International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education
Abbreviation: IJIAPE | ISSN (Print): 2602-4780 | ISSN (Online): 2602-4489 | DOI: 10.29329/ijiape

Original article    |    Open Access
International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education 2023, Vol. 7(4) 166-183

Comparison of Teachers' Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Cyberbullying Awareness (Cyprus Sample)

Yeşim Çırak & Özden Demirkan

pp. 166 - 183   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijiape.2023.627.1

Published online: December 31, 2023  |   Number of Views: 30  |  Number of Download: 57


Abstract

This study aimed to compare teachers' self-efficacy in using online technologies with their students' awareness of cyberbullying behaviors. In this regard, the need to support the opinions obtained through the survey with qualitative data was felt. Therefore, the phenomenological pattern method, a mixed method research in which qualitative and quantitative research methods are used together, was used in the research. For the quantitative data of the research, data were collected using the "Demographic Information Form", "Online Technologies Self-Efficacy Scale" and "Teachers' Cyberbullying Awareness Scale". A semi-structured interview form was used for qualitative data. The study included 256 teachers from Northern Cyprus's secondary and high schools. The Mann-Whitney U Test was used in quantitative data analysis for independent variables with two categories, while the Kruskal-Wallis Test statistic was used for comparisons between more than two independent groups. Content analysis was used in the study of qualitative data. The results showed that there was a significant and positive relationship between teachers' online technology self-efficacy and their students' awareness of cyberbullying behaviors. Female teachers are much more knowledgeable about cyberbullying issues than male teachers. Teachers between the ages of 25 and 44 had higher self-efficacy in online technologies than other age groups. Teachers whose fields are not related to informatics departments stated that training is necessary to increase online technology self-efficacy. It was observed that the majority of teachers stated that the disclosure of personal information was the most common form of cyberbullying occurring in schools. In line with these results, various suggestions were included in the research.

Keywords: Online Technologies Self-Efficacy, Bullying, Cyberbullying, Cyberbullying Behaviors, Teachers’ Cyberbullying Awareness


How to Cite this Article

APA 6th edition
Cirak, Y. & Demirkan, O. (2023). Comparison of Teachers' Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Cyberbullying Awareness (Cyprus Sample) . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education, 7(4), 166-183. doi: 10.29329/ijiape.2023.627.1

Harvard
Cirak, Y. and Demirkan, O. (2023). Comparison of Teachers' Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Cyberbullying Awareness (Cyprus Sample) . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education, 7(4), pp. 166-183.

Chicago 16th edition
Cirak, Yesim and Ozden Demirkan (2023). "Comparison of Teachers' Online Technologies Self-Efficacy and Cyberbullying Awareness (Cyprus Sample) ". International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education 7 (4):166-183. doi:10.29329/ijiape.2023.627.1.

References
  1. Abbitt, J. T. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs about technology integration and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) among preservice teachers. Journal of digital learning in teacher education, 27(4), 134-143. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anna, W. (2019). Cyberbullying in the light of challenges of school-based prevention. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 7(3), 13-26. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ayas, T., & HORZUM, M. B. (2011). Exploring the Teachers' Cyber Bullying Perception in terms of Various Variables. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2). [Google Scholar]
  4. Baki, A., & Gökçek, T. (2012). An overview of mixed methods research. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 11(42). [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandura, A., & Freeman, W. H. (1997). Company. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. [Google Scholar]
  8. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chowdhury, M. (2020), “4 ways to improve and increase self-efficacy”, available at: https://positivepsychology.com/3-ways-build-self-efficacy/. [Google Scholar]
  10. Early Intervention Foundation (EIF). (2021, October). The Teacher Tapp survey, commissioned by the EIF, took place in October 2021 with 4,336 secondary school teachers. Retrieved from https://www.eif.org.uk/press-release/only-one-in-three-teachers-feel-equipped-to-help-stop-cyberbullying  [Google Scholar]
  11. Eden, S., Heiman, T., & Olenik‐Shemesh, D. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions, beliefs and concerns about cyberbullying. British journal of educational technology, 44(6), 1036-1052. [Google Scholar]
  12. Firat, M., Yurdakul, I. K., & Ersoy, A. (2014). Bir eğitim teknolojisi araştırmasına dayalı olarak karma yöntem araştırması deneyimi. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(1), 64-85. [Google Scholar]
  13. Fredrick, S. S., Coyle, S., & King, J. A. (2023). Middle and high school teachers' perceptions of cyberbullying prevention and digital citizenship. Psychology in the Schools, 60(6), 1958-1978. [Google Scholar]
  14. Gürpınar, A., & Oğuz, E. (2018). Examination of the relationship between teachers’ cyberbullying awareness and online technologies self-efficacy (istanbul silivri sample). [Google Scholar]
  15. Hayashibara, K. N. E. (2017). Teachers' perceptions of cyberbullying (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). [Google Scholar]
  16. Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 343-367. [Google Scholar]
  17. Honicke, T., & Broadbent, J. (2016). The influence of academic self-efficacy on academic performance: A systematic review. Educational research review, 17, 63-84. [Google Scholar]
  18. Horzum, B. M., & Çakır, Ö. (2009). Çevrim içi teknolojilere yönelik öz yeterlik algısı ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2021). ISTE standards for educators: Empowered Professional. https://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards-for-teachers [Google Scholar]
  19. Horzum, M. B. ve Ayas, T. (2013). Rehber öğretmenlerin sanal zorbalık fakındalık düzeyinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H. U. Journal of Education), 28(3), 195-205. [Google Scholar]
  20. Karas K. (2019). Internet self-efficacy and attitudes toward cyberbullying prevention programs in teachers and mental health professionals in Minnesota. (Published Ph.D. thesis, ProQuest Number: 27548514), Capella University, US. [Google Scholar]
  21. Koh, J. H., & Frick, T. W. (2009). Instructor and student classroom interactions during technology skills instruction for facilitating preservice teachers' computer self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(2), 211-228. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kundu, A. (2020). Toward a framework for strengthening participants' self-efficacy in online education. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(3), 351-370. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lareki, A., Altuna, J., & Martínez-de-Morentin, J. I. (2023). Fake digital identity and cyberbullying. Media, Culture & Society, 45(2), 338-353. [Google Scholar]
  24. Locke, E. A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Personnel psychology, 50(3), 801. [Google Scholar]
  25. Macaulay, P. J., Betts, L. R., Stiller, J., & Kellezi, B. (2018). Perceptions and responses towards cyberbullying: A systematic review of teachers in the education system. Aggression and violent behavior, 43, 1-12. [Google Scholar]
  26. Marvasti, A.B. (2004). Qualitative Research in Sociology. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  27. Miles, M. B.,& Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  28. Mliless, M., & Larouz, M. (2015, November). Students’ Safety of Private Information on Social Media Risks of Dissemination and Educational implications. In Conference Proceedings. Innovation in Language Learning 2015. [Google Scholar]
  29. Olenik-Shemesh, D., Heiman, T., & Eden, S. (2012) Cyberbullying victimization in adolescence: relationships with loneliness and depressive mood, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 17:3-4, 361-374, https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2012.70422 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Peng, R., Razak, R. A., & Halili, S. H. (2023). Investigating the factors affecting ICT integration of in-service teachers in Henan Province, China: structural equation modeling. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-11. [Google Scholar]
  31. Prensky, M. (2012). From digital natives to digital wisdom. Thousand Oaks: CA: Corwin. [Google Scholar]
  32. Rajbhandari, J., & Rana, K. (2023). Cyberbullying on social media: An analysis of teachers’ unheard voices and coping strategies in Nepal. International journal of bullying prevention, 5(2), 95-107. [Google Scholar]
  33. Redmond, P., Lock, J. V., & Smart, V. (2018). Pre-service teachers' perspectives of cyberbullying. Computers & Education, 119, 1-13. [Google Scholar]
  34. Redmond, P., Lock, J. V., & Smart, V. (2020). Developing a cyberbullying conceptual framework for educators. Technology in Society, 60, 101223. [Google Scholar]
  35. Serin, H. (2012). Ergenlerde sanal zorbalık / sanal mağduriyet yaşantıları ve bu davranışlara ilişkin öğretmen ve eğitim yöneticilerinin görüşleri (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Türkiye. [Google Scholar]
  36. Tekindal, M., & Şerife, U. Ğ. U. Z. (2020). Nitel araştırma yöntemi olarak fenomenolojik yaklaşımın kapsamı ve sürecine yönelik bir derleme. Ufkun Ötesi Bilim Dergisi, 20(1), 153-172. [Google Scholar]
  37. Von Marées, N., & Petermann, F. (2012). Cyberbullying: An increasing challenge for schools. School psychology international, 33(5), 467-476. [Google Scholar]
  38. Woolfolk, A., & Margetts, K. (2012). Educational psychology Australian edition. Pearson Higher Education AU. [Google Scholar]
  39. Yenilmez, Y. ve Seferoğlu, S. S. (2013). Sanal zorbalık ve öğretmenlerin farkındalık durumlarına bir bakış. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(169), 420-432. [Google Scholar]