ERIC EJ1331509: Teachers' Views on Distance Education: Turkey in the COVID-19 Pandemic Process

2022·0.84 MB·English

by  ERIC

Available online at ijci.wcci-international.org
IJCI

International Journal of
International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1)
Curriculum and Instruction
(2022) 625-654

Teachers’ views on distance education: Turkey in the
Covid-19 pandemic process
Ayça Kaya a *, Sümeyra Dilek Uylas b
a Assistant Professor, Haliç University, İstanbul, 34330, Turkey
b PhD, Ministry of National Education, Sakarya, 54300, Turkey

Abstract
In this research, it is aimed to determine the experiences of teachers in depth by examining their
perspectives on the positive or negative situations they had experienced in the distance education process
during the Covid-19 pandemic period. The research was conducted via a mixed method research design in
which both qualitative and quantitative research methods were utilized together. While the measurement
tool prepared by the researchers was used in the quantitative part of the study, two different methods were
used in the qualitative part. In the first method, the data collected from the participants with the
measurement tool were analyzed and each scale item was interpreted with a qualitative approach. In the
second method, the data collected from the teachers with a semi-structured interview form were interpreted
with content and descriptive analysis. The study group of the research consists of 209 teachers who were
involved in distance education or hybrid education due to Covid-19 in different regions and at different levels.
The quantitative analyzes of the data obtained from the surveys were carried out by using SPSS 25 and the
qualitative analyzes were carried out by using MAXQDA 2020 Analytics Pro. According to the obtained
quantitative findings, teachers expressed negative opinions about distance education and stated that they
considered themselves partially sufficient. It has been determined that according to the qualitative findings,
in the category of positive aspects of distance education, the codes with the most opinions were time saving,
increase in technological knowledge and flexibility in place; In the negative aspects category were inequality
of opportunity, social-emotional problems and distraction.
Keywords: Covid-19 pandemic, distance education, views of teacher, education in Turkey
© 2016 IJCI & the Authors. Published by International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction (IJCI). This is an open-
access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY-NC-ND)
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1. Introduction
With the Covid-19 pandemic, which emerged in late 2019 and has had an impact
worldwide by 2020, transformations have occurred in many fields, primarily in the field
of health. One of the most important of these transforming areas has been the education

* Corresponding author: Ayça Kaya. Phone: [phone]
E-mail address: [email protected]
626 Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654
system. When the negative effects of pandemic conditions on health were evaluated,
practices such as minimizing or eliminating face-to-face training were implemented. This
process has driven countries to pursue new avenues of education, making distance
education obligatory at all levels. Therefore, Turkey has been one of the countries to
implement the distance education system. With the Covid-19 pandemic, which emerged
in late 2019 and has had an impact worldwide by 2020, transformations have occurred in
many fields, primarily in the field of health. One of the most important of these
transforming areas has been the education system. When the negative effects of
pandemic conditions on health were evaluated, practices such as minimizing or
eliminating face-to-face training were implemented. This process has driven countries to
pursue new avenues of education, making distance education obligatory at all levels.
Therefore, Turkey has been one of the countries to implement the distance education
system. As a matter of fact, according to Lloyd, Byrne, and McCoy (2012), it has been
stated that providing support to teachers in pedagogical and material design rather than
just providing technical support facilitates teachers' adaptation to distance education and
contributes to an increase in their performance. Therefore, it is expected that the steps
taken by the Ministry of National Education (MEB) by providing in-service training to
teachers will also solve the adaptation problem that teachers experience against distance
education.
Distance education, which means that education reaches students on a web-based
basis through developing internet technologies (Newby, Stepich, Lehman & Russell,
2006); It is also seen as an alternative to the solution of time, space and financial
problems (Kışla, 2016). However, in order to manage these alternatives effectively, it
would be appropriate for educational organizations to be prepared for this process with
the right methods and conditions. As a matter of fact, Demir (2014) stated that there is a
spiral structure among the elements of distance education and that the efficient and
effective construction of this structure will positively affect the success of distance
education. However, when the history of distance education, which can be carried out
with synchronous (synchronous) and asynchronous (non-synchronous) tools, is examined,
it is noteworthy that asynchronous tools are used to a large extent (Düzgün ve Sulak,
2020). According to Stein, Wanstreet, and Calvin (2009), the most beneficial point in
asynchronous interaction is that students have the opportunity to access education
anytime and anywhere. In synchronous interaction, it can be mentioned that there is a
current image/sound flow and feedback can be received instantly. Therefore, in both
cases, the aim is to enable the student to participate more actively in the distance
education process (Düzgün ve Sulak, 2020). The importance and need of distance
education has revealed due to reasons such as the increase in the demands of individuals
for education with the developing technology and knowledge, the aim of providing
educational services to large population, the view of providing equal opportunities in
education, the desire to fulfill the educational needs of the students who cannot continue
Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654 627
formal education for various reasons, and the efforts to eliminate the limitations of
traditional education (Yalın, 2007). Therefore, distance education is important in terms
of providing the continuation of education by administrators, teachers and students by
replacing this education system rather than being a part of today's education system,
both in terms of fulfilling the educational needs of individuals and increasing the
professional motivation of teachers and administrators. At the same time, with the
pandemic process, it is also quite important that distance education programs become
able to meet the educational needs of individuals and being on the agenda. Therefore,
with the distance education system, which has become a part of technology and our lives,
it has become inevitable for teachers to be affected by constantly updated changes.
It is possible to say that the development of distance education in Turkey dates back to
the 1920s. It is known that distance education has been discussed for about 40 years
since these dates. In the following processes, it is seen that distance education has
started to take place in many education levels, especially in universities. It can be said
that distance education was not at a sufficient level, especially in this process that
started in the 1990s, due to the insufficient development of technology and the
deficiencies in the technological infrastructure processes of the Ministry of National
Education (MEB). However, with the Covid-19 pandemic, it is seen that there are rapid
developments and the efforts to improve the infrastructure have increased (Çok, 2021).
With the pandemic, it can be predicted that distance education will become widespread in
the coming years and its use in educational organizations will increase at an important
point. It has been seen that the Ministry of Education has further developed the
Education Information Network (EBA) system during the pandemic process, and even
tried to facilitate students' access to the distance education system by establishing EBA
support points in some schools they have determined. It is possible to examine the
development generations and phases of distance education in Turkey in Figure 1.
628 Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654
Reference: Bozkurt, 2017
Figure 1. Generations and phases of distance education in Turkey

When Figure 1 is examined, it is possible to state that the distance education process
in Turkey has become active after the 1990s and reached a turning point with the Covid-
19 pandemic. As a result, it is believed that the effective implementation of distance
education and the quality of student education would vary based on instructor
performance, which is the output of positive/negative attitudes towards the distance
education process. In this sense, when the literature in the world and in Turkey is
examined, it is seen that the studies on distance education related to teachers are focused
on during the Covid-19 pandemic. Some of studies have been ranged as (Adıgüzel, 2020;
Almanthari, Maulina & Bruce, 2020; Alper, 2020; Arı ve Kanat, 2020; Bakioğlu & Çevik,
2020; Balaman & Hanbay Tiryaki, 2021; Bayburtlu, 2020; Börnert-Ringleb, Casale &
Hillenbrand, 2021; Çiftçi & Aydın, 2020; Demir & Kale, 2020; Demir & Özdaş, 2020;
Düzgün & Sulak, 2020; Gayvoronskiy, 2020; Hebebci, Bertiz & Alan, 2020; Karakuş,
Ucuzsatar, Karacaoğlu, Esendemir & Bayraktar, 2020; Karatepe, Küçükgençay & Peker,
2020; Kurnaz, Kaynar, Barışık & Doğrukök, 2020; Kuset, Özgem, Şaşmacıoğlu & Güldal
Kan, 2021; Metin, Emlik, Gürlek ve Demirbaş, 2021; Özdoğan & Berkant, 2020; Özkul,
Kırnık, Dönük, Altunhan & Altunkaynak, 2020; Rasmitadila, Aliyyah, Rachmadtullah,
Samsudin, Syaodih, Nurtanto & Tambunan, 2020; Tartavulea, Albu, Albu, Dieaconescu
& Petre, 2020; Tzivinikou, Charitaki & Kagkara, 2020; Ünal & Bulunuz, 2020; Yalman
Polatlar & Bayram Tuncay, 2020; Yıldız & Seferoğlu, 2020; Yılmaz ve Üredi, 2020).
When the studies conducted in this context are examined, it is noteworthy that teachers
play a significant role in the process of distance education and in improving the efficiency
of distance education. Thus, it is believed that disclosing instructors' positive and
negative experiences with distance education during the pandemic period may aid in
structuring this process. Ozcan, Tosun, and Eken (2020) have emphasized the
importance of effectively structuring distance education processes, particularly in times
of epidemics, to avoid interruptions to education.
As a result, it is important to take into account the views of teachers, who are one of
the primary stakeholders in distance education, and structure distance education in a
conscious and systematic manner throughout the Covid-19 pandemic period. The main
problem of this study has been determined as "What are the views of teachers about
distance education during the Covid-19 pandemic period?"

2. Method
Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654 629
In the present study, a mixed-method design, in which qualitative and quantitative
research techniques are used together, was adopted. According to Creswell (2013),
combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a mixed-method design will result in
a better understanding of research problems than utilizing either methodology alone.
While the measurement tool prepared by researchers was employed in the quantitative
part of the study, two distinct methods were used in the qualitative part. In the first
method, the data collected from the participants with the measurement tools were
analysed, and each scale item was interpreted with a qualitative approach. The second
method involved conducting content and descriptive analyses of data received from
teachers via a semi-structured interview form
2.1. Study group
The study group consists of 209 instructors who are enrolled in distance education or
hybrid education due to Covid-19 in various regions and at various levels and who were
chosen via convenient/accidental sampling from a non-random sampling method.
Demographic information for the teachers in the study is shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Demographic information
Demographic characteristics Frequency (N=209) Percentage (%)
Gender
Female 159 76.1
Male 50 23.9
Age group
20 – 29 years 26 12.4
30 – 39 years 93 44.5
40 – 49 years 45 21.5
50 – 59 years 32 15.3
Above 60 years 13 6.2
Seniority
1 – 5 years 28 13.4
6 – 10 years 51 24.4
11 – 15 years 42 20.1
16 – 20 years 31 14.8
Above 21 years 57 27.3
Marital Status
630 Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654
Married 162 77.5
Single 47 22.5
Preference for the method of conducting distance education
Synchronicity 100 47.8
Asynchronous 2 1
Mixed 107 51.2
Preference for the method of Education
Hybrid training 136 65.1
Distance Learning 73 34.9

When Table 1 is examined, it is seen that 76.1% of the 209 teachers participating in
the research are female and 23.9% are male. However, 44.5% of the participants are
between the ages of 30-39; 27.3% of them have a seniority of 21 years or more; 77.5% of
them are married. 51.2% of the participants stated that distance education should be
carried out with a mixed method in which synchronous and asynchronous methods are
used together, and 2% with asynchronous methods. 65.1% of the participants stated that
the hybrid education model was more effective in the Covid-19 process, while 34.9%
stated that distance education was more effective.
2.2. Data collection and analysis
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected simultaneously in the study. In order
to collect the quantitative data of the scale, two separate measurement tools were
developed by the researchers. Measurement tools and semi-structured interview forms
were used simultaneously in the collection of qualitative data. While developing the
measurement tool, the literature was examined, and the opinions of field teachers were
gathered. New studies in the field (Kurnaz et al., 2020; Kurnaz and Serçemeli, 2020)
were used to develop the item pool. The developed item pool was examined by 4 experts
and 6 teachers in the field, and necessary additions/removals/corrections were made in
line with the suggestions. The questionnaire is divided into four parts: the first part
contains demographic data, the second part contains a six-question measurement tool
constructed using the three-point Likert type, the third part contains a 33-question scale
constructed using the five-point Likert type, and the fourth part contains a semi-
structured interview form with two questions. While 209 teachers participated in the
first three parts of the questionnaire, 192 teachers participated in the fourth part. Since
items 24, 25, 26, 30, and 32 of the 33-item measurement tool are reversed items, their
average scores were calculated by reversing them in the SPSS program. After being
Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654 631
coded, the survey form was delivered to the participants via the access link created over
the Google Form application.
Quantitative analyzes of the data obtained from the surveys were made using SPSS
25, and qualitative analyzes were made using MAXQDA 2020 Analytics Pro. Values such
as frequency, percentage, mean, t-test, ANOVA, Cronbach's Alpha were calculated with
SPSS 25. The MAXQDA program began with the selection of open-ended questions as the
theme, followed by the creation of codes. After the text was coded, word clouds revealing
the most frequently repeated concept were displayed in the responses. For the reliability
calculation of qualitative data, Miles and Huberman's (1994) formula “(Reliability =
Consensus / Consensus + Disagreement x100)” was used. According to the coding control,
the consensus among coders is expected to be at least 80%, which explains internal
consistency (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2002: Akt. Baltaci, 2017). Cronbach's
Alpha reliability level for the 33-item measurement tools 85.
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to determine if the quantitative data had a
normal distribution and the significance of the difference in instructors' views on
demographic variables. The skewness and kurtosis values were examined, with the
significance level obtained from the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results being p<0.05. Since
the skewness and kurtosis values were within the acceptable range for parametric tests,
it was accepted that the data had a normal distribution. According to Tabachnick and
Fidell (2013), skewness and kurtosis values between +1.5 and -1.5 indicate that the data
are normally distributed. Therefore, while the t-test was employed for variables such as
gender, marital status, and preferred educational model, ANOVA was used for variables
such as seniority, age, and method of conducting distance education.
Cohen's d formula was used to interpret the values determined by the t-test in the
effect size calculation of the descriptive values obtained. The difference between the
means of two events or groups is referred to as the effect size. Cohen's d formula (Cohen,
1988) is widely preferred. Accordingly, the criteria of “d ≥ 1 very large effect, 0.8 large
effects, 0.5 medium effects, 0.2 small effects” were taken into account in the
interpretation. Tukey-b and Bonferroni test and mean scores were used to find the source
of the difference in the results obtained with ANOVA.
3. Results
Since the mixed design was used in this study, the quantitative and qualitative
findings were analyzed and interpreted together.
3.1. Readiness of teachers for distance education
In Table 2, the frequencies and percentages of the answers given by the teachers to the
readiness questions regarding distance education are given.
632 Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654
Table 2. Readiness of teachers for distance education
Questions Frequency Percentage
Before the distance education process started, I had sufficient knowledge
about how to use web 2.0 tools.

81 38.8
Yes
39 18.7
No
89 42.6
Partly

Before I started distance education, I used web 2.0 tools in the teaching
71 34.0
process.
48 23.0
Yes
90 43.0
No

Partly

Before I started distance education, I took a course or in-service training for
distance education from the institution I worked for. 51 24.4
Yes 109 52.2
No 49 23.4
Partly
I learned to use Web 2.0 tools with my own efforts during the distance
education process. 113 54.1
Yes 24 11.5
No 72 34.4
Partly
I consider myself well-equipped and competent in distance education. 126 60.3
Yes 19 9.1
No 64 30.6
Partly
I have technical problems connecting to the course in distance education. 55 26.3
Yes 82 39.2
No 72 34.4
Partly
When Table 2 is examined, the item with which teachers agree the most (60.3%)
among the items related to the participant's readiness for distance education is "I
consider myself well-equipped and competent in distance education." While 60.3% of the
teachers consider themselves equipped and sufficient in distance education, 9.1% do not
consider themselves equipped and sufficient. 54.1% of the teachers stated that they
learned to use web 2.0 tools with their own efforts during the distance education process,
and 11.5% of them stated that they did not learn with their own efforts during the
distance education process. It is understood that 52.2% of the participants did not receive
a course or in-service training for distance education from the institution they worked
before the distance education started, and 23.4% received partial in-service training. It is
understood that 43% of the teachers partially used web 2.0 tools in the teaching process
before the start of distance education, and 23% did not. It is seen that 42.6% of the
Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654 633
teachers partially had enough information about how to use web 2.0 tools before the
distance education process started, while 18.7% did not have enough information. It is
understood that 39.2% of the teachers did not experience technical problems in
connecting to the lesson in distance education, and 26.3% of them had technical
problems.
3.2. Opinions of teachers on distance education
In Table 3, teachers' views on distance education are given.
Table 3. Opinions of teachers on distance education
Expressions I strongly disagree I disagree what I Agree what I disagree I Agree I strongly agree
N N N N N
% % % % %
7 11 27 59 105
1- The inability to communicate with students face-to-face in
distance education affects the educational process negatively. (%3.3) (%5.3) (%12.9) (%28.2) (%50.2)
2- Classroom management in the distance education process 1 18 25 46 106
is more difficult than face-to-face education.
(%6.7) (%8.6) (%12) (%22) (%50,7)
3- Distance education is insufficient in courses with a lot of 7 10 14 50 128
applied content.
(%3.3) (%4.8) (%6.7) (%23.9) (%61.2)
4- In the distance education process, the attention of the 8 13 19 44 125
students is distracted in a shorter time compared to face-to-
(%3.8) (%6.2) (%9.1) (%21.1) (%59.8)
face education.
5- In distance education, students use other internet or game 20 21 61 58 49
sites during the course period.
(%9.6) (%10) (%29.2) (%27.8) (%23.4)
6- Being in front of a screen for a long time in distance 4 7 18 55 125
education distracts students.
(%1.9) (%3.3) (%8.6) (%26.3) (%59.8)
7- Distance education prevents learning by living by doing. 7 18 43 42 99
(%3.3) (%8.6) (%20.6) (%20.1) (%47.4)
8- Distance education courses require more preliminary 4 11 44 64 86
preparation than face-to-face education.
(%1.9) (%5.3) (%21.1) (%30.6) (%)41.1
9- Students have problems connecting to lessons due to 3 22 35 87 62
634 Kaya& Uylas/ International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(1) (2022) 625-654
technical problems in distance education. (%1.4) (%10.5) (%16.7) (%41.6) (%29.7)
10- The lessons in distance education are more tiring than 8 13 24 52 112
face-to-face education.
(%3.8) (%6.2) (%11.5) (%24.9) (%53.6)
11- It is difficult to communicate directly with students in 16 20 29 58 86
distance education.
(%7.7) (%9.6) (%13.9) (%27.8) (%41.1)
12- It is difficult to appeal to all senses in distance education. 6 15 20 64 104
(%2.9) (%7.2) (%9.6) (%30.6) (%49.8)
13- Learning in distance education is less permanent than 23 26 47 51 62
face-to-face education.
(%11) (%12.4) (%22.5) (%24.4) (%29.7)
14- In the distance education process, students have difficulty 5 18 40 55 91
in communicating with each other.
(%2.4) (%8.6) (%19.1) (%26.3) (%43.5)
15- Homework control is difficult in distance education. 14 19 31 35 110
(%6.7) (%9.1) (%14.8) (%16.7) (%52.6)
16- In distance education, students have difficulty expressing 28 43 45 51 42
their thoughts and wishes.
(%13.4) (%20.6) (%21.5) (%24.4) (%20.1)
17- Distance education creates inequality of opportunity 23 24 22 42 98
among students.
(%11) (%11.5) (%10.5) (%20.1) (%46.9)
18- In the distance education process, the fact that students 7 7 16 34 145
connect to the lesson without turning on their cameras
(%3.3) (%3.3) (%7.7) (%16.3) (%69.4)
negatively affects the education-teaching process.
19- Motivation of students in distance education is lower than 6 12 23 60 108
in face-to-face education.
(%2.9) (%5.7) (%11) (%28.7) (%51.7)
20- Teacher motivation in distance education is lower than in 24 30 37 44 74
face-to-face education.
(%11.5) (%14.4) (%17.7) (%21.1) (%35.4)
21- In distance education, the daily course duration should be 6 9 16 48 130
less than face-to-face education.
(%2.9) (%4.3) (%7.7) (%23) (%62.2)
22- Measurement and evaluation methods should be changed 0 6 29 51 123
in distance education. (%0)
(%2.9) (%13.9) (%24.4) (%58.9)
23- Students can gain course gains in the distance education 22 31 46 66 44
process within the time specified in the annual plans.
(%10.5) (%14.8) (%22) (%31.6) (%21.1)
46
24- Lessons in distance education are as efficient as face-to- 48 53 42 20