Journals / Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning / 2022 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

Trends in 'Technology Leadership' Research in Education: Scoping Review

Pages
12–33
Publication Date
2022-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In studies on ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) and NETS-A (National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators) standards, it has been concluded that school administrators are seen as technology leaders.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The rapid development of technology and the effective use of technology in education systems have revealed the concept of technology leadership.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, a total of 32 master's and doctoral dissertations on 'technology leadership' published in the National Thesis Center of Turkey (YÖKTEZ) between 2009-2020 were examined.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In studies on ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) and NETS-A (National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators) standards, it has been concluded that school administrators are seen as technology leaders.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2009-2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:technology leadership · ISTE-NETS-A standards · school administrator

Abstract

The rapid development of technology and the effective use of technology in education systems have revealed the concept of technology leadership. In this study, a total of 32 master's and doctoral dissertations on 'technology leadership' published in the National Thesis Center of Turkey (YÖKTEZ) between 2009-2020 were examined. PRISMA (2009) model was preferred in the selection of published thesis studies. This review was carried out using the Scopping Review method of Arksey and O'Malley (2005). In this direction, the scope of the research consisted of 28 master's and 1 doctoral thesis ‘in the field of education and training’, ‘the language of publication is Turkish’, which ‘has the conditions of publication and permission’. Of the examined studies, 26 were conducted using quantitative, 2 qualitative and 1 mixed research method. In the sample distributions in the studies, it is seen that there are 52% teacher participants and 24% administrator participants. When the findings of the studies were examined, it was determined that school administrators' self-efficacy regarding technology leadership, role perceptions and teacher views on technology leadership were the most researched dependent variables. In studies on ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) and NETS-A (National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators) standards, it has been concluded that school administrators are seen as technology leaders. When the literature is examined, it is seen that the studies on technology leadership in education have increased in recent years, but doctoral studies are not sufficient in the general distribution.

🔖

Cite This Article

KORKMAZ, Ö., KUTLU, A. Ö., YAVUZ, Ş. (2022). Trends in 'Technology Leadership' Research in Education: Scoping Review. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 12–33. https://ajindex.com/articles/836693

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (5)

  1. Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language learning: A literature review. International journal of research in english education (IJREE), 3(2), 115–125.
  2. Akıllı, E. (2019). Investigation of the relationship between the management effectiveness and technological leadership level of school managers according to perceptions of teacher. (Unpublished master’s thesis), Marmara University, Institute of Education Sciences, Educational Administration and Supervision, Istanbul. Akın-Mart, Ö. & Tulunay-Ateş, Ö. (2021). Investigation of technological leadership of the school administrators in Turkey: A meta-analysis study. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 10(1), 169-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/buefad.740794
  3. Aksoy, M. E., & Çobanoğlu, L. (2018). An investigation of the relationship between school administrators’ technology leadership competencies and project submissions. Electronic Turkish Studies, 13(18), 31- 39. Anderson, E.R. & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: an empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 1(41), 49-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X 04269517. Arksey, H. & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.
  4. Aykaç, N. & Ulubey, Ö. (2008). Yaratıcı drama yöntemi ile yapılandırmacılık ilişkisinin 2005 MEB ilköğretim programlarında değerlendirilmesi. [Evaluation of the relationship between creative drama method and constructivism in 2005 MEB primary education programs] Creative Drama Journal, 3(6), 25-44.
  5. Balaban, N. U. (2012). Assesing the relationship between technology leadership roles and computer anxiety levels of aministrators. (Unpublished master’s thesis), Anadolu University, Institute of Education Sciences, Department of Educational Sciences, Educational Administration, Supervision, Planning and Economics, Eskişehir. Baş, E. D. (2012). The relationship between elementary school administrators? technology leadership roles and school climate. (Unpublished master’s thesis), Maltepe University, Social Sciences Institute, Department of Educational Sciences, Istanbul. Baybara, M. (2018). The competencies of private and state elementary school administrators regarding their technology leadership roles (İstanbul city, Bahçelievler district sample) (Unpublished master’s thesis), Sabahatti̇n Zaim Univercity, Social Sciences Institute, Department of Educational Science