A toolbox for democratic and participatory methods in education

Kolfschoten, Gwendolyn L.

doi:10.7564/12-fule4

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…e-forums, e-consultation, e-referenda, e-mailing, online decision-making, e-campaigning, e-voting, and e-petitioning) (Coleman & Norris, 2005;Şendağ, 2010, factors affecting participation such as political knowledge, political talk, digital integrity, digital citizenship, digital divide, mobile device use, ICT use, gender, income, education level, and age (Bailey & Ngwenyama, 2011;Şendağ, 2010;Şendağ & Toker, 2016;Shelley II et al, 2006;Shirazi et al, 2010). A considerable amount of research on the participation of pre-service teachers in e-democracy have been done (Karickhoff & Howley, 1997;Macintosh et al, 2003;Oral, 2008;Şendağ, 2010;Şendağ & Toker, 2016;Ünlü, 2017;Yiğit & Çolak, 2010) while the same is not true for inservice teachers (Kolfschoten, 2012;Park, 2018). Moreover, the quality of participation in e-democracy applications in educational settings refers to a crucial research gap to fulfill.…”

Section: The Participation In E-democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of e-democracy applicability in Turkish K-12 schools

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, the COVID-19 pandemic has paved the way for a more democratic climate in K-12 schools. Administrators and teachers have had to seek out new ways through which to interact. This raises two questions; “What about the quality of interaction and participation in decision-making?” and “Which factors affect the level of participation in decision-making?” The aim of the current research is to determine the factors that predict the applicability level of e-democracy (i.e., “reporting and declaring opinions” and “decision-making”) in K-12 schools. An associational research design was used in order to attain the main goal of the study, with Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA) technique used to analyze the factors predicting the applicability level of e-democracy. Data were collected from a total of 765 inservice K-12 teachers through a questionnaire developed by the researchers. DFA results showed “motivation to participate,” “the level of participatory democracy in the country,” and higher levels of the “use of Twitter” as the significant determinants of different levels of e-democracy application. Moreover, the results also indicated that those participants with the belief of e-democracy’s applicability at the decision-making level found the “motivation level of stakeholders” to be the most critical. Their level of Twitter use was higher. They also believed that the level of participatory democracy in the country was at a higher level. Another result of the DFA pointed to “security and ethical issues,” and lower levels of the “use of Twitter” as factors differentiating the group believing that e-democracy can be applicable with reporting and the declaration of opinions to administrators from the other groups. The discussions highlighted the critical role of participation level in e-democracy within K-12 schools.

show abstract