54

EurasianJournalofEducationalResearch,33,pp35/542008

School.A.dıninistrators'Perceptionsoftheir R.oles R.egardinglnforınationTechnologyClassrooıns SadcgülAkbaba-Altun• 1'1elihIJerya (;ürer·· Stıggested C:itatioıt: .Akbaba-Altun, S. &:(;üre~tıı:.IJ.(2008).School adrninisl:rators' perceptionsoftheir roles regardinginforrnationtechnologyclassroorns.EgitiınA.rastinnalari-Eurasian/ournal ofEducationııl Research,33,35-54.

Abstract Probleın Stateınent: it is a \oVell-docurnentedfact that school adrninistrators have a crucial role in the integration of inforrnation and cornınunication technology (IC1") in education and in the effectiveand efficientuse of IC1" for educational purposes. in the Turkish educational systern, school adrninistrators have irnportant roles and duties regarding the integration of inforrnation technology (ff) classroorns (\oVhichare established through the Basic Education Project)for instruction and learning, forthe utilization of the equiprnent in those classroorns, and for the utilizationof those equiprnent in the classes by the cornrnunity. The question arises,ho\oVdo school adrninistrators perceive their O\oVn roles regarding inforrnation technologyclassroorns? J\nd \oVhatinfluencesthoseperceptions? Purpose of the study: This study airned to deterrnine ho\oV the school adrninistrators thernselves perceive their roles regarding inforrnation technology classroorns, and \oVhether school adrninistrators' levels of perception differaccording totheirgender,education,arnountofin-service training in \oVhichthey participate,job experience, and level of cornputer ability. IJata Collection and A.nalysis: IJata \oVascollected through an instrurnent developed bytheresearchers. ;\fterthevalidityand reliabilitystudyofthe instrurnent,the instrurnent \oVassent to ali prirnary school adrninistrators \oVhose schools have iT classroorns in ()rdu province to deterrnine the perceptions of school adrninistratorsof the ()rdu province regarding their roles in iT classroorns. ()f those adrninistrators, 100 cornpleted thc instrurnent and returned it to the researchers. The rnean scores and the standard deviation \-Vere cornputed. To analyze the data, the l'vfann­ \.VhitneylJ-Testand I .05),ernployrnent (lJ=1059.00, p= .64 > .05),education (l1=812, p= .46 > .05),job experience (x2=4.85, p= .30 > .05),arnountof in-servicetraining in '.Vhichthey participated (x2=.16,p= .91 > .05},ortheirperceivedcornputerability(x2=2.14, p= .34 > .05).

48

1 EurasianJournalofEducationa!Research

Conclusion and lJiscussion This study found that the dimensions of the roles of administrators regarding rr classroorns are staffdevelopment, comrnunication, facilitation,maintenance of the infrastructure,ergonomics, supervision, leadership, public relations,monitoring, empo\.Vermen~ and ethics.It 'Nas also found that school administrators' levels of perception regarding their roles in ff classrooms is very high. the cornrnunication and supervision dirnensions 'Nere not reported in the literature.Those dimensions are unique forTurkey. Theperceptionlevelsofschooladministratorsregarding their roles in ffclassroomsarehighestforthemonitoringdimensionand lo\.Vestforpublic relations.Itseems thatschooladrninistratorsaregood atmonitoringbuttheyneed to developpublic relationskillsinorderto useITclassroomseffectively. Itisinteresting thattheleadershiproleissomehoıv inthemiddle. Another resultofthisstudy isthatthere\.Vasnosignificantdifference in themean scores of the peception levels of school administrators based on their gender, position, education, job experience, amount of in-service training in \.Vhichthey participated,or perceived computer ability.IJa\.Vsonand Rakes (2003) collecteddata through the School Technology and Readiness (SfaR) scale and concluded that the technology integration of school administrators did not differ according to their gender and seniorityof administration; ho\.Vever,itdiffered in terms of the amount of in-servicetraining abouttech.nology integration in \.Vhichthey had participated.In our study, \.Vedid not observe any significantdifference in terms of the in-service training.This mightbedueto thequalityand contentofthe in-servicetraining about technologyintegrationand ffclassroomsofferedtoadministratorsandteachers. The CE() forum on education and technology (1999) claims that teachers should participatein training programs, and that these programs should be sustained and supported. School administrators in ()rdu are conscious of their roles regarding the staff development of teachers about the use of ICT in education, and of the perrnanance and support of those training programs. Staff development has been identified in many studies as a key component in the succesful implementation of technology (see Costello, 1997; Niacl'Jeil&: IJelafield,1998; l'v1icheal, 1998; Bailey, 2000; Akbaba-PJtun, 2004). Niacl'Jeiland IJelafield(1998) found that one of the inhibitors of technology implementaion in the classroom is lack of time for professional development and planning. Bailey (2000) claims that one of the 21st century technology leaders' roles is staffdevelopment. NiicheaJ (1998) reports that staffdevelopmentshould becontinuous and individualized. Investrnentin teachers' and staffmembers' computer kno'Nledge and skillsisa \.Vİseinvestrnent for schools. Akbaba-Altun (2004) also says that there must be closer alignment bet\.Veen the amount of time for professional development \.Vİthtechnology and its degree of perceived importance. \ıVhen ICT is integrated into the teaching and learning process, school principals have a facilitatorrole. IJa\.Vsonand Rakes (2003) statethat school administrators are exp~cted to act as instructional leaders and provide the required materials and equıprnents to the teachers. Niacl'Jeiland IJelafield(1998) claı·mth t · · 1 a prına~s~d

EğitiınAraştırrnalan

ı

49

other school leaders rnustacceptthe challenge to create a supportiveenvironınentin 1Nhich innovative uses of cornputers areencouraged. In line\Niththese opinions, A.k­ baba-Altun (2004) found that cornputer coordinators ernphasize a need for support and facilitationfrorn school principals as technological leaders. The present study sho1Nsthatschooladrninistratorscollaborate1Nithcornputercoordinators. The present study also sho\Ns that school adrninistrators rnake an effort to providetechnical support forITclassrooms. They need to pay attention to procuring equiprnent for the IT classrooms. \Nhen IT classroorns \Nere firstestablished in prirnaryschools,technical support\Nas assured forthreeyears. [)uringthis period, if there \Nas a breakdo""11 in the infrastructure,administrators could seek help by fillingout and submitting a form. ı-ı:o\Never, after the end of those three years, as schools' budgetsarelimited, theyhavedifficulties rnaintainingthe infrastructureand procuring ne\N instructionalrnaterials.A.s one of his model tenets,tvficheal(1998) says that technical support rnust respond promptly to users' needs in K-12 schools. The acqusition of hard1Nare and soft\Nareentailsrnore than a last-rninuterush to the cornputer store.A. procıırernent strategy must be planned, purchases of hard\Nare and soft\Naremust be rnade 1Nithfullattention to systern cornpability,the IT systern rnust fullysupportand enhance instructionalactivitiesand goals, anda replacernent procedure must be carefully thought out. A.kbaba-A.ltun (2006) found that infrastructureisoneoftheissues inTurkeyin integratingcornputertechnologies into education. She found that there '\Nerefe'INcornputers, slo'INInternet connections, insufficientsoft\Nare in the native language, and a lack of periferialequiprnent at schools.ı-ı:ard\Nareandsoft\Nareinvestrnentand rnaintenance isan irnportantstep in cornputerintegration. Taking ergonornics issues under consideration is another role of school adrninistrators.rvticheal(1998) says that effectiveschools rnust have an expanded vie'INof IT~a vie'INthat includes attention to roorn conditions and ergonornics. In Turkey, the establishrnent of iT classrooms and the procurernent of rnaterialsand equiprnent '\Nereinitiallymade by the tviinistry,and the tvfinistryposted the materials to the schools directly.The administrators only selected the proper spaces to be theITclassrooms and tookdeliveryoftheequiprnentand the rnaterials. IJa'INsonand Rakes (2003) emphasize that itisnot irnportant ho\N rnuch training teachers receive about technology integration ifthey do not have the leadership of their adrninistrators;1Nithout it,teachers can.not apply 1Nhat they learn in the training.ln addition, Yuen, La'IN,and VVong (2003) state that successful technology integration is not about hard\Nare, soft\Nare,and cornputer literacy,but about supporting, ernpo1Nering, and influencing teachers. After studying 1Nith school principals in l'Je\NZealand, Yee(1998)offersthatadrninistratorsshould havethe five proposed technology leadership types: tcchnology entrepreneur, technology caretaker,technologytrainer, technologyrnodeler, and technology learner. VVhen considering the effects of using information and cornrnunication technologies on teaching and learning environrnents, school adrninistratorsas the leaders of innovation in education have crucial roles. Therefore, rnany scholars

50

ı

EurasianJournalofEducationalResearch

(Bailey,2000; Turan, 2002; Flanagan &: Jacobscn, 2003; Schiller,2003; A.kbaba-A.ltun, 2004a &: 2006) state that adıninistrators should have the skillsto use technological innovations and have technological leadership characteristics.In their regulations, the rvi:of\IE expect school adıninistrators to be technological leaders. This research's results sho"" that school adıninistrators are a\'Varethat they should behave as the technological leaders of the school. Their perceptions of technological leadership rolesrnaybetheindicatorsthattheyarekno"'1ledgeableabouttheduties thatshould begiwn~~m ()ne rr classrooın-related role that has bee.n deterrnined far adrninistratorsis the ethics diınension. A.ccording to Bailey (2000), technology integration involves rnore thanjustteachingstudentsho\'Vto usetechnological tools;italsorequireshelpingtheın deal \'Vithethicaldile1T11T1asthatcanarise""henapplyingernergingtechnologies. f\lance (2003) and (2ııinn(2003) alsa rnention issues related to the infusionoftechnologies into schools, including pornography, acceptable use policies,freedoınof expression, online and equitable access to technology, privacy, digitalcopyright and censorship. (2ııinn (2003) says, "A.s "'1İthany advanceınent there is al\'Vaysthe prospect of rnisuse and abuse of ne"" technologies.... School leaders ınust be \'Veliinforrned in such ınattersto minimize the distractions and liabilitiesand ~ rnaxirnize the learning potential afforded by educational technology" (p. 205). Regarding the roles of adıninistratorsin the ethics dirnension far rr classroorns,the adrninistratorsrnust care far the copyright issuesoftheınaterials (C:[),books,etc.)in the ffclassroorn. School prindpals' rr classrooıns-relatedroles can alsa be considered as prindpals' technologicalleadership roles--indeed, ınost of these roles have been rnentioned in the literatureasprindpals' technologicalleadership roles.Itissuggested as furtherstudy that therelationshipbet"'1eenschoolprindpals'perceptionsofrolesregardingfl'classroornsand theirrealizationlevelshouldbeinvestigated.

References Akbaba-A.ltun, S. (2004). lnforınation technology classroorns and elernentary school principals'roles:Turkish experience. Education and InforrrıationTechnologies, 9(3), 255-270. A.kbaba-A.ltun,S. (2006).C:ornplexityof integratingcoınputer tecluıologiesinto education inTurkey./ournalofEducationa/Technology&'Society,9(1), 176-187. A.nderson, R.E. &: Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: A.n eınprical investigationto prevelance and effect,Educational l\dıninistration(Juarterly,41 (1), 49-82. Bailey, G. D. (2000).Technology leadership: Ten essential buttons for understanding technology integration in the 21st century. [()nline] Available at: http://~2.educ.ksu.edu/Faculty/BaileyG/htınl/currentbuttonart.htınl.19962000 Technology LeadershipC:enter. Date: 11/20/2000. Brockn1eier,L.,Serrnon,J.l'vf. &:H.ope, VV.C:. (2005).Principals'relationship\lçeği" iletoplanmıştır..A.raştırmaproblemi belirlendikten sonra ölçek maddeleri 11 boyutta S'liölçek olarak yazılmıştır.Bu hazırlanan taslak forum kapsam ge­ çerliğininbelirlenmesi içinhem BC>TEbölümünden hem de Eğitim Yönetimi bölümünden öğretim üyelerine verilmiş ve görüşleri alınmıştır.()Juşturulan 99 madde uzman görüşlerinden sonra 85 maddeye indirgenmiştir. Son ola­ rak da Türkiye'deki ?coğrafi bölgeden tesadüfiörneklem yoluyla seçilenye­ di ilde pilot uygtılama yapılmış ve 316 ilköğretim okulu yöneticisine uygu­ lanmıştır.lJygularna sonucunda aracın geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması ya­ pılmıştır..A.racıngüvenirlikkatsayısıalfa.94olarakbulunrnuştur. SPSSprog­ ramı kullanılarak grupları belirlemek için faktör analizi (principal cornponent) yapılış ve 11 boyut olduğu görülmüştür. IJaha sonra LİSTREL programında tekrar doğrulayıcı faktör analizi yapılmış ve çıkan boyutların

Eğ!_tiınAraşhrrnalan

1 53

11 boyutu olduğu 59 madde olarak netleştirilrnişHr. Belirlenen boyutlar per­ sonel yetiştirme, iletişim,kolaylaşhrıcılık,alt yapının sürekliliğininsağlan­ ması, ergonomiyi gözetme, denetim, liderlik,hakla ilişkiler(halkın kullanı­ mın.a aÇtlla),izleme{önleme), yetkilendirme ve etiktir. C'.>lçmearacıngeçerlik ve geçerlik çalışmasından sonra, okul yöneticilerinin BT sınıflarınayönelik rollerinin belirlenmesi için ()rdu ilinde bünyesinde BT sınıfıbulunan okul yöneticilerinin tamamına uygulanmış ve 100 anket geri dönmüştür. Toplanan verileranaliz edilmiştir. \/eri/erin .4nnlizi : ()kul yöneticilerinin öncelikle her boyuttaki rollerininal­ gılanma düzeyine bakılmış daha sonra da genelde BT sınıflarınayönelik rollerini bir bütün olarak nasıl algıladıklarına bakılmıştır. Bunun için maddelerin her boyutta ortalama ve standart sapmaları alınmıştır. Araş­ tırma probleminin ve alt problemlerin analizinde hangi testin kullanılaca­ ğını belirlemek için her alt grup için Shapiro-VVilk normallik testiuygu­ lanmışhr. Bu test sonucunda alt grupların tamarnrnında normal dağılım olmadığı için parametrik olmayan testlerinkullanılmasına karar verilmiş­ tir. ()kul yöneticilerin cinsiyet, eğitim düzeyi ve görevlerine göre farkındalık düzeylerinde farklılığınolup olmadığını testetmek için ~ann­ VVitheny lJ testi kullanılmışhr . .Ayrıca, BT sınıflarına yönelik rollerin ilişikinalgı düzeylerinin, okul yöneticilerinin,kıdemleri, hizmet içine ka­ tılma sıklıklarıve bilgisayar kullanma düzeyleri ileanlamlı olarak farklıla­ şıp farklılaşmadığını testetmek içinde I .05), görevlerine (U=1059.00, p= .64 > .05),eğitim durmları (U=812, p= .46 > .05),kıdernle­ rinde (x2=4.85, p= .30 > .05),katıldıklarıhizmet içieğitimlerinin sayılarına

54

ı

EurasianJournalofEducationalResearch

(x2=.16,p= .91 > .05), ve bilgisayar kullanma düzeylerine (X2=2.14,p= .34 >.05) göre anlamlı farklılıkgöstermemektedir. CJneriler:()kul yöneticilerinin BT sınıflarınayönelik rollerinin farkında ol­ maları ve bu düzeyin yüksek çıkması BTsınıflarının daha etkilikullanılabi­ leceğinin göstergesi olabilir.J\ncak, okul yöneticilerinin BT sınıflarına yö­ nelik rollerini ne kadar gerçekleştirip gerçekleştirmedikleri ve farkındalık düzeyleri ile rollerinin gerçekleştirilme düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkiçalışma konusu olarak önerilmiştir. /\nahtar sözcükler: ()kul yöneticisi, Bilgi Teknolojisi Sınıfı, J\lgı,Temel E­ ğitim Programı.