Examining the Relationships between Student Engagement, Campus Facilities, and Technology Integration among Elementary Teacher Candidates

Selim Günüç, Emrullah Yiğit, Hüseyin Artun, Murat Okur

Abstract


This study aims at examining the relationships between technology integration, campus facilities, and student engagement at 26 state universities in Turkey. In the study, the quantitative method was employed, specifically the correlational research method. The research sample involved 5,534 female students (71.21%) and 2237 (28.79%) male students, amounting to 7771 participants in total. The data of this study were collected by means of Student Engagement Scale, Student Perception Scale for Faculty Members’ Technology Integration Efficacy, and Campus Climate Checklist. In addition, Pearson correlation analysis was conducted on the collected data. The results revealed that in every university, there was a positive relationship between student engagement and the students’ scores in regards to benefits from the campus facilities. Another important result was that the positive relationship between student engagement and the students’ perceptions regarding technology integration efficacies of the faculty members was proven for all universities involved in the study.

Keywords


student engagement; campus facilities; technology integration; elementary teacher candidates

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abubakar, B., Shanka, T., & Muuka, G. N. (2010). Tertiary education: an investigation of location selection criteria and preferences by international students–The case of two Australian universities. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 20(1), 49-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241003788052

Allison, B. N., & Rehm, M. L. (2007). Effective teaching strategies for middle school learners in multicultural, multilingual classrooms. Middle School Journal, 39(2), 12-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2007.11461619

Artun, H., & Gunuc, S. (2016). Student Perception Scale for Technology Integration Competence of Instructors: A Study of Validity and Reliability. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Ünivercity Journal of the Faculty of Education, 8, 1-1. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/yyuefd/issue/25853/272560

Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1999-01418-006

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of college student personnel, 25(4), 297-308. http://chawkinson.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/122997693/Student_Involvement_A_Development_Theory_for_Highe.pdf

Atabey, D. (2021). The Predictive Role of Professional Concern and Quality of University Life on Attitudes Toward Teaching Profession. Participatory Educational Research , 8 (2) , 373-390. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.44.8.2

Bouta, H., Retalis, S., & Paraskeva, F. (2012). Utilising a collaborative macro-script to enhance student engagement: A mixed method study in a 3D virtual environment. Computers & Education, 58(1), 501-517. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131511002090?via%3Dihub

Chen, P. S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Guidry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of Web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1222-1232. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131509003285?via%3Dihub

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson: Boston

Cuckle, P. & Jenkins, I. (2000). Students’ information and comunications technology skills and their use during teacher training. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(1), 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390000200072

Dietrich, T.R. (2012). Digital natives: A phenomenological study of authentic engagement among fifth-grade students. Doctoral thesis, La Sierra Üniversitesi, USA. https://www.proquest.com/pagepdf/1039271657?accountid=15188

Edyburn, D. L. (1998). Part III: A map of the technology integration process. Closing the gap: Computer technology for people with special needs. Technology in Special Education and Rehabilitation. February/March. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dave-

Edyburn/publication/237803167_Part_III_A_map_of_the_technology_integration_process/links/5511b6830cf268a4aae9038b/Part-III-A-map-of-the-technology-integration-process.pdf

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Fukuzawa, S., & Boyd, C. (2016). Student engagement in a large classroom: Using technology to generate a hybridized problem-based learning experience in a large first year undergraduate class. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(1), 7. https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/cjsotl_rcacea/article/view/6981

Gibbs, R., & Poskitt, J. (2010). Student engagement in the middle years of schooling (Years 7-10): A literature review report to the Ministry of Education. http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications.

Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of nutrition education and behavior, 47(1), 109-114.Url: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008

Golubski, P. M. (2012). Utilizing interactive technologies to engage, integrate, involve, and increase community amongst college students. In Pedagogical and andragogical teaching and learning with information communication technologies (pp. 13-27). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-791-3.ch002

Gunuc, S. (2013). The Role of Technology in Student Engagement and Examining the Relationship between Technology Use in the Course and Student Engagement. Anadolu Üniversitesi Institute of Education Sciences. Doctoral thesis. Eskişehir. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp

Gunuc, S. (2016). Development of a Measurement Tool to Determine Campus Climate. International Multidisciplinary Eurasian Congress, Odessa, UKRAYNA, 11-13 Temmuz, 1-1.

Gunuc, S. (2017). Theoretical Foundations of Technology Integration in Education. Anı Yayıncılık. Ankara. 1. Baskı. 2017.

Gunuc, S., Artun, H., Yigit, E., & Keser, H. (2022). Examining the Relationship Between Student Engagement and Campus Climate: A Case in Turkey. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory Practice. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025119894579.

Gunuc, S., & Kuzu, A. (2014). Student engagement scale: Development, reliability and validity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.938019.

Hernandez, Y. (2013). Latino students’ perceptions of the university campus climate: Exploratory study of first generation students. (Doctoral dissertation). The Claremont Graduate University.

Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2001). Being (Dis) Engaged in Educationally Purposeful Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Seattle, WA, 10–14 April. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1020114231387

Krausea, L. K. & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505. (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892

Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing What Really Matters to Student Learning. İnside the national survey of student engagement. DOI: 10.1080/00091380109601795

Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683-706. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/364960

Li, Y., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (2010). Personal and ecological assets and academic competence in early adolescence: The mediating role of school engagement. Journal of youth and adolescence, 39(7), 801-815. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10964-010-9535-4

Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153-184. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153

Martin, G. L. (2014). Understanding and Improving Campus Climates for Activists. New Directions for Higher Education, 167, 87-92. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153

Matthews, K. E., Andrews, V., & Adams, P. (2011). Social learning spaces and student engagement. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2), 105-120. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.512629

McGrath, B. (1998). Partners in learning: twelve ways technology changes the teacher-student relationship. Technological Horizon in Education, 25(9), 58-62. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/86527/

Petruzzellis, L., & Romanazzi, S. (2010). Educational value: How students choose university: Evidence from an Italian university. International Journal of Educational Management, 24 (2), 139-158. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/09513541011020954/full/pdf?title=educational-value-how-students-choose-university-evidence-from-an-italian-university

Reynard, R. (2007). Hybrid learning: Maximizing student engagement. Campus technology. Campus enterprise networking & infrastructure-Campus technology. http://campustechnology.com/articles/2007/05/hybrid-learning-maximizing-student-engagement.aspx

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Baroody, A. E., Larsen, R. A., Curby, T. W., & Abry, T. (2015). To what extent do teacher–student interaction quality and student gender contribute to fifth graders’ engagement in mathematics learning?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 170.Url: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037252

Sheard, J., Carbone, A., & Hurst, A. J. (2010). Student engagement in first year of an ICT degree: staff and student perceptions. Computer Science Education, 20(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400903484396

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student retention. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Trowler, V. (2010). Student Engagement Literature Review. York: Higher Education Academy. (2010).http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/studentengagement/StudentEngagementLiteratureReview.pdf.

Virtanen, T. E., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., & Kuorelahti, M. (2015). The relationship between classroom quality and students’ engagement in secondary school. Educational Psychology, 35(8), 963-983. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.822961

Walker, C. O., Greene, B. A., & Mansell, R. A. (2006). Identification with academics, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of cognitive engagement. Learning and individual differences, 16(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.004

Yılmazlı Trout, İ. & Yıldırım, F. (2021). Campus environment through the lens of graduate students: A Photovoice study. Qualitative Social Sciences, 3(2), 231-257. https://doi.org/10.47105/nsb.937091

Xu, Y. (2010). Examining the effects of digital feedback on student engagement and achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.3.a




DOI: https://doi.org/10.53400/mimbar-sd.v9i2.42884

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


Copyright (c) 2022 Mimbar Sekolah Dasar

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View Mimbar Sekolah Dasar Stats