2), 1-23.
Leu, E., & Ginsburg, M. (2011). First principles compendium: Designing effective education programs for in-service teacher professional development. Washington, DC: EQUIP1 and American Institutes for Research. Retrieved May 23, 2016 from http://www.equip123.net/docs/E1-FP_In-Svc_TPD_Compendium.pdf
Levy, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: A developmental study. Sheffield: Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield.
Makki, B., & Makki, B. (2012). The impact of integration of instructional systems technology into research and educational technology. Creative Education, 3(2), 275-280.
Mathews-Aydinli, J., & Elaziz, F. (2010). Turkish students' and teachers' attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards in EFL classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(3), 235-252.
MEB. (2012). Mili Eğitim Bakanlığı FATİH Projesi - Eğitim Teknolojileri Genel Müdürlüğü. Retrieved from http://fatihprojesi.meb.gov.tr
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014) Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. London: Sage Publications.
Öz, H. (2014). Pre-service English teachers’ perceptions of web-based assessment in a pedagogical content knowledge course. Procedia Social and
Behavioural Sciences, 141, 45-58.
Pamuk, S. (2012). Understanding preservice teachers’ technology use through TPACK framework. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), 425-439.
Pamuk, S., Çakır, R., Ergun, M., Yılmaz, H. B., & Ayaş, C. (2013). The use of tablet PC and interactive board from the perspectives of teachers and students: Evaluation of the FATİH project. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(3), 1815-1822.
Saraç, M. (2015). An explanatory investigation on the Turkish EFL teachers’ TPACK and their attitudes toward the use of interactive whiteboards (M.A. thesis). Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Sarıoğlu, M. & Saraç, M. (2017, May). Perceptions and needs of Turkish in-service teachers from various subject areas about in-service training courses within the context of FATIH project. Paper presented at GlobELT 2017 Conference: An International Conference on Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language, Ephesus, Selçuk, İzmir, Turkey.
Shenton, A., & Pagett, L. (2007). From 'bored' to screen: The use of the interactive whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms. Literacy, 41(3), 129-136.
Slay, H., Siebörger, I., & Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2008). Interactive whiteboards: Real beauty or just "lipstick"? Computers & Education, 51, 1321-1341.
Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of theliterature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91-101.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Teo, T. (2008). Pre-service teachers' attitudes towards computer use: A Singapore survey. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 413-424.
Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Karadağ, E., & Orhan, S. (2015). The factors affecting acceptance and use of interactive whiteboard within the scope of FATIH project: A structural equation model based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Computers & Education, 81, 169-178.
Türel, Y. K. (2011). An interactive whiteboard student survey: Development, validity and reliability. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2441-2450.
Türel, Y. K. (2012). Teachers’ negative attitudes towards interactive whiteboard use: Needs and problems. Elementary Education Online, 11(2), 423-439.
Türel, Y. K., & Johnson, T. E. (2012). Teachers' belief and use of interactive whiteboards for teaching and learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 381-393.
Uslu, O., & Bumen, N. T. (2012). Effects of the professional development program on Turkish teachers: Technology integration along with attitude towards ICT in education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(3), 115-127.
Yıldız, H., Sarıtepeci, M., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2013). FATİH projesi kapsamında düzenlenen hizmet-içi eğitim etkinliklerinin öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimine katkılarının ISTE öğretmen standartları açısından incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 375-392.
Zhao, Y. (Ed.). (2003). What should teachers know about technology?: Perspectives and practices. Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing, Inc.