Academia.eduAcademia.edu
European Journal of Education Studies ISSN: 2501 - 1111 ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu 10.5281/zenodo.165850 Volume 2│Issue 9│2016 INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Ferhat Karakaya1i, Sakine Serap Avgin2 1,2 Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Turkey Abstract: The aim of this study is to determine about the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) self confidence level of physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers and to analyze if the level of self–confidence changes according to gender, joining to a technological education before, branch, education level, worked institution and service period. Scanning method is used for the research. Working group of this research consists of 87 teachers from different institutions and branches. For data collection, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Self–Confidence Scale (TPACKSC), which is adapted to Turkish from original scale by Graham, Burgoyne, Cantrell, Smith & Harris (2009) and tested for validity and reliability by Timur & Tasar , is preferred. “s a result of the study, it is stated that teachers TP“CK level is very high. On the other hand, it is seen that self-confidence level of teachers joined to research does not have a statically logical (p>0.05) difference according to their sex, worked institution, joining to a technological education before and they have a statistical logical (p<0.05) difference related with the branch, service period and education level. Keywords: technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), science teacher, technology and pedagogy, self–confidence Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved 1 Published by Open Access Publishing Group ©2015. Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Introduction Drastically improvements on technology during 21st century became the reason for various innovations for Turkey or for other countries on education and training areas. This situation made the profiles of teacher training institutions, school administrators, teachers, students and parents change. When the innovations of technology are analyzed, it is seen that they are on the areas of pedagogy, human and performance (Fording, 2006). It is stated that positive results that technology will bring to education are not only enough with technological changes (Koehler & Mishra, 2005), but also this situation of teachers using technology has the potential to change the education Carr, Jonassen, Litzinger & Marra, 1998). Quality, experience and efficiency of instructors on planning and applying in-class teaching activities have a huge importance (Demir & ”ozkurt, . “ccording to Shulman teacher efficiencies should have information headings like field information, pedagogic information, pedagogic field information, curriculum information, teacher quality information, educational context information, educational prints, aims, values, philosophical and historical bases. Koehler and Mishra by incorporating the concept of technological competence of the teachers have formed the framework of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. According to the description by Mishra and Koehler (2006), TPACK is a kind of information that is more than the blend of technology, pedagogy and field; is an improving information type. With a wider description, TP“CK is A pack of information about showing concepts with technology; using technology positively in order to teach information with pedagogical techniques; what makes concepts easy or hard and what kind of technology will help to students for solving the problems that they encounter; learners’ pre information and information theories; how can technology be used in order to improve new information theories with depending on existing information or strengthen old information Mishra & Koehler, Koehler & Mishra, 2009). TPACK concept puts the concepts that teacher information should include in order to create an effective integration of technology and education (Ovez & Akyüz, 2013). TPACK; is created with three main knowledge; Technological Knowledge (TK), Pedagogical Knowledge (PK), Content Knowledge (CK) and relationship components of these knowledge. TK is knowledge about various Technologies from the most basic lesson materials to mostly improved digital technologies (Pamuk, Ülken & Dilek, 2012). PK is the knowledge that includes how to teach a knowledge domain to a student, lesson plan, class management and teaching strategies (Wetzel, Foulger & Williams, 2008- 2009). CK is the knowledge about what is the teacher going to teach about the subject European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 2 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) domain to learners (Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Wetzel & et al., 2008-2009; Baran, Chuang & Thompson, 2011). PCK is the knowledge about strong similarities; drawings, examples, explanations and visuals that teacher uses during teaching subject field (Shulman, 1986). TCK is the knowledge that enables teachers to transmit the subject into technological platform by using technological tools (Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Kereluik, Mishra & Koehler, 2011; Pamuk et al., 2012). TPACK frame that explains the relationship between TPACK and its dimensions is given as Figure 1 (Koehler & Mishra, 2005). Figure 1: Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK Model) It is seen that during recent years in Turkey, many investments are performed to technological infrastructure of schools in order to integrate technological developments with the field of education. Yet, as a result of performed researches, it is stated that education technologies are not integrated into education process efficiently (Çiftçi, Taşkaya & “lemdar, Kayaduman, Sırakaya & Seferoğlu, . For the solution of this problem, the importance of application and research studies come forward for teacher candidates on teacher education programs and working instructors to integrate technology to their branches efficiently (Baran & Canbazoglu Bilici, 2015). ”ecause of the contributions to teacher qualifications on TP“CK s integration to education; when the field literature is analyzed, its seen that researches are mostly about teacher candidates Canbazoğlu ”ilici, Ozgen, Narlı & “lkan, Tokmak, Konakman & Yelken, 2013; Ovez & “ky(z, Meriç, “çıkg(l & Aslaner, 2015). On the other hand, it is clear that there are also studies on scale improvement for TPACK (Doğan, Sahin, 2011; Canbazoglu Bilici & Yamak, Kavak European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 3 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) & Guzey, 2013; Pamuk & et al., 2013) and scale adaptation (Timur & Tasar, 2011; Altun, 2013; Bal & Kandemir, 2013; Oztürk & Horzum, 2011). Also, it is noticed that researches about individuals that work as a teacher actively are missing. It is defined that analysis is done mostly according to the variables of sex and class level. Starting from this point, the TPACK self-confidence level of physics teachers, chemistry teachers, biology teachers and science teachers is analyzed. Aim of the study On this research, it is aimed to determine the teachers technological and pedagogical self-confidence level and with which variables is this level related. For the frame of this aim, answers are tried to be found to the questions below.  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the gender?  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the teachers according to the teachers participation in technological courses?  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the education level?  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the branch?  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the service period?  Does the TPACK self-confidence of teachers show difference according to the worked institution? Method Scanning Design, which is one of the quantitative methods, is used for this research. Scanning Design is to describe the environment s attitude, tendency or opinions through the analysis on samples that are chosen from the environment of the research (Bursal, 2014, 155). Working group Environment of the research consists physics teachers, chemistry teachers, biology teachers and science teachers that has been working at Kahramanmaras. Samples of the research are 87 teachers that are chosen through suitable sample method. Suitable European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 4 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) sample method is the one that stops the loss of factors like time, work force and money (Buyukozturk, et al., 2015). Distribution of teachers that attended to research according to their demographic characteristics is given on Table 1. Table 1: Demographic characteristics of teacher N % Famele 40 54.0 Gender Male 47 46.0 Science teacher 33 37.9 Physics teacher 17 19.5 Branch Chemistry teacher 14 16.1 Biology Teacher 23 26.4 Graduate 70 80.5 Education Level P. Graduate 17 19.5 Yes 43 49.4 Having Technological Training No 44 50.6 0- yıl 24 27.6 Working Period 6- yıl 14 16.1 11- yıl 14 16.1 > yıl 35 40.2 Govern 70 80.5 Worked Institution Private Coll. 10 11.5 Private Ins. 7 8.0 When data on table 1 is analyzed, it can be seen that the sample of research include 37.9% (n=33) science teachers, 19.5% (n=17) physics teachers, 26.4% (n=23) biology teachers and 16.1% (n=14) chemistry teachers. 46% (n=40) of these teachers are females and 54% (n=47) of these teachers are males. Data collection tool Scientific research, which can be described as the process of gathering scientific knowledge, is a systematic period that is consisted of steps or activities following each other (Buyukozturk, 2009, 6). On this research, it is aimed to determine the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge self-confidence. As data collection tool, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Self–Confidence Scale (TPACKSC), which is adapted to Turkish from original scale by Graham, Burgoyne, Cantrell, Smith & Harris (2009) and tested for validity and reliability by Timur & Tasar (2011), is preferred. Scale includes 31 items totally. While Timur et al. found reliability coefficient as 0.92, the reliability coefficient of scale is determined as 0.95 on this study. The scale European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 5 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) that is 6-point Likert scale originally is adapted as 5-point Likert scale by Timur & Tasar . On the scale, = I don t trust at all, = I trust a little, = I trust on an average level, = I trust greatly = I trust completely, = I don t know these Technologies only for items 16th , 17th , 18th , 19th and 20th ) are the numbered levels. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Self–Confidence Scale (TPACKSC) is consisted of four (4) factors as Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), Technological Content Knowledge (TCK), Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK) and Technological Knowledge (TK). Reliability Coefficient value (Cranach alpha) of these factors is given on table 2. Table 2: Technological Pedagogical Field Information Self-Confidence Scale Sub-Dimensions Reliability Coefficient Values Test Sub-Dimensions Reliability Coefficient Values TPACK .906 TCK .900 TPK .917 TK .933 TPACKSCS .950 When the data on table 2 is analyzed, it s seen that reliability coefficient values of TPACKSCS (.950), and four factors TPACK (.906), TCK (.900), TPK (.971) and TK (.933) are high. Analysis of data Information that are gathered from teachers that form the sample of the research is analyzed by the help of IBM SPSS-21 statistic programme. While evaluating the gathered data, individual-t test, one-way variance analysis (Anova) test is performed. On the situation that there is no homogeneity during data evaluation, Mann-Whitney test is used. On the other hand, data on the research is evaluated with 0.05 relevance and percent, frequency, average and standard deviation values are also given. In order to explain the comparison of the points about TPACKSCS and sub- dimensions TP“CK, TCK, TPK, TK that create the scale, each scale s total points are divided to item number and changed into 6-point rating. For the explanation of these points, self-confidence level according to point ranges is given on table 3. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 6 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Table 3: TPACKSCS and sub-dimensions, point ranges used for explaining the points Point Range Trust Level 0-0.85 I don t trust at all 0.86-1.68 I trust a little 1.69-2.51 I trust on an average level 2.52-3.34 I trust greatly 3.35-4.17 I trust pretty much 4.18-5.00 I trust completely Findings On this section, findings that are gathered by analyzing the science teachers, physics teachers and biology teachers technological, pedagogical content knowledge are presented. The minimum, maximum, average and standard deviation value and trust for the used scale and sub dimensions is presented at table 4. Table 4: Descriptive statistics and confidence level values related with TPACKSCS and sub dimensions Test Sub Dimensions N Min Max SS Self Con. Level TPACK 1.88 5.00 3.38 0.74 I trust greatly TCK 1.86 5.00 3.45 0.76 I trust greatly 87 TPK 0.00 5.00 3.09 1.24 I trust pretty much TK 1.36 5.00 3.22 0.90 I trust pretty much TPACKSCS 87 1.71 5.00 3.29 0.71 I trust pretty much When data on table 4 is analyzed, it is seen that the highest point average for the teachers is the frequency TCK. When the trust levels are examined, while teachers are self-confident greatly on dimensions TPACK and TCK, they are self-confident pretty much on dimensions TPK and TK. On this study, the effect of gender, branch, education level, period of service, quality of the worked institution, the situation that attending to a technological education is analyzed for technological pedagogical content knowledge self confidence level. Firstly, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence level of teachers that attended to this research change according to their gender? is searched and the results of levee homogeneity and Mann-Whitney U test is given at table five. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 7 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Table 5: Mann-Whitney U test analysis results according to gender Levene Gender N Line Av. U p Male 47 46.77 TPACK 0.01 810.0 .267 Female 40 40.75 Male 47 46.02 TCK 0.04 845.0 .418 Female 40 41.63 Male 47 44.80 TPK 0.389 902.5 .749 Female 40 43.06 Male 47 44.34 TK 0.01 924.0 .891 Female 40 43.60 Male 47 45.79 TPACKSCS 0.02 856.0 .474 Female 40 41.90 *p<0.05 When the Mann-Whitney U test results that are given on table t is analyzed, it became clear that the points from technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence scale (U=856.0; p>0.05) and other frequencies that create the scale does not show a logical difference according to the gender. Yet, when the line average is examined, it is seen that male teachers points are on a higher level. On the research, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence level of teachers that attended to this research show a logical change according to the situation that teachers attended to a previous technology course? is searched and results gathered from individual t-test are presented on table 6. Table 6: T test results according to the situation that teachers attended to a technology course before Test Sub Course N sd t p Dimensions Yes 43 3.40 TPACK 85 .217 0.829 No 44 3.37 Yes 43 3.47 TCK 85 .262 0.794 No 44 3.43 Yes 43 3.25 TPK 85 1.213 0.229 No 44 2.93 Yes 43 3.33 TK 85 1.106 0.272 No 44 3.11 Event 43 3.37 TPACKSCS 85 .960 0.340 Hayır 44 3.22 *p<0.05 European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 8 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) When the independent t-test results are analyzed, it is seen that there is no logical change on points of teachers technological pedagogical content knowledge self- confidence scale (t (85) = .960; p>0.05) and other dimensions that create the scale according to the situation that teachers attended to a technological course before. On the research, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence level of teachers that attended to this research change according to their education level? is searched and the results of Levene homogeneity and Mann-Whitney U test is given at table 7. Table 7: Mann-Whitney U test analysis results which is performed according to education level Levene Education Level N Line Av. U p Graduate 70 40.26 TPACK .109 333.5 .005* P. Grad. 17 59.38 Graduate 70 40.34 TCK 0.264 338.5 .006* P. Grad. 17 59.09 Graduate 70 44.14 TPK 0.948 585.0 .914 P. Grad. 17 43.41 Graduate 70 39.33 TK 0.003 268.0 .000* P. Grad. 17 63.24 Graduate 70 39.94 TPACKSCS 0.01 310.5 .002* P. Grad. 17 60.74 *p<0.05 When the results of Mann- Whitney U test results on table 7 are analyzed, it is seen that there is a statistical relevance on the level of 0.05 for the benefit of post graduate teachers from the technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence scale (U=310.5; p<0.05) and dimensions TPACK (U=333.5; p<0.05), TCK (U=338.5; p<0.05) and TK (U=268.0; p<0.05). On the research, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self confidence level of teachers that attended to this research show a logical change according to their branches? is searched and gathered frequency, average point, standard deviation and one direction variance analysis (Anova) test results are shown at tables 8 and 9. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 9 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Table 8: Frequency, average point and standard deviation values according to branch TPACK TCK TPK TK TPACKSCS Branch N SS SS SS SS SS Science(1) 33 3.37 0.72 3.58 0.77 2.82 1.29 3.34 0.96 3.32 0.68 Physics (2) 17 3.41 0.86 3.42 0.82 3.51 1.03 3.33 1.01 3.40 0.89 Biology (3) 23 3.65 0.69 3.59 0.69 3.32 1.37 3.36 0.72 3.48 0.57 Chem. (4) 14 3.94 0.52 2.94 0.60 2.82 1.04 2.59 0.66 2.80 0.59 All 87 3.38 0.74 3.45 0.76 3.09 1.24 3.22 0.90 3.29 0.71 Table 9: One direction variance analysis (Anova) results according to branch Test Sub Sum of Average of Relevance sd F p Dimensions Squares Squares (Tukey) Between groups 4.424 3 1.475 TPACK In-Group 43.309 83 2.826 .044* 3-4 .522 All 47.732 86 Between groups 4.617 3 1.539 TCK In-Group 45.759 83 2.791 .045* 1-4 .551 All 50.376 86 Between groups 7.631 3 2.544 TPK In-Group 126.593 83 1.668 .180 - 1.525 All 134.224 86 Between groups 6.738 3 2.246 TK In-Group 63.656 83 2.929 .038* 1-4 .767 All 70.394 86 Between groups 4.475 3 1.492 TPACKSCS In-Group 39.381 83 3.144 .029* 3-4 .474 All 43.856 86 *p<0.05 When the one direction variance analysis (Anova) test results are analyzed, it is seen that there is a statistical relevance of . for teachers technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence scale [F (3,83) =3.144; p<0.05] and sub - dimensions TPACK [F (3,83) =2.826; p<0.05], TCK [F (3,83) =2.791; p<0.05] and TK [F (3,83) =2.929; p<0.05] that create the scale itself. On the result of Tukey Relevance Analysis, which is performed in order to reveal from which branches does this relevance is created, it is seen that the points of biology teachers on the general scale (TPACKSCS) and dimension TPACK, and science teachers on the TCK and TK dimensions are more relevant than the points of chemistry teachers. On the research, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence level of teachers that attended to this research change according to the worked institution? is searched and gathered results from the test European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 10 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) (Anova) in terms of frequency, average points, standard deviation and one direction variation are presented on tables 10 and 11. Table 10: Frequency, average point and standard variation values according to worked institution Worked Institution TPACK TCK TPK TK TPACKSCS N SS SS SS SS SS Govern.(1) 70 3.32 0.74 3.37 0.76 3.08 1.16 3.19 0.91 3.24 0.71 Private Coll.(2) 10 3.77 0.83 3.94 0.73 2.52 1.67 3.48 1.06 3.50 0.86 Private Ins.(3) 7 3.50 0.48 3.48 0.65 4.02 0.94 3.20 0.57 3.47 0.48 All 87 3.38 0.74 3.45 0.76 3.09 1.24 3.22 0.90 3.29 0.71 Table 11: One direction variance analysis (Anova) results according to worked institution Test Sub- Dimensions Sum of Relevance sd Average of Squares F p Squares (Tukey) Between groups 1.879 2 .940 TPACK In-Group 45.853 84 1.721 .185 - .546 All 47.732 86 Between groups 2.786 2 1.393 TCK In-Group 47.590 84 2.459 .092 - .567 All 50.376 86 Between groups 9.422 2 4.711 TPK In-Group 124.802 84 3.171 .047* 3-2 1.486 All 134.224 86 Between groups 0.743 2 .371 TK In-Group 69.651 84 .448 .640 - .829 All 70.394 86 Between groups 0.827 2 .414 TPACKSCS In-Group 43.028 84 .808 .449 - .512 All 43.856 86 *p<0.05 When the one direction variance analysis (Anova) test results are analyzed from the table 11, it is seen that there is a statistical relevance of . for teachers technological pedagogical field information self-confidence scale s sub-dimension TPK [F (3,83)=3.171; p<0.05] On the research, an answer for the question Does the technological pedagogical content knowledge self confidence level of teachers that attended to this research change according to the working period? is searched and gathered results from the test Anova) in terms of frequency, average points, standard deviation and one direction variation are presented on tables 12 and 13. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 11 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Table 12: Frequency, average point and standard variation values according to working period TPACK TCK TPK TK TPACKSCS Working Period N SS SS SS SS SS 1-5 years(1) 24 3.52 0.71 3.64 0.65 3.19 1.50 3.65 0.68 3.54 0.53 6-10 years (2) 14 3.61 0.74 3.84 0.78 3.31 1.32 3.49 0.95 3.57 0.71 11-15 years (3) 14 3.36 0.47 3.58 0.50 3.04 0.99 3.20 0.77 3.30 0.59 16 and more years(4) 35 3.21 0.83 3.11 0.79 2.95 1.15 2.83 0.92 3.01 0.77 All 87 3.38 0.74 3.45 0.76 3.09 1.24 3.22 0.90 3.29 0.71 Table 13: One- direction variance analysis (Anova) results according to working period Test Sub-Dimensions Sum of Average of Relevance Squares sd F p Squares (Tukey) TPACK Between groups 2.248 3 .749 In-Group 45.484 83 1.368 .258 - .548 All 47.732 86 TCK Between groups 7.437 3 2.479 1-4 In-Group 42.939 83 4.792 .004* .517 2-4 All 50.376 86 TPK Between groups 1.628 3 .543 In-Group 132.597 83 .340 .797 - 1.598 All 134.224 86 TK Between groups 10.669 3 3.556 In-Group 59.725 83 4.942 .003* 1-4 .720 All 70.394 86 TPACKSCS Between groups 5.348 3 1.783 In-Group 38.508 83 3.842 .013 1-4 .464 All 43.856 86 *p<0.05 When the one direction variance analysis (Anova) test results are analyzed from table 13, its seen that there is a statistical relevance on the level of 0.05 for the dimension TCK [F(3,83)=4.792; p<0.05] and TK [F(3,83)=4.942; p<0.05] that creates technological pedagogical content knowledge self-confidence scale and also for TPACKSCS [F(3,83)=3.842; p<0.05]. Tukey relevance is performed for this research in order to determine from which working periods this relevance occurs. According to this, the points of teachers with 1-5 years of working period are found relevant from the teachers with 16 years or more on the general of the scale (TPACKSCS) and TCK and TK dimensions. On the other hand, points gathered by teachers with working period of 6- 10 years are found more relevant than teachers with 16 years or more on the TCK dimension. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 12 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Discussion and Results On this study, it is aimed to determine the self-confidence perception of Physics teachers, Chemistry teachers, Biology teachers and Science teachers from Kahramanmaras about technological pedagogical content knowledge and these perceptions change according to gender, previous technological courses, branch, education level, quality level of worked institution and working period. For data collection, Technological Pedagogic Content Knowledge Self– Confidence Scale (TPACKSC), which is adapted to Turkish from original scale by Graham, Burgoyne, Cantrell, Smith & Harris (2009) and tested for validity and reliability by Timur & Tasar , is preferred and Personal Knowledge Form created by researchers and supported by experts remarks is used. Gathered results percentage, frequency, average, standard variation values are calculated. On the other hand, the effects of independent variables (gender, previous technological courses, branch, education level, quality level of worked institution and working period) to their technological pedagogical field information self confidence level is analyzed statistically through independent t-test, one direction variance analysis, Kruskal- Wallis H test and Mann-Whitney U. When the research results are analyzed, the averages of TPACKSCS ( =3.29) and dimensions TPACK ( =3.38), TCK ( =3.45), TPK ( =3.09), TK ( =3.22) are gathered. When the self confidence levels of teachers attended to research it is seen that they trust themselves greatly on dimensions TPACK and TCK; they trust themselves pretty much on dimensions TPK, TK and general on scale (TPACKSCS). As a result of the study by Acikgul & et al. (2015), Sancar Tokmak & et al. (2013), Ozgen et al. (2013) with teacher candidates, they mentioned that TPACK self - confidence is high. This result shows difference with the findings of this research. On the study, it is understood that there is no statistical logical (p>0.05) difference between male and female physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers TPACKSCS and sub dimensions (TPACK, TCK,TPK,TK). According to these results, it can be said that gender is not a factor that affects teachers self-confidence about TPACK. This result overlaps with the results of researches by Acıkg(l & et al. Kula (2015); Meriç (2014); Sancar Tokmak & et al. (2013); Kaya, Ozdemir, Emre and Kaya (2011); Oztürk (2013); Koh and Chai (2011); North and Noyes (2002). According to North & Noyes (2002), the reason for this situation is the fact that computer usage is becoming common in schools and equal opportunities are given to individuals to use technology. Yet, Koh and Tsai (2010) saw on their research that gender creates difference on the situation. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 13 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) On the study, it is understood that there is no statistical logical (p>0.05) difference for physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers TP“CKSCS and sub dimensions (TPACK, TCK, TPK, TK) according to the situation of being attended to a technological course before. According to these results, it can be said that the situation of being attended to a technological course before is not a factor that affects teachers self- confidence about TPACK. Yet, when the point average of teachers is evaluated, it is seen that instructors attended to technology course before got a higher point average than the ones that did not attend to a technology course before. This situation shows that attending to courses about technology has a positive impact on TPACK self-confidence. That result overlaps with Ozturk s (2013) research about class teacher candidates. On the study, it is understood that according to education levels, there is a statistical logical (p>0.05) difference for physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers points of TP“CKSCS and sub dimensions (TPACK, TCK, TK). It is analyzed that when the teachers education levels increase to post graduate from graduate, the self-confidence shows an increase. This situation can be evaluated as the idea that physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers having a post graduate education can have a support on their self- confidence. This result showed difference with the research of Kho and Chai (2011). On the study, it is understood that according to branches (physics, chemistry, biology and science) there is no statistical logical (p>0.05) difference for teachers TPACKSCS and sub dimensions (TPACK, TCK, TK). According to Tukey results that are given on table 9, on the general TPACKSCS and, the points of biology teachers on TPACK dimension and the points of science teachers on TCK and TK dimensions are more logical than chemistry teachers. This situation is because of the biology and science teachers usage of technological materials during their teaching process. Ozgen & et al. , Niess s results support this research. On the study, it is understood that according to worked place (government, private college, institution) there is no statistical logical (p>0.05) difference between male and female physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers TP“CKSCS and sub dimensions (TPACK, TCK, TK) according to the working period, but there is a statistical logical (p>0.05) difference on the dimension TPK. According to Tukey results presented on table 11, it is seen that points of teachers working at institutions are more logical than the ones working at private colleges. On the study, it is understood that there is no statistical logical (p>0.05) difference between male and female physics, chemistry, biology and science teachers TPACKSCS and sub dimensions (TCK, TK) according to the working period. According European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 14 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) to the Tukey results presented on table 13, points of teachers with 1-5 years of working period points are more logical than the points of the ones with 16 years or more on the general of scale (TPACKSCS) and TCK and TK dimensions. On the other hand, on TCK dimension, points of teachers with working period 6-10 years are more logical than the ones with 16 years or working period. Conclusion This study with physics teachers, chemistry teachers, biology teachers and science teachers show that results of the study supports the increase on self-confidence about TP“CK with teachers technology usage. ”ecause of this, while planning the teaching techniques for teaching process, there should be an integration of technology to education and this will have a benefit for increasing teachers TP“CK self-confidence levels. Acknowledgements In this research, (31 May-3 June 2016, Mugla) the 3rd International Eurasian educational research has been described as oral presentations at the congress. About the authors Ferhat KARAKAYA: Research Assist. Ferhat KARAKAYA is currently working at Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University. He received his master degree in Department of Biology Education at the Gazi University, Turkey. His contact information is as follows: KSU Faculty of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Avsar Campus, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, Ofis. E-mail: ferhatk26@gmail.com Sakine Serap AVGIN: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sakine Serap AVGIN is currently Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Faculty of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education. Her contact information is as follows: KSU Faculty of Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Avsar Campus, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, Ofis. E-mail: serapavgin@hotmail.com European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 15 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) References 1. Acikgul, K., & Aslaner, R. (2015). Investigation of TPACK confidence perception of prospective elementary mathematics teachers. Journal of Education Faculty, 17(1), 118-152. 2. “ltun, T. . Examination of classroom teachers technological pedagogical and content knowledge on the basis of their demographic profiles. Croatian Journal of Education, 15(2), 365-397. 3. Bal, M. S., & Karademir, N. (2013). Revealing the self-confidence levels of social science teachers about Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). Pamukkale University Education Faculty Magazine, 34(11), 15-32. 4. ”aran, E., & Canbazoğlu ”ilici, S. . “ Review of the Research on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Case of Turkey. H. U. Journal of Education, 30(1), 15-32. 5. Baran, E., Chuang, H. H., & Thompson, A. (2011). Tpack: An emerging research and development tool for teacher educators. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 370-377. 6. Bursal, M. (2014). Quantitative methods. Selçuk Beşir Demir Ed. Qualitative, Quantitive and Mixed Method Approaches. (s: 155- . “nkara Eğiten Publishing. 7. ”uyukozturk, Ş. Çakmak, E., “kg(n, 5., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F., (2015) Scientific Research Techniques.. Improved 19th publishing., Pegem Akademi Bookstore. 8. ”uyukozturk, Ş. . Data analysis handbook for social sciences. (10th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Academy. 9. Canbazoğlu ”ilici, S., Yamak, H., Kavak, N., S., & Guzey, S. Technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy scale (TPACK-SeS) for preservice science teachers: Construction, validation and reliability. Eurasian Journal of Education Research, 52, 37–60. 10. Canbazoğlu ”ilici, S. . The pre-service science teachers? technological pedagogical content knowledge and their self-efficacy. Published PhD Thesis, Gazi University Educational Sciences Institute, Ankara. 11. Carr, A. A., Jonassen, D. H., Litzinger, M. E., & Marra, R. M. (1998). Good ideas to foment educational revolution: The role of systematic change in advancing situated learning, constructivism, and feminist pedagogy. Educational Technology, 38(1), 5-14 12. Ciftci, S., Taskaya, S. M. ve “lemdar, M. . Class teachers points of views about FATIH project. Primary -online. 12(1), 227-240. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 16 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) 13. Demir, S. ve Bozkurt, A. (201 . Primary Maths Teachers points of views about teacher sufficiency on technology integration. Primary Online, 10(3), 850-860. 14. Doğan, M. . Primary trainee teachers attitudes to and use of computer and technology in mathematics: The case of Turkey. Educational Research and Review, 5(11), 690-702. 15. Ferdig, R. E. (2006). Assessing technologies for teaching and learning: understanding the importance of technological pedagogical content knowledge. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 749–760. 16. Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK Development in science teaching: measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers, techtrends, Special Issue on TPACK, 53(5), 70-79. 17. Kaya, Z., Özdemir, T. Y., Emre, İ & Kaya, O. N. . Exploring preservice information technology teachers perception of self-efficacy in web-technological pedagogical content knowledge. 6th International Advanced Technologies Symposium IATS’11 , Elazığ. 18. Kayaduman, H., Sırakaya M. ve Seferoğlu S. , February . “nalyzing Fatih Project on Education in terms of Teacher Sufficiency “cademic Science II-XIII. Academic Science Conference Announcements, Inonu University, Malatya. 19. Kereluik, K.; Mishra, P.; Koehler, Matthew. J., (2011), On learning to subvert signs: Literacy, Technology And The TPACK Framework, California Reader, 44(2), 12-18. 20. Koehler, M. J. & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. J. Educational Computing Research, 32(2) 131-152. 21. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. 22. Koh, J.H.L.; Chai, C.S. & Tsai, C.C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large- scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 26(6), 563–573. 23. Koh, J.H.L., & Chai, C.S. (2011). Modeling pre-service teachers. Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) perceptions: The influence of demographic factors and TPACK constructs. IN 24. Kula, A. (2015) Analysis of teacher candidates sufficiency in terms of Technological Pedagogical Field Information (TPFI ”artın University Example. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 3(12), 395-412. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 17 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) 25. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge a new framework for teacher knowledge , Teachers college record, 108(6), 1017- 1054. 26. Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509–523. 27. North, A. S., & Noyes, J. M. (2002). Gender influences on children's computer attitudes and cognitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(2), 135-150. 28. Ovez, F. T. D., & “kyuz, G. . Primary maths teacher candidates technological pedagogical content knowledge modelling. Education and Science, 38(170). 29. Ozgen, K., Narlı, S., & “lkan, H. . Maths teacher candidates technological and pedagogical content knowledge and analysis of perception of the frequency of using technology. Electronical Social Sciences Magazine, 44(44). 30. Ozturk, E. (2013). Class teacher candidates technological pedagogical content knowledge evaluation according to some variables. Usak University Social Sciences Magazine, 13, 223-238. 31. Ozturk, E., & Horzum, M. B. (2011). Technological pedagogical context information scale s adaptation to Turkish. Ahi Evran University Education Faculty Magazine, 12(3), 255-278. 32. Pamuk, S. Ülken, A., & Dilek, N. Ş. . Teacher candidates technology usage sufficiency s evaluation from the frame of Technological Pedagogical Context Information Theoretical Perspective. Mustafa Kemal University Social Sciences Institute Magazinei, 9(17), 415-438. 33. Pamuk, S., Ergun, M. Cakir, R., Yilmaz, H. B., & Ayas, C. (2013). Exploring relationships among TPACK components and development of the TPACK instrument. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10639-013-9278-410.1007/s10639-013-9278-4. 34. Sancar Tokmak, H., Konokman, G. Y., & Yelken, T. Y. (2013). Analysis of Mersin University pre-school teacher candidates technological pedagogical content knowledge (tpack) self-confidence. Ahi Evran University Kirsehir Education Faculty Magazine, 14(1). 35. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(4), 4-14. 36. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 18 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) 37. Sahin, I. (2011). Development of survey of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 97- 105. 38. Timur, B., & Tasar, M. F. (2011). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Self-Confidence Scale s TP“CKSCS) Adaptation to Turkish. Gaziantep University Social Sciences Magazine, 10(2), 839-856. 39. Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M.K. (Winter 2008-2009). The evolution of the required educational technology course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 25 (2) 67-71. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 19 Ferhat Karakaya, Sakine Serap Avgin - INVESTIGATION OF TEACHER SCIENCE DISCIPLINE SELF-CONFIDENCE ABOUT THEIR TECHNOLOGICAL PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (TPACK) Creative Commons licensing terms Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2 │ Issue 9 │ 2016 20