IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i1p21582440241227769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Mixed-Method Study on the Distance Education Process Experienced in the Faculties of Education

Author

Listed:
  • BaÅŸak Karakoç Öztürk

Abstract

Based on the experiences of preservice Turkish teachers (PTTs) along with the transition to distance education, the objective of this study was to evaluate their views on this process in terms of various variables and determine the problems they experienced during the distance education process. One hundred eighty PTTs constituted the sample of the present mixed-method study. Afterward, 40 PTTs were selected from the sample by the criterion sampling method, and their responses to open-ended questions constituted the qualitative data. The data were collected online using the “Interview Form for Distance Education†developed through Google Forms. Descriptive statistical (percentage and frequency distributions) techniques, the chi-square technique for a single sample and two variables were used to analyze quantitative data, and the qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis. The study showed that most PTTs regarded the attainments obtained through distance education as not equivalent to face-to-face education, and there was no significant relationship between these views and gender, grade level, and grade point average. However, there was a significant relationship between PTTs’ problems in distance education, their places of residence, and connection speed. Furthermore, while quite few PTTs thought that distance education was beneficial to developing higher-order thinking and language skills and enriching interaction, most preservice teachers found distance education useful in terms of providing an opportunity to repeat the course content and ensuring space and time flexibility.

Suggested Citation

  • BaÅŸak Karakoç Öztürk, 2024. "A Mixed-Method Study on the Distance Education Process Experienced in the Faculties of Education," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1), pages 21582440241, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241227769
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241227769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241227769
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241227769?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241227769. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.