Students' perceptions to use technology for learning: Measurement integrity of the modified Fennema-Sherman attitudes scales

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 185-201

  Kahveci, Murat ^a  

^a ÇANAKKALE ONSEKIZ MART UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 76449083718     PISSN: None     EISSN: 13036521     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Angeli, C., Valanides, N., & Bonk, C. J. (2003). Communication in a web-based conferencing system: The quality of computer-mediated interactions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 31-43.
2. Aydin, C. H., & Tasci, D. (2005). Measuring readiness for e-learning: Reflections from an emerging country. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 244-257.
3. Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Can, G., & Cagiltay, K. (2006). Turkish prospective teachers' perceptions regarding the use of computer games with educational features. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 308-321.
5. Cavas, B., Cavas, P., Karaoglan, B., & Kisla, T. (2009). A study on science teachers' attitudes toward information and communication technologies in education. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 20-32.
6. Colley, A., & Comber, C. (2003). Age and gender differences in computer use and attitudes among secondary school students: What has changed? Educational Research, 45(2), 155-165.
7. Comber, C., & Colley, A. (1997). The effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes the effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39(2), 123.
8. Comber, C., Colley, A., Hargreaves, D. J., & Dorn, L. (1997). The effects of age, gender and computer experience upon computer attitudes. Educational Research, 39(2), 123.
9. Cronin, M. W., & Cronin, K. A. (1992). A critical analysis of the theoretic foundations of interactive video instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 19(2), 37-41.
10. Dabaj, F. (2009). The role of gender and age on students'' perceptions towards online education case study: Sakarya university, vocational high school. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 120-123.
11. Doppen, F. H. (2004). Beginning social studies teachers' integration of technology in the history classroom. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32(2), 248-279.
12. Ellington, J. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effects of calculators on students' achievement and attitude levels in precollege mathematical classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics, 34(5), 433-463.
13. Ellington, J. (2006). The effects of non-cas graphing calculators on student achievement and attitude levels in mathematics: A meta-analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 106(1), 16-25.
14. Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1976). Fennema-sherman mathematics attitude scales. Instruments designed to measure the attitudes toward the learning of mathematics by females and males. JSAS: Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6(Ms. No. 1225), 31.
15. Ferdig, R. E. (2005). Towards implementing technologies in education: Exploring the pedagogy and people of good innovations. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(2), http://www.tojet.net/articles/425.htm.
16. Fish, W. W., & Gill, P. B. (2009). Perceptions of online instruction. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 53-64.
17. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5 ed.). New York: NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
18. Glasser, W. (1986). Control theory in the classroom. New York, NY, US: Perennial Library/Harper & Row Publishers.
19. Holt, D. T., & Crocker, M. (2000). Prior negative experiences: Their impact on computer training outcomes. Computers & Education, 35(4), 295-308.
20. Hurley, N. P., & Vosburg, J. D. (1997). Modern technology: The relationship between student attitudes toward technology and their attitudes toward learning using modern technology in an everyday setting (Publication no. ED415841). Retrieved 10/24/2007, from ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) database:
21. Isman, A., & Celikli, G. L. N. E. (2009). How does student ability and self-efficacy affect the usage of computer technology? The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), 33-38.
22. Jaeger, R. M. (1988). Survey research methods in education. In R. M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 303-330). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
23. Jayaratne, T. E., Thomas, N. G., & Trautmann, M. (2003). Intervention program to keep girls in the science pipeline: Outcome differences by ethnic status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 393-414.
24. Kadijevich, D. (2000). Gender differences in computer attitude among ninth-grade students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(2), 145-154.
25. Kahveci, M. (2007a). An instrument development: The interactivity survey (is). Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 163-174.
26. Kahveci, M. (2007b). Investigating the existence of interactivity in various instructional settings. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching International Conference (NARST), New Orleans, USA.
27. Kahveci, M. (2009). Shared perceptions of professors about instructional interactivity. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
28. Kaino, L. M., & Salani, E. B. (2004). Students' gender attitudes towards the use of calculators in mathematics instruction. Paper presented at the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2004.
29. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
30. Kay, R. (2006). A systematic evaluation of learning objects for secondary school students. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(4), 411-448.
31. Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models. NJ: Erlbaum: Hillsdale.
32. Keller, J. M. (1987). Strategies for stimulating the motivation to learn. Performance and Instruction, 26(8), 1-7.
33. Keller, J. M., & Kopp, T. W. (1987). Application of the arcs model of motivational design. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrance Earlbaum Associates.
34. Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies and findings on computer based instruction. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O'Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35. Lancy, D. F. (1990). Microcomputers and the social studies. OCSS Review, 26(1), 30.
36. Li, N., & Kirkup, G. (2007). Gender and cultural differences in internet use: A study of china and the uk. Computers & Education, 48(2), 301.
37. Melancon, J., Thompson, B., & Becnel, S. (1994). Measurement integrity of scores from the fennema-sherman mathematics attitudes scales: The attitudes of public school teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(1), 187-192.
38. Mercier, E. M., Barron, B., & O'Connor, K. M. (2006). Images of self and others as computer users: The role of gender and experience. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(5), 335.
39. Ofori, R., & Charlton, J. P. (2002). A path model of factors influencing the academic performance of nursing students. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 38(5), 507-515.
40. Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. C. (1996). Dimensions of effective interactive learning with telematics for distance education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(4), 45-56.
41. Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and mathematics performance of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 124-139.
42. Rieber, L. P. (1993). A pargmatic view of instructional technology. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
43. Romano, D. M., & Brna, P. (2001). Presence and reflection in training: Support for learning to improve quality decision-making skills under time limitations. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 4(2), 265-277.
44. Russell, C. J., Mattson, J., Devlin, S. E., & Atwater, D. (1990). Predictive validity of biodata items generated from retrospective life experience essays. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 569-580.
45. Ryba, K., & Anderson, B. (1990). Learning with computers: Effective teaching strategies: ISTE Publications.
46. Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2004). Scaffolding problem-based teaching in a traditional social studies classroom. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32(3), 349-378.
47. SPSS. (2007). The statistical package of social sciences (Version 16.0.1 (Nov 15, 2007)): SPSS Inc.
48. Stevens, T., Olivarez, A. J., Lan, W. Y., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K. (2004). Role of mathematics self efficacy and motivation in mathematics performance across ethnicity. Journal of Educational Research, 97(4), 208-221.
49. Stoney, S., & Wild, M. (1998). Motivation and interface design: Maximising learning opportunities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(1), 40-50.
50. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. from http://www.sbceo.k12.ca.us/~ims/techcen/EETT/ImpactofET.pdf
51. Wishart, J., & Blease, D. (1999). Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning after installing a computer network in a secondary school. British journal of Educational Technology, 30(1), 25-41.
52. Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, english, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.
53. Yang, S. C. (2003). Computer-mediated history learning: Spanning three centuries project. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 299-318.