Research in Social Sciences and Technology TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHING 1 Emin KILINÇ Dumlupınar University, Turkey emin.kilinc@dpu.edu.tr Seray KILINÇ Dumlupınar University, Turkey seraykilinc35@gmail.com Mehmet M. KAYA Dumlupınar University, Turkey mehmet.kaya@dpu.edu.tr Enis H. BAŞER Dumlupınar University, Turkey enisharun.baser@dpu.edu.tr Hafize ER TÜRKÜRESİN Dumlupınar University, Turkey hafize.er@dpu.edu.tr Alper KESTEN Ondokuz Mayıs University, Turkey alperkesten@gmail.com Abstract Technology integration in education is one of the most popular topics in the last decades. Many countries have invested millions of dollars to equip classrooms with technological devices. As well as developed countries, Turkey has conducted several projects to provide technological devices and educational materials to classrooms. Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine teachers’ attitudes toward the use of technology in social studies teaching. Understanding social studies teachers’ attitudes is essential because it is one of the most important constructs of technology integration. The authors applied quantitative survey method and used cluster sampling to choose participants. The sample of the study consisted of 155 social studies teachers who are currently teaching at middle schools. The use of technology in social studies teaching attitude scale was used to collect data. The findings revealed that teachers have positive beliefs and attitudes toward the use of technology. Moreover, teachers who took educational technology and teaching material course and attended in-service training have more positive attitudes than others. Keywords: Technology, social studies, attitude. Introduction Technology has been part of our daily life and also one of the main components of education (Açıkalın & Erdinç, 2005; Banister, 2010; Baytak, Tarman & Ayas, 2011; Cener, Acun & Demirhan, 2015; Evans, Kılınç, Waxman & Houston, 2012; Voogt, Tilya, & Van den 1 Part of this paper has been presented at the annual meeting of International Society for the Social Studies Conference in 2016. mailto:seraykilinc35@gmail.com mailto:mehmet.kaya@dpu.edu.tr mailto:enisharun.baser@dpu.edu.tr mailto:hafize.er@dpu.edu.tr Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 60 Akker, 2009; Yücel, Acun, Tarman & Mete, 2010). Over thirty years, the importance of integrating technology into teaching and learning process has been discussed among educators (Armitage, 1993; Ayas, 2015; Chai & Khine, 2006; Kesten, 2010; Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Lowther, Strahl, Inan, & Ross, 2008; Yiğit, Çengelci, & Karaduman, 2013). Scholars and educators indicated that technology integration improves teaching (Williams, Linn, Ammon, & Gearhart, 2004), facilitates students’ learning (Enriquez, 2010), advances higher order thinking (Fox & Henri, 2005), and allows teachers to create more student-centered classroom environment (Teo, Chai, Hung & Lee, 2008). Because of these expected outcomes, many countries have invested huge amounts of money to increase availability of technology in classrooms (Waxman, Evans, Boriack & Kılınç, 2013). As well as other developed countries, The Republic of Turkey has conducted several projects to equip classroom with new technologies in last decades. For instance, National Ministry of Education provided computer labs and teaching materials to schools in order to improve the quality of education with a project called Basic Education Project, which was completed between 1998 and 2004 (Pouezevara, Dinçer, Kipp & Sarıışık, 2013). Next, The Republic of Turkey designed a project called Movement to Increase Opportunities and Improve Technology (FATIH) to enhance equality of opportunity in education and to improve ICT use in teaching and learning processes in schools. FATIH intends to set up ICT hardware in 40,000 schools and 620,000 classrooms across Turkey. As it seen above, technology has been accepted as a powerful tool that can help bring about transformation in education (Chigona, 2015). However, there are several barriers in front of technology implementation in the field of education. The lack of professional development is one of the most cited reasons for lack of technology implementation (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadık, Sendurur & Sendurur, 2012). Results showed that teachers who attended technology related professional development (in-service training) have positive Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 61 attitudes toward the use of technology in their teaching (NEA, 2008; Gray, Thomas & Lewis, 2010). Also, providing educational technology course for pre-service teachers enables them to learn about technology integration before they start their career (An, Wilder & Lim, 2011). Another reason for lack of technology implementation is teachers’ negative belief and attitudes (anxiety) toward technology. Several studies implied that teachers’ beliefs and attitudes are the one of the most important constructs of technology integration (Andrew, 2007; Kim, Kim, Lee, Spector & DeMeester, 2013). Technology anxiety is defined as an attitude that is applicable to technology in various forms (Biggs & Moore, 1993). It is also defined as a negative emotional state by an individual when he/she uses technology or technology equipment (Bozionelos, 2001). Technology anxiety influences the use of technology in social studies teaching. According to Pajares (1992), in order to understand teaching practices, one must study on teachers’ beliefs and attitudes because it is considered as an indicator of several behaviors in class. Because of technology adoption process are positively correlated with the teacher attitudes (Aldunate & Nussbaum, 2013), examining social studies teachers’ attitudes toward the use of technology in social studies teaching is crucial. The purpose of this study is to investigate teachers’ attitudes toward the use of technology in social studies teaching. Understanding social studies teachers’ attitudes is essential because it is a way to figure out how they integrate technology into their teaching. This paper is a part of project which aims to guide social studies teachers to develop digital teaching materials by training them on how to use technology on the process of teaching and learning and increase the level of educational technology usage in the social studies. In order to achieve these goals, the authors must understand how social studies teachers perceive technology integration into their teaching. Thus, this paper focused on the following research questions: Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 62 Research Questions  To what extend are teachers’ attitude levels about the use of technology in social studies teaching?  Do social studies teachers’ attitudes show significant difference by considering gender?  Do social studies teachers’ attitudes show significant difference by considering taking educational technology and material design course at college?  Do social studies teachers’ attitudes show significant difference by considering attending in-service trainings? Method The authors applied quantitative survey model in this study. In educational context, survey research is used to collect information to learn population groups’ characteristics, opinions, attitudes, or previous experiences (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005). It is also used in education to understand current conditions (Ebel, 1980). Survey research is an eminent method for systematically collecting data from a broad spectrum of individuals and educational settings (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). The authors used survey method to describe current conditions of social studies teachers’ attitudes toward technology integration into their class before they implement their research project about increasing the use of digital teaching materials in social studies teaching. Sample To select participants, the authors used cluster random sampling. Cluster random sampling is sometimes undertaken as an alternative to simple random sampling because it is not possible to select a sample of individuals from a population (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003). Also, using cluster random sampling reduces research cost for a given sample size. In addition Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 63 cluster random sampling requires less time for listing and implementing the survey. The authors first decided to identification of the geographical areas of interest and chose two cities in the west part of Turkey. Then they randomly selected middle schools in these two cities during the 2015-2016 academic year. The sample of the study consisted of 155 social studies teachers who are currently teaching at middle schools. Table 1 shows some demographic information of the participant. Table 1 Demographic Information of the Participants Gender Frequency Percentage Female 82 52,9 Male 73 47,1 Total 155 100 Taking educational technology and material design course Frequency Percentage Yes 68 43,9 No 87 56,1 Total 155 100 Attending in-service training Frequency Percentage Yes 101 65,1 No 54 34,9 Total 155 100 The Survey The use of technology in social studies teaching attitude scale, which was developed by the authors, was used to collect data. The survey was evaluated on a five point Likert scale strongly disagree -1, disagree -2, neither agree nor disagree -3, agree -4, strongly agree -5. The survey consisted of 24 items and three dimensions: beliefs, anxiety, and implementation. The first dimension has 11 items, the second has eight items, and the last one has five items. The general rule of the scale is that the higher score shows more agreement and the lower score shows less agreement with the statement. Table 2 shows interpretation of the scores. Table 2 Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 64 Interpretation of the Scores Dimension Lowest score Highest score Belief 11 55 Anxiety 8 40 Implementation 5 25 The authors calculated Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient of the whole scale and it was found .89. Also the author calculated internal consistency coefficient for each dimension. According to the test results Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficient was found ,94 for belief dimension, .76 for anxiety dimension, and .85 for implementation dimension. Analysis of the Data The authors used descriptive analysis and independent sample t test with α = 0.05 significance level in a statistical package program. Results The following results appeared from the study in order to obtain social studies teachers’ attitude levels about the use of technology in social studies teaching. Findings Related to First Research Question The use of technology in social studies teaching attitude scale was applied to examine teachers’ attitude levels about the use of technology in social studies teaching. Participants’ responses mean and standard deviation of each item have shown in Table 3. Table 3 Mean and Standard Deviation of Participant Responses for Belief Items No Item M Sd 7 Knowing how to use technology supports professional development. 4,19 ,94 6 Teachers need to be informed about the use of technology. 4,18 ,92 Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 65 5 Using technology is an effective way to grab students’ attention. 4,15 ,93 1 Knowing how to use technology is important 4,14 1,02 2 Technology makes easier to realize difficult topic. 4,12 ,92 11 Technology provides easiness to implement social studies activities. 4,11 ,91 9 Technology enables the creation of alternative teaching techniques 4,11 ,94 8 Teaching with computers offers real advantages over traditional method of instruction. 4,09 1,02 10 Using technology makes easier to reach social studies acquisitions. 4,04 1,00 4 Integrating technology into teaching increases student achievement. 4,03 ,97 3 Using technology is waste of time. 1,85 1,01 Table 3 shows that participants have positive attitudes toward items in the belief dimension. The most accepted items are “Knowing how to use technology supports professional development” ( x =4.19), “Teachers need to be informed about the use of technology” ( x =4.18), and “Using technology is an effective way to grab students’ attention” ( x =4.15). On the other hand, social studies teachers did not agree with the item “Using technology is waste of time” ( x =1.85).It can be concluded from the result that social studies teachers want to learn how to implement technology into their teaching and they want to be updated about the use of technology. Also teachers believed that technology is crucial to take students’ attention during teaching-learning process. Moreover, through technology social studies teachers can create alternative teaching techniques. Table 4 Mean and Standard Deviation of Participant Responses for Anxiety Items No Item M Sd 15 I feel confident in using technology. 3.77 .98 17 I am afraid that I might loss all of my technological data.* 3.02 1.21 19 I am concerned about my knowledge about using technology.* 2.92 1.18 13 I am afraid that I might damage technologic devices.* 2.66 1.22 Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 66 18 I am afraid that I cannot communicate with all of my students by using technology.* 2.65 1.17 16 I am afraid that using technology negatively affects the quality of instruction.* 2.60 1.18 14 I hesitate to use technology for fear of making mistakes that I cannot correct.* 2.48 1.12 12 Working with technology makes me nervous.* 2.35 1.21 *Reverse item Table 4 shows participants’ anxiety levels towards using technology while they are teaching. The most agreed items are “I feel confident in using technology” ( x =3.77), “I am afraid that I might loss all of my technological data” ( x =3.02), and “I am concerned about my knowledge about using technology” ( x =2.92). On the other hand, social studies teachers did not agree with the item “Working with technology makes me nervous” ( x =2.35). Examining social studies teachers’ technology anxiety is crucial because it affects their ability to use technology while they are teaching social studies. It can be concluded from participants’ responses that their anxiety level is moderate. Table 5 Mean and Standard Deviation of Participant Responses for Implementation Items No Item M Sd 22 I speak with my colleagues about using technology. 3.95 .87 20 I try to learn new applications related to the use of technology. 3.85 .88 24 I attend workshops related to technology use. 3.85 .90 21 I follow the development related to use technology. 3.81 .93 23 I encourage my colleagues to use technology. 2.80 .91 Table 5 shows that teachers have positive attitudes toward technology implementation into their teaching. The most agreed items are “I speak with my colleagues about using technology” ( x =3.95), “I try to learn new applications related to the use of technology” ( x Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 67 =3.85), and “I attend workshops related to technology use” ( x =3.85). On the other hand, social studies teachers did not agree with the item “I encourage my colleagues to use technology” ( x =2.80). The results showed that social studies teachers speak with their colleagues about how they use technology in social studies. However, they do not encourage each other to use technology in social studies teaching. Findings Related to Second Research Question The authors conducted an independent sample t-test to examine the hypothesis that social studies teachers’ attitudes toward the use of technology in social studies teaching differ by considering gender. The test was not significant for belief dimension (t(153) = 943, p = .347), anxiety dimension (t(153) = 817, p = .415), and implementation dimension (t(153) = .- 718, p = .474). According to this result, it can be concluded that social studies teachers’ attitudes toward the use of technology did not differ by considering their gender. Table 6 T-test Results about Social Studies Teachers Attitudes towards the Use of Technology by Gender Dimension Gender N x Sd Df t p Belief Female 78 46,00 8,98 153 ,943 ,347 Male 67 44,66 8,01 Anxiety Female 78 27,29 4,45 153 ,817 ,415 Male 67 26,65 4,72 Implementation Female 78 19,15 3,68 153 -,718 ,474 Male 67 19,57 3,47 Findings Related to Third Research Question An independent sample t-test was conducted to evaluate the hypothesis that social studies teachers’ attitudes about the use of technology differ by considering taking educational technology and material design course at college while they were student. The test was significant for belief (t(153) = 3.401, p = .001) dimension. Social studies teachers Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 68 who took educational technology and teaching materials course during their college years ( x = 48.07) have more positive attitudes than other teachers who did not take the course ( x = 43.42) on belief dimension. The effect size was calculated as d=.59 and which can be interpreted as moderate (Cohen, 1992). There was no significant difference on anxiety and implementation dimensions. These findings indicated that offering social studies related technology course causes more positive attitudes towards the use of technology in social studies teaching. Table 7 T-Test Results about Social Studies Teachers Attitudes Towards The Use Of Technology By Taking Educational Technology And Teaching Materials Course On College. Dimension Course N x Sd Df t p Belief Yes 68 48,07 5,20 153 3,401 ,001 No 87 43,42 9,87 Anxiety Yes 68 27,55 4,73 153 1,138 ,257 No 87 26,66 4,43 Implementation Yes 68 19,69 3,45 153 1,109 ,269 No 87 19,04 3,66 Findings Related to Fourth Research Question An independent t-test was conducted to examine whether social studies teachers’ attitudes show significant difference by considering attending in-service training. The test was significant for belief dimensions (t(153) = 2.258, p = .025). Social studies teachers who attended in-service training ( x = 47.66) have more positive attitudes than other teachers who did not attend in-service training ( x = 44.33) on belief dimension. The effect size was calculated and found d= .42 which can be interpreted as moderate (Cohen, 1992). There was no significant difference on anxiety and implementation dimensions. Table 8 Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 69 T-Test Results about Social Studies Teachers Attitudes Towards The Use Of Technology By Attending In-Service Training. Dimension In-service Training N x Sd Df t p Belief Yes 101 47,66 6,50 153 2,258 ,025 No 54 44,33 9,13 Anxiety Yes 101 27,21 3,86 153 ,315 ,753 No 54 26,95 4,89 Implementation Yes 101 19,11 3,42 153 -,523 ,602 No 54 19,44 3,66 Conclusion Technology integration into teaching and learning process has been discussed among scholars over the past decades. Huge amounts of money have been invested to provide technological devices and educational materials to schools. Nowadays, almost every middle and high school have interactive white boards. Also, many tablets have been distributed to high school students in Turkey. Through Movement to Increase Opportunities and Improve Technology (FATIH Project), National Ministry of Education have provided interactive white boards tablet computers and Internet network infrastructure to all schools in basic education (Pouezevara, Dinçer, Kipp & Sarıışık, 2013). Examining teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward technology is an essential component of increasing the use of technology in teaching-learning process. In this paper, the authors analyzed social studies teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward the use of technology in social studies teaching. The findings revealed that teachers possess positive beliefs and attitudes toward the use of technology and the participant of the study viewed their own attitudes as facilitating technology integration. The findings of the paper supported previous researches (İpek & Acuner, 2011; Mahoney, 2009) which indicated that teachers have positive attitudes toward technology. The result of the study also showed that the acceptance of technology has been achieved by social studies teachers. Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 70 Another finding of the research showed that teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward the use of technology did not significantly differ by considering gender. It was found in previous studies that teachers attitudes toward the use of technology do not depend on gender (Akkoyunlu & Orhan, 2003; Arslan, 2008; Torkzadeh, Pflughoeft & Hall, 1999). Technology-related professional development is one of the most important component of technology integration (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, & Orphanos, 2009). Also it is crucial to integrate technology based teaching practice course into teacher education program increase the use of technology. Providing teachers and teachers candidate how to use technology such as blogs, map tools, enable teachers to create new teaching practices for their classrooms (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, Sadık, Sendurur & Sendurur, 2012). The result of the study revealed that teachers who took educational technology and teaching material course and attended in-service training possess more positive attitudes than others. These findings supported previous research that indicated similar results (Kutluca & Ekici, 2010; Usluel, Mumcu, & Demiraslan, 2007). Nurturing preservice social studies teachers with technology skills, providing more technology related in service training, and enlarging it for all social studies teachers will increase the use of technology to prepare students to the future. In brief, these results revealed that social studies teachers need several workshops which show them how to integrate technology into social studies teaching. These workshops should be specific and more social studies acquisitions oriented. Also, providing more social studies oriented technology workshops will increase teachers’ beliefs and attitudes toward the use of technology in their teaching process and reduce teachers’ technology anxiety level. Acknowledgments The present study was based on a part of a scientific research project funded by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) – number 114K675 – Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 71 called “The Effects of Technology Supported Social Studies Education Program (TSSSEP) on the level of Social Studies Teachers’ Digital Instructional Materials Development and Educational Technology Using Skills”. We also thank Erhan Delen for his valuable contribution to creating data collection tool. References Açıkalın, M., & Erdinç, D. (2005). The use of computer technologies in the social studies classroom. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), 18-27. Akkoyunlu, B. & Orhan, F. (2003). Bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri eğitimi (BOTE) bölümü öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar kullanma öz yeterlik inancı ile demografik özellikleri arasındaki ilişki. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2 (3), 86-93. Aldunate, R., & Nussbaum, M. (2013). Teacher adoption of technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 519-524. An, H., Wilder, H. & Lim, K. (2011). Preparing elementary pre-service teachers from a non- traditional student population to teach with technology. Computers in the Schools, 28(2), 170-193. Andrew, L. (2007). Comparison of teacher educators’ instructional methods with the constructivist ideal. The Teacher Educator, 42(3), 157–184. Armitage, D. (1993). Where are the girls? Increasing female participation in computer, math, and science education. In D. Carey, R. Carey, D.A. Willis, & J. Willis (Eds.), Technology and teacher education annual. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 72 Technology and Technology Education (pp. 14–18). Charlottesville, VA: Association for Advancement of Computing in Education. Arslan, A. (2008). Öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar destekli eğitim yapmaya yönelik tutumları ile öz-yeterlik algıları arasındaki ilişki. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7 (24), 101– 109. Ayas, C. (2015). The role of media in geography courses from the perspective of preservice social studies teachers. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 6(1), 172-189. Banister, S. (2010). Integrating the iPod Touch in K-12 education: Visions and vices. Computers in the Schools, 27(2), 121–131. Baytak, A., Tarman, B., & Ayas, C. (2011). Experiencing technology integration in education: children's perceptions. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 3(2), 139. Biggs, J.B., & Moore, P. J. (1993). The process of learning. Melbourne: Prentice Hall. Bozionelos, N. (2001). The relationship of instrumental and expressive traits with computer anxiety, Personality and Individual Differences, 31(6), 955–974. Cener, E., Acun, İ., & Demirhan, G. (2015). The impact of ICT on pupil’s achievement and attitudes in social studies. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 6(1), 190-207. Chai, C.S., & Khine, M.S. (2006). Understanding ICT integration in schools. In M.S. Khine (Ed.), Teaching with technology: Strategies for engaging learners (pp. 49–62). Singapore: Prentice Hall. Chigona, A. (2015) Pedagogical shift in the twenty-first century: Preparing teachers to teach with new technologies. Africa Education Review, 12(3), 478-492. Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 73 Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. Darling-Hammond, L.,Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (February, 2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. National Staff Development Council. http://www.nsdc.org/news/NSDCstudy2009.pdf. Ebel, R. L. (1980). Survey research in education: The need and the value. Peabody Journal of Education, 57(2), 126-134. Enriquez, A. G. (2010). Enhancing student performance using Tablet computers. College Teaching, 58(3), 77–84. 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(2), 423-435. Evans, R. T., Kilinc, E., Waxman, H. C., & Houston, W. R. (2012, March). Investigating the Availability and Use of Technology in Urban Middle School Classrooms. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2012, No. 1, pp. 1767-1772). Fox, R., & Henri, J. (2005). Understanding Teacher mindsets: IT and change in Hong Kong schools. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 8(2), 161–169. Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ use of educational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 74 İpek, C., & Acuner, H. Y. (2011). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilgisayar öz-yeterlik inançları ve eğitim teknolojilerine yönelik tutumları. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(2), 23-40. Kesten, A. (2010). Computer technology in education and issues of power and equity. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 1(1), 88-106. Kim, C., Kim, M. K., Lee, C., Spector, J. M., & DeMeester, K. (2013). Teacher beliefs and technology integration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 76-85. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Kutluca, T., & Ekici, G. (2010). Öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar destekli eğitime ilişkin tutum ve öz-yeterlik algılarının incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 38, 177-188. Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lowther, D., Strahl, J. D., Inan, F. A., & Ross, S. M. (2008). Does technology integration “work” when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45, 195–213. Mahoney, M. P. (2009). Students’ attitudes toward stem: Development of an instrument for high school stem-based programs. The Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 24-34. National Education Association. (2008). Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access, adequacy, and equity. Policy Brief # 19. Washington DC: NEA Policy and Practice Department. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 75 Pouezevara, S., Dinçer, A., Kipp, S., & Sarışık, Y. (2013). Turkey's FATIH project: A plan to conquer the digital divide or a technological leap of faith. Turkey: RTI International & Education Reform Initiative (ERI). Teo, T., Chai, C. S., Hung, D. & Lee, C. B. (2008) Beliefs about teaching and uses of technology among pre‐service teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 163-174. Torkzadeh, R., Pflughoeft, K. & Hall, L. (1999). Computer self-efficacy, training effectiveness and user attitudes: An empirical study. Behavior & Information Technology, 18 (4). 299–309. Usluel, Y. K., Mumcu, F. K., & Demiraslan, Y. (2007). Öğrenme-öğretme sürecinde bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri: Öğretmenlerin entegrasyon süreci ve engelleriyle ilgili görüşleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 164-178. Voogt, J., Tilya, F., & van den Akker, J. (2009). Science teacher learning for MBL-supported student-centered science education in the context of secondary education in Tanzania. Journal of Science and Education and Technology, 18, 419-428. Waxman, H. C., Evans, R. T., Boriack, A. W., & Kılınç, E. (2013). Systematic observations of the availability and use of instructional technology in urban middle school classrooms. Journal of Contemporary Research in Education, 1(3), 104-114. Williams, M., Linn, M. C., Ammon, P., & Gearhart, M. (2004). Learning to teach inquiry science in a technology-based environment: a case study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 189-206. Kılınç, Kılınç, Kaya, Başer, Er Türküresin, & Kesten Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(1) 59-76 76 Yücel, C., Acun, İ., Tarman, B., & Tugba, M. (2010). A Model to Explore Turkish Teachers' ICT Integration Stages. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 1- 9. Yiğit, E. Ö., Çengelci, T., & Karaduman, H. (2013). Pre-service social studies teachers’ views about reflection of technology on values. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 4(1), 73-96.