Analysis Of The Effect Of Use Of Web 2.0 Tools In Online Science Courses On Students Achievements And Digital Literacy

Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia
December 2021, Volume 44
148
Analysis of the Effect of Use of Web 2.0 Tools in Online Science Courses on Students
Achievements and Digital Literacy
1
Hatice Merve Korkut, 2
Hatice Cansu Özpir Mantaş & 3
Mehtap Yıldırım
1,2&3
Marmara University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
1
Corresponding author: koyustuhaticemerve@gmail.com
Abstract
Purpose - This research determined the effect of using Web 2.0 tools in online science courses prepared
according to the 5E model on student achievement and digital literacy.
Methods - For this purpose, the research used the explanatory sequential design. The qualitative dimension of
the study were used semi-structured interviews. The research participants consisted of 40 fifth-grade students
studying at a private school in Istanbul in the 2020-2021 academic years. In the study, quantitative data collected
via academic achievement test and digital literacy scale, while qualitative data obtained from interview and
observation forms. The achievement test and the digital literacy scale administered via Google Forms and the
observations and interviews carried out online via the Microsoft Teams application. While quantitative data were
analysed with a package program, qualitative data were analysed with descriptive analysis.
Findings - The study found a significant difference between the academic achievement test points of the students
in the experimental group. There was no significant difference found between the academic achievement test
points of the students in the control group. There is no significant difference between the points obtained from
the digital literacy scale applied to the students in the experimental and control groups. As a conclusion, the
interviews with three students in the experimental group found that the science lessons taught with Web 2.0 tools
were more interesting and catchy. As a conclusion of the observations made in the experimental group, students
showed a positive tendency towards science lessons with Web 2.0 tools. To summarise, that the observations
supported the interview results.
Significance - The study is important in terms of providing an example for teachers' use of Web 2.0 tools and
making significant contributions to the field of science education because it supports online learning, which is
carried out frequently due to unusual conditions today.
Keywords: 5E Learning model, Online education, Science education, Technology integration, Web 2.0 tools.

149
Introduction
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak (WHO, 2020), which emerged in Wuhan, China, and spread
globally around the world, caused changes in the field of education as in other fields. Consequences of the rapid
spread of the pandemic, schools in many countries are closed. Following the announcement of the first case in
Turkey on March 11, 2020, face-to-face training at all levels of education was suspended on March 14, 2020.
In order not to take away the education and training rights of individuals, the distance education process
has been started quickly (Eken et al., 2020). In Turkey, distance education has been carried out with TV channels,
the Education Informatics Network (EBA) (MEB, 2020), and various applications (Zoom, Microsoft Teams,
etc.), in primary and secondary schools. Distance education infrastructure, or different applications (Zoom,
Microsoft Teams, etc.), are used for education at universities. With the transition to distance education, problems
such as technology-internet access, lack of tools/equipment such as computers/tablets have caused anxiety in
many educators, students (Ince et al., 2020) and revealed inequality of opportunity in education.
The rapid spread of digital technologies and internet use in the 21st
century is perceived as an age of
transformation because of changes in access to information (Barak, 2017). As a result, of the development of
technology and the widespread use of the internet, technology has been integrated into education (Fırat & Köksal,
2019). Integration of technology into the educational environment is an important component in achieving the
gains in the programme in the learning-teaching process. With the integration into education and training of
technology, two sub-components have emerged as education and training technologies in technology. While
"educational technologies" are required for the planning, preparation of learning environments, the design and
evaluation of educational processes; all materials used in the learning environment are associated with ‘teaching
technologies’ (Adıgüzel & Yüksel, 2012; Irmak & Demirci-Güler, 2018). Applications made with technology-
based Web 2.0 tools are more efficient in paying attention to students’ individual differences, responding to their
learning needs (Tomlinson,1999; as cited in Konstantinidis et al.,, 2013, p.287-288), making learning effective,
permanent and internalising the learned information (Korkmaz et al., 2019) rather than materials that require
pencil and paper.
Literature Review
Web 2.0 tools first appeared in 2004 at a web conference organised by O'Reilly and Medialive International
(O’Reilly, 2007). Web 2.0 tools allowed communication, collaboration and content sharing among users (Pieri
& Diamantini, 2014). The most important feature of Web 2.0 technological tools is that they are presented
comprehensively by taking advantage of the network effects. Thanks to its internet infrastructure, applications
that enable the preparation, sharing, and transmission of information on various platforms are accepted as Web
2.0 tools (O’Reilly 2005; 2006; Fahser-Herro & Steinkuehler, 2009). Since Web 2.0 tools are an environment
that directs the theory of multiple intelligences (Holland, 2019), they also support individual learning because
they appeal to many senses (London & Hall, 2011). It can be said that Web 2.0 tools have a significant place in
education in terms of being easy to use and student-centred (Bower et al., 2009). Traditional learning methods
are inadequate for students in generation Z, which have grown intertwined with technology in the 21st
century.
Therefore, the use of new technologies in educational environments is important in terms of students’ ability to
internalise information according to multiple intelligence areas, taking into account individual differences
(Korkmaz et al., 2019). Technological developments have an important place in terms of increasing access to
information and developing different skills. In general, thanks to the changing and developing technology,
students are expected to be literate individuals suitable for the age they live in. The concept of literacy is primarily

150
defined as the acquisition of reading and writing skills (Lim et al., 2009). As a result, of the changes in science
and technology in recent years, literacy has been used as a concept that defines competencies in certain fields
(literacy, scientific literacy, network literacy, etc.). Among these sub-branches, the concept of digital literacy
related to today's information and communication technologies has emerged (Kozan & Özek, 2019). Digital
literacy is a concept introduced into the literature by Paul Gilster in the late 1990s. According to Sangül (2013),
digital literacy is defined as easily accessing information with digital technologies, understanding the information
it reaches, using and evaluating the information it understands effectively (Sangül, 2013 as cited in Öçal, 2017).
Individuals are expected to have five basic skills to become a digitally literate individual. These skills are shown
in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Basic skills required for digital literacy (Ng, 2012).
It can be said that the acquisition of digital literacy skills is related to web-based teaching. According
to McManus (1996), Web-based teaching is teaching in which writing, sounds, shapes, graphics, and images,
which are called "hypermedia" networks, are carried out via the internet (McManus, 1996 as cited in Çetin &
Günay, 2010). Web-based teaching is based on constructivist thinking (Çetin & Günay, 2010). Constructivism
is an approach that offers individuals an opportunity to learn by doing and experiencing. Constructivism is
accepted as a learning-teaching approach that enables students to understand the correlations between the
information they learn and the environment they live in (Jofili et al., 1999). One of the application methods of
the constructivist approach, which was developed by Bybee and has an important place in science education, is
the 5E model (Bozdoğan & Altunçekiç, 2007). Each letter E in the 5E model represents the stages of the model.
These stages are engage, explore, explain, elaborate and evaluate (Bybee et al., 2006). The 5E model is a process
based on the constructivist approach to reveal the knowledge and misconceptions of the students, to make a better
sense of the information by comparing the old information with the new information learned. In addition, the 5E
Digital
Literacy
Accessing
computer-
based
resources
Performing
computer-
based
operations
Researching
information in
a computer-
based
environment
Identifying
and evaluating
information
Protecting
yourself from
the negative
consequences of
digital
environments

151
model includes students in the learning process, to attract the attention of the lesson and to provide an in-depth
understanding of the subject (Brooks & Brooks, 1993). In the teaching process, the 5E model is used to transfer
knowledge between the information learned by students based on scientific process skills and new knowledge
(Campbell, 2006; Özenç et al., 2020). For this purpose, the 5E model was preferred in the study.
When the related studies in the literature were examined there are studies examining the effect of web-
based science teaching on student achievement. In Baig's (2011) study, it was concluded that the use of Web 2.0
applications in physics teaching increased student achievement. Akgün et al. (2014) examined the effect of
technology-based teaching on academic achievement and concluded that technology-based science teaching
made a significant difference in student achievement. Çoruhlu-Şenel et al. (2016) concluded that web-based
teaching material based on a brain-based learning approach positively affects science achievement. Kölemen
(2018) conducted a study to determine the impact of a science course conducted using a computer-based teaching
method on students' success status, and found a significant difference in student success as a result of the study.
Hursen (2020) examined the effect of the problem-based learning method supported by Web 2.0 tools on the
academic achievement of pre-service teachers and found a significant difference (in favour of the experimental
group) among the pre-service teachers. Sönmez-Ergül & Çakır (2021) examined the contribution of wikis and
blogs, accepted as Web 2.0 technologies, to academic performance and concluded that the effect of Web 2.0
technologies on academic performance is positive.
Studies examining the effect of web-based science teaching on students' digital literacy levels were
present in the literature. Fu and Pow (2011) investigated the effect of the web-based collaborative inquiry-based
learning model on digital literacy and concluded that the web-based collaborative learning model has a positive
effect on digital literacy. On the other hand, Kozan (2018) concluded that there was no significant difference
between various variables (such as computer usage time, computer ownership) and digital literacy levels. In the
study conducted by Gürleroğlu (2019), no effect of Web 2.0 applications and science teaching on students' digital
literacy was found.
Based on all these, this study aims to investigate the effect of using Web 2.0 tools on student
achievement and digital literacy in online science lessons prepared according to the 5E model. For this purpose,
the effectiveness and efficiency of Web 2.0 tools used in online education have been tried to be revealed. With
the spread of online education, the use of Web 2.0 tools in education has become more important. Therefore, the
study is important in terms of setting an example for teachers' use of Web 2.0 tools.
Research Problem
This research was carried out to determine the effect of using Web 2.0 tools in online science courses prepared
according to the 5E model on student achievement and digital literacy.
Research Question (RQ)
What is the effect of using Web 2.0 tools prepared according to the 5E learning model in the fifth grade online
science lesson on students' academic achievement and digital literacy?
Sub-problems
(1) Is there a significant difference between the achievements of the experimental group students studying
with the science courses prepared according to the 5E model using Web 2.0 tools and the control group
students studying with the current science programme in online education?;

152
(2) Is there a significant difference between the digital literacy of the experimental group students studying
students studying with the current science programme in online education?; and
(3) What are the opinions of the experimental group students in using Web 2.0 tools in an online science
lessons prepared according to the 5E model?
Methodology
Research Design
Mixed research methods provide an opportunity to examine a phenomenon in depth by using both quantitative
and qualitative data. In this study, explanatory-sequential design (Figure 2), one of the mixed research methods,
was used. The explanatory sequential pattern takes place in two stages. It is a design in which quantitative data
are collected and analysed during the first and second stages. In the study, firstly, quantitative data were collected
and analysed, and then qualitative data were collected and analysed in line with the results of the quantitative
data. All the data obtained were interpreted together. In the quantitative dimension of the study, a pre-test and
post-test, semi-experimental design with control groups was preferred. Groups were formed as experimental and
control groups randomly (Büyüköztürk et al., 2016). In the qualitative dimension of the study, semi-structured
interviews were made with the experimental group students.

153
Figure 2
Research design.
Participants
The participants of the study are composed of a total of 40 students, 21 experimental groups and 19 control
groups, who continue their education in the fifth grade of a private school in Istanbul. A convenience sampling
method was used in addition to interviews conducted with three students. Three students who participated in the
interview were determined according to the criterion sampling method, taking into account their achievement
levels (low, medium, high) in line with the results of the academic achievement test.
Mixed-Method Explanatory Sequential Design
Pre-test Post-test
Process
Study group
Experimental
Group
21 Students (4
Males + 17
Females)
Research
Questions
Control Group
19 Students (7
Males + 12
Females)
Achievement
Pre-test Digital
Literacy pre-
scale
(Quantitative)
Achievement
Post-test
Digital
Literacy post-
scale
(Quantitative)
Observation
form
Interview
form
Experimental
application (Science
lessons supported by
Web 2.0 tools
according to 5E
learning model)
Control application
(Science lessons
created according to
curriculum)
(1) Is there a significant difference between the achievements of the experimental group
students studying with the science courses prepared according to the 5E model using Web 2.0
tools and the control group students studying with the current science programme in online
education?
(2) Is there a significant difference between the digital literacy of the experimental group
students studying with the science courses prepared according to the 5E model using Web 2.0
tools and the control group students studying with the current science programme in online
education?
(3) What are the opinions of the experimental group students
in using Web 2.0 tools in an online science lessons prepared
according to the 5E model?

154
The Role of the Researchers
One of the researchers assumed the role of practitioner as she was the science teacher of the students in the study
group. Other researchers, on the other hand, did not take a direct part in the activities carried out during the
teaching process and participated as observers.
Validity and Reliability
The academic achievement test and the digital literacy scale were used in the quantitative dimension of the study.
The Cronbach Alpha test was used to ensure the reliability of the tests. The observation and semi-structured
interview forms were used in the qualitative dimension of the study and forms were presented to a field expert
and two science teachers who are experts in their field to ensure validity and reliability. Field experts stated that
the forms were appropriate.
Data Collection Tools
In the study, quantitative data were collected with achievement tests and digital literacy scale; qualitative data
were obtained with the observation and semi-structured interview form prepared by the researchers. The
researcher observed the students during the application process and the observations were noted in the
observation form. A semi-structured interview conducted with three students in the experimental group to
examine the students’ views on science lessons supported Web 2.0 tools. The interview form prepared by the
researchers in line with the expert opinion consisting of 12 open-ended questions used for the interview. The
interviews conducted online by Microsoft Teams and lasted about 15-20 minutes.
Achievement Test
The 'Force Measurement and Friction' achievement test created by Ozan and Sağır-Uluçınar (2019) used to
investigate the effect of science lessons supported by Web 2.0 tools on the achievement of students in online
education. Prior approval requested for this study. The achievement test consisted of 30 multiple-choice
questions. In this study, the reliability value of KR-20: 0.85. The questions in the achievement test directed to
the gains in 'Force Measurement and Friction'. According to Bloom's taxonomy, the questions are at the level of
knowledge (3), comprehension (6), application (7), analysis (12), and synthesis (2) (Ozan, 2019).
The reliability analysis of the ‘Force Measurement and Friction’ achievement test performed and the
Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient is 0.728. According to the Cronbach’s Alpha value, the achievement test is reliable.
Digital Literacy Scale
To investigate the effect of science lessons supported by Web 2.0 tools on students’ digital literacy in online
education, "Digital Literacy Scale" adapted into Turkish by Hamutoğlu et al. (2017) used with approval. The
digital literacy scale, which consists of 17 items, is in the 5-point likert type such as "Strongly Agree", "Agree",
"Undecided", "Disagree" and "Strongly Disagree". The original digital literacy scale has a 4-factor structure:
attitude, technical, cognitive, and social. The reliability of the scale examined using the internal consistency
coefficient and test-retest method. The internal consistency points of the scale is 0.93. Considering the data, the
scale is valid and reliable. In the study, the reliability analysis of the digital literacy scale was performed and the
Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient is 0.793. According to the Cronbach’s Alpha value, the digital literacy scale is
reliable.

155
Interview
Patton (2002) states that the easiest way to understand an individual's inner world and point of view is by
interview. Thanks to the interviews, unobserved situations such as experiences, attitudes, and reactions easily
understood. Interviews divided into three are unstructured, semi-structured and structured interviews (Yıldırım
& Şimşek, 2018). The important advantages of semi-structured interviews are that they are used at every stage
of the research, they are an effective way of cooperation between the interviewer and the participant, they offer
the individual the opportunity to express themselves, they provide in-depth information about a subject, and they
are easy to analyse (Büyüköztürk et al., 2016).
To support the data obtained from the achievement test and digital literacy scale, a semi-structured
interview form was prepared by the researchers. The interview form consists of 12 open-ended questions. The
interview included questions about the time spent on the computer, the purpose of using the computer, general
information about Web 2.0 tools, and the positive/negative aspects of Web 2.0 tools. To ensure the validity of
the interview questions, the opinions of a field expert and two science teachers were taken. A semi-structured
interview was conducted with three students in the experimental group to examine the students’ views on science
lessons supported by Web 2.0 tools. In line with the data obtained from the achievement test, students were
selected for interview based on student achievement (low/medium/ high).
Observation
Observation is defined as the direct or indirect examination of the data needed about the research subject in-
depth, in detail, and focusing on the objectives (Patton, 2002; Büyüköztürk et al., 2016). In the research, the other
researcher observed the students in the experimental group. Observations were made by observing the records of
science lessons conducted over the Microsoft Teams application, and the researcher noted the observations.
Procedure
In this section, the applications made during the research process are included (see Table 1).
Table 1
Application Process
Time Groups Experimental Manipulation
6 lesson hours Experimental Current science curriculum supported by Web 2.0 tools
6 lesson hours Control Current science curriculum without Web 2.0 tools
For the control group of the study, an appropriate science education instruction was provided for the
curriculum and the activities prepared with Web 2.0 tools were not used. During the implementation process, the
lessons were conducted via Microsoft Teams. In the control group, activities in the textbook were carried out in
line with the gains related to friction force during six lesson hours.
The activities prepared by the researchers with Web 2.0 tools according to the 5E model were applied
to the students in the experimental group in six lesson hours. During the implementation process, the lessons
were conducted on Microsoft Teams. Web 2.0 tools and applications used at every stage of the 5E model are
shown in Table 2.

156
Table 2
Gains, the stages of the 5E model, the applications made with the Web 2.0 tools used in these stages and application images and links
Gains Stage of the 5E model Applications made with the Web
2.0 tools used in these stages
Application images and links
F.5.3.2.1. It gives examples of
friction force from daily life.
F.5.3.2.2. Friction force
discovered by experimenting
with the effect of motion in
various environments.
Experiments are carried out on
the effect of friction force on
movement on rough and
slippery surfaces.
F.5.3.2.3. It generates new
ideas to increase or decrease
friction in daily life.
Engage: The "Virtual Exhibition" that was made in the
ArtSteps application to draw the attention of the
students and prepare them for the lesson is shown to the
students. To determine the readiness of the students, the
students are asked to make a mind map on what might
come to mind when the word "friction force" is
mentioned. Then the poster made by the teacher in the
Word Art application is shown to the students. In the
next step, the teacher presents the Concept of Cartoon
to the students. After examining the concept cartoon,
students are asked to have questions in their minds and
to discuss the information in the cartoon. After the
students’ prior knowledge and misconceptions are
determined, the banner is presented to the students.
Students’ are encouraged to think about the banner.
After the banner is shown, a video about the subject is
shown.
Artstep- ‘Force of Friction’ Virtual
Exhibition
WordArt- ‘Force of Friction’ Poster
Storyboard that- ‘Force of Friction’
Concept Cartoon
Easelly- ‘Force of Friction’ Banner
Animoto- ‘Force of Friction’ Video
https://www.artsteps.com/view/5ff0a282
03a12521432b9377?currentUser
https://animoto.com/play/PDUFw7JQz
FCJAYr6sPloDA

157
Explore: In this phase where students’ are active;
students are asked to design an experiment to observe
that the friction force changes depending on the type of
the friction surface. Later, Defne's Adventures-Concept
Story is read with the students. The questions in the
concept story are discussed.
Storybird- Defne's Adventures
Concept Story
Explain: At the stage where teachers are more active;
a lecture is made in the presentation prepared in the
Prezi application. Thus, it is explained to the students
what is friction force, how it differs according to
surfaces, what can be done to increase/decrease friction
force.
Prezi- ‘Force of Friction’ Presentation
https://prezi.com/p/ot6fnh9b4ksp/?pre
sent=1
Elaborate: In this phase, students acquire new
knowledge/experiences by further deepening previous
knowledge and experiences. The Scratch Game is
played to deepen the students’ gains. Then, to
understand better the subject, the empty parts of the
Concept Map are asked to be filled.
Scratch- ‘Force of Friction’ Game
İnspiration- ‘Force of Friction’
Concept Map
https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/463492
167/
Evaluate: The activities in Quizlet and Kahoot
applications are carried out to obtain information about
the learning process of the students.
Quizlet- ‘Force of Friction’
Electronic Cards
Kahoot- ‘Force of Friction’ activity
https://quizlet.com/_95tdwj?x=1jqt&i=
3cx53l
https://create.kahoot.it/share/5-snf-
surtunme-kuvveti/c777242a-bd8e-
407a-b3df-b91f3dea9113

158
Data Analysis
The process of reaching logical conclusions by making sense of data is called data analysis (Merriam, 2002). In
this study, quantitative data (achievement test, digital literacy scale) were analysed with a statistical programme
(SPSS 20.0) and qualitative data (observation, interview) were analysed with descriptive analysis. Descriptive
analysis is the summarisation and interpretation of the obtained data within the framework of the determined
themes. The purpose of descriptive analysis is to present the findings to the reader in an organised and interpreted
manner. Descriptive analysis is carried out in four stages. At the first stage, a framework for data analysis is
created from the research questions or in line with the conceptual framework of the research. The framework in
this study was created and tabulated according to the questions in the semi-structured interview form. After this
stage, the edited data are processed, findings are defined and interpreted. Explanation of cause-effect correlations
between findings ensures that the comments made by the researcher are more qualified (Yıldırım & Şimşek,
2013).
Findings
In this chapter, the findings and tables of findings obtained from the academic achievement test, digital literacy
scale, interview form, and observation results applied to the students are included.
RQ 1: Explanation of difference between the achievements of the experimental group students studying
students studying with the current science programme in online education
Findings from the Achievement Test
The results of the academic achievement test for the first sub-problem of the study are presented below. First,
the Shapiro-Wilk test was applied to the test results and it was determined whether the groups showed normal
distribution. Shapiro-Wilk test findings are shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Shapiro-Wilk test findings
Groups Shapiro-Wilk Test p
Experimental (Pre-test)
Control (Pre-test)
Experimental (Post-test)
Control (Post-test)
0.964
0.932
0.886
0.801
0.600
0.191
0.019*
0.001*
As seen in Table 3, it was concluded that the points collected from the experimental and control groups from the
pre-tests showed a normal distribution (p > 0.05), and both two groups from the post-tests showed no normal
distribution (p < 0.05). In line with these findings, it was decided to use parametric analyses during the
comparison of pre-tests. Non-parametric tests were used for comparisons related to post-tests.

159
Table 4
Results of the independent samples t-test for the comparison of the pre-test points of the experimental and
control groups
Group N X S t p
Experimental 21 0.566 0.172 -1.439 0.145
Control 19 0.651 0.198
The data of the achievement test pre-tests of the experimental and control groups are shown in Table 4. The
academic achievement test means the point is 0.566 for the experimental group and 0.651 for the control group.
There is no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the pre-test success of the students in the experimental and control
groups. In this case, the achievements of groups were the same before the application process.
Table 5
Comparison of the achievement test pre-test and post-test points of the students in the experimental group with
the Wilcoxon signed ranks test
Group Rank N Rank
Average
Rank Total Z p
Experimental
Negative Rank 5 8.10 40.50
-2.416 0.016
Positive Rank 15 11.30 169.50
Equal Rank 1
When the pre-test and post-test achievement test points of the students in the experimental group are examined
in Table 5, a significant difference (p < 0.05) was found between the points.
Table 6
Comparison of achievement test pre-test and post-test points of the students in the control group with the
Wilcoxon signed ranks test
Group Rank N Rank
Average
Rank
Total
Z p
Control
Negative Rank 7 9.86 69.00
-1.050 0.294
Positive Rank 12 10.08 121.00
Equal Rank 0
When the pre-test and post-test achievement test points of the students in the control group were examined in
Table 6, no significant difference (p > 0.05) was found between the points.

160
Table 7
Mann-Whitney U test findings of achievement test post-tests
Group N Rank
Average
Rank
Total
U p
Experimental 21 19.83 416.50 185.500 0.702
Control 19 21.24 403.50
When Table 7 was examined, there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) in the achievement test post-tests of
the experimental and control groups.
RQ 2: Explanation of difference between the digital literacy of the experimental group students studying
students studying with the current science programme in online education
Findings from the Digital Literacy Scale
The results of the digital literacy scale were presented below. The Shapiro-Wilk test was applied to determine
whether the groups showed normal distribution in the Digital Literacy Scale. Table 8 shows the Shapiro-Wilk
test findings.
Table 8
Shapiro-Wilk test findings
Group Shapiro-Wilk Test p
Experimental (pre-test)
Control (pre-test)
Experimental (post-test)
Control (post-test)
0.964
0.966
0.959
0.926
0.609
0.689
0.493
0.144
When Table 8 is examined, the pre-test and post-test points of the students’ Digital Literacy Scale in the
experimental and control groups were seen as a normal distribution (p > 0.05). It was concluded that the obtained
data could be evaluated with parametric tests.
Table 9
Independent samples t-test findings of the digital literacy scale pre-tests
Group N X S t p
Experimental 21 3.848 0.556 -1.003 0.253
Control 19 4.012 0.465
When the points of the experimental and control groups' pre-tests are examined in Table 9, it can be said that the
groups are equivalent in terms of digital literacy since there is no significant difference (p > 0.05).

161
Table 10
Comparison of the digital literacy scale pre-test/post-test points of the experimental group students with the
dependent samples t-test
Group N X S t p
Experimental (pre-test) 21 3.848 0.556 -0 .313 0.956
Experimental (post-test) 21 3.904 0.595
The dependent t-test results in Table 10 shows whether there was a significant difference between the pre-test
and post-test digital literacy scale points within the experimental group. According to these results, there was no
statistically significant difference for the digital literacy between the pre-test and post-test points of the
experimental (t = -0.313, p > 0.05) group.
Table 11
Results of the paired samples t-test for the comparison of the pre-test and post-test digital literacy points in the
control group
Group N X S t p
Control (pre-test) 19 4.012 0.465 -0.159 0.480
Control (post-test) 19 4.040 0.691
The dependent t-test results in Table 11 show whether there was a significant difference between the pre-test and
post-test digital literacy scale points within the control group. According to these results, there was no statistically
significant difference for the digital literacy between the pre-test and post-test points of the control (t = -0.159; p
> 0.05) groups.
Table 12
Results of the independent samples t-test for the comparison of the post-test digital literacy scale points of the
experimental and control groups
Group N X S t p
Experimental (post-test) 21 3.904 0.595 -0.665 0.777
Control (post-test) 19 4.040 0.691
According to the independent samples t-test results (Table 12), a significant difference was not determined in the
digital literacy between the mean post-test points of the experimental and control groups (t = -0.665, p > 0.05).

162
RQ 3: Opinions of the experimental group students in using Web 2.0 tools in an online science lessons
prepared according to the 5E model
Findings Obtained from the Interview Form
In the research, the data obtained from the interviews with the three students at different levels in the experimental
group are analysed with descriptive analysis and shown in Table 13.
Table 13
Comparison of students views on Web 2.0 tools
Student views on
Web 2.0 tools
Student 1 (S1) Student 2 (S2) Student 3 (S3)
Time spent on the
computer and the
purpose of
computer use
 30-60 minutes
(excluding online
lessons)
 Taking tests, playing
games, chatting with
friends
 60-90 minutes (excluding
online lessons)
 Follow homework, meet
with friends
 30-60 minutes
(excluding online lessons)
 Participating in French
studies and playing games
What is known
about Web 2.0
tools
 She does not know  She does not know  Applications carried out
over the internet used for
education and training
In which course/
courses they
prepared material
with Web 2.0 tools
 Information
technologies
 Music
 Information technologies
 Science
 French
 Information technologies
Programs used by
students for
materials
prepared with
Web 2.0 tools
 Scratch  Canva
 Easelly
 Canva
 Scratch
Views on the use
of materials
designed with Web
2.0 tools in the
course
 Thinking that she
learned better because
the lessons were fun
 Expressing that she
has learned the
computer better and
has knowledge about
Web 2.0 tools
 Lessons are interesting
 Not getting bored
because the lessons are fun
 Higher attendance
 Lessons are interesting
 She stated that Web 2.0
tools are a good solution
for students who are bored
in lessons

163
The most liked
Web 2.0
applications from
the activities
prepared by the
researchers
 Scratch  Kahoot and Scratch  Kahoot and Scratch
Positive aspects of
applications
designed with Web
2.0 tools
 Learning lessons
more effectively
 Providing easy
access to lesson
activities later
 Repeatability of
activities
 Providing experience
 Not distracted during
lessons
 Lessons are more
enjoyable
 Increasing the
permanence of the activities
 No need to write
 To eliminate this
problem for students who
cannot find their books
 Make lessons more
effective
 Activities to be fun and
interesting
 High retention in mind
 Remembering the
information more easily
due to the visuality of the
activities
 Easy access and
experience to these
activities thanks to the
internet
Negative aspects of
applications
designed with Web
2.0 tools
 The negative aspect
is not expressed
 The negative aspect is not
expressed
 Appear small on the
screen
 Difficulty preparing
events with Web 2.0 tools
If you were a
science teacher,
how would you
handle the
lessons?
 She stated that she
would teach lessons by
using applications such
as Scratch, since the
lessons are fun with
Web 2.0 tools
 She stated that she would
prefer to use Web 2.0 tools
in lessons to attract the
attention of the students
 She thought that students
will remember the
information more and they
will process the lessons
using Web 2.0 tools
The findings obtained from the interviews with students at three different levels from the experimental group are
included in Table 13. In general, the science lessons conducted with Web 2.0 tools were liked by the students. In
addition, students stated that it should be used in other courses, especially in science. The most liked Web 2.0
application among the activities prepared by the researchers was Scratch. Students especially said that Scratch
activity was more fun and visual than other activities.

164
Findings Obtained from the Observation
In the research, the majority of the students in the experimental group carefully examined and liked all the
activities performed with Web 2.0 tools. The transition to the lesson was achieved by giving short information
with Web 2.0 tools. Before starting the subject, the "Virtual Exhibition" was shown to the students from the
Artsteps application. The virtual exhibition attracted the attention of all students and they started to follow the
lesson with interest. The activities prepared with Web 2.0 tools were carried out in order according to the 5E
model (see Table 2). The use of a different Web 2.0 tool at each stage motivated the students more and enabled
them to participate in the course enthusiastically. Most of the students liked Web 2.0 applications such as
Artsteps, Kahoot, Scratch, Concept Map, and Word Art more. In general, it has been observed that students have
a positive behaviour towards science lessons conducted with Web 2.0 applications.
Discussion and Conclusion
In this research, it was aimed to determine the effect of science courses prepared according to the 5E model by
using Web 2.0 tools in online education on student achievement and digital literacy. In line with the first sub-
problem of the research, the achievement test was applied as pre-test and post-test to the students in the
experimental and control groups. When the achievement test points applied to the experimental group as pre-test
and post-test were examined, a significant difference (p < 0.05, p = 0.016,) was found. In online education, it is
seen that science education, which is carried out with Web 2.0 tools according to the 5E model, has a positive
contribution to the academic success of students in the experimental group. In the related literature; when the
studies conducted by Çetin & Günay (2010), Bayrak (2011), Güven & Sülün (2012), Akgün et al. (2014),
Çoruhlu-Şenel et al. (2016), Kölemen (2018) and Yıldırım & Gürleroğlu (2021) are examined, it has been
observed that the science classes conducted with Web applications have a positive effect on the academic success
of students. The results of the research are similar to the results in the literature.
In line with the second sub-problem of the study, the Digital Literacy Scale was applied as a pre-test
and post-test to the students in the experimental and control groups. No significant difference (t = -0.313, p >
0.05 p = 0.956) was found between the points of the experimental group in the pre-test and post-test digital
literacy scale. By comparing the points of the control group from the pre-test and post-test digital literacy scale,
no significant difference (t = -0.159; p > 0.05, p = 0.480) was found between the groups. In line with this
information obtained, it can be said that science education, which is carried out according to the 5E model using
Web 2.0 tools in online education, does not affect the digital literacy of the students. In the literature, Kozan
(2018) investigated the digital literacy levels of pre-service teachers and their sensitivity to cyberbullying in
terms of different variables (having a computer, time to use a computer, etc.) and there was no significant
difference between digital literacy levels and variables in his study. The results in the literature are similar to the
results of the research.
According to the data obtained from the interviews with three students in line with the third sub-problem
of the study, students' views on science lessons conducted with Web 2.0 tools in online education are positive.
In general, the students stated that teaching the lessons with Web 2.0 tools is fun, interesting and the lessons are
catchier. As a result of the interviews, the most popular Web 2.0 tool was Scratch. Scratch, an interactive Web
2.0 tool, can be said to play a supportive role in teaching abstract concepts, especially in science courses. When
the related literature is examined, it is seen that students’ views in web-supported science teaching are positive
in the studies conducted by Çetin (2010), supporting the results of this study.

165
In the study, the students in the experimental group were observed for six-lesson hours by the
researcher. As a result, of the observations, the science lesson, which was carried out with Web 2.0 tools, attracted
the attention of the students, and the students actively participated in the course process. Since the activities
carried out with Web 2.0 tools appeal to more than one sense, it is thought that they contribute to the individual
learning of students. It can be said that the observations of the researchers support the interviews.
Further research
This research, it was aimed to reveal the impact of science lessons prepared according to the 5E model using
Web 2.0 tools in online education on student achievement and digital literacy. Since Web 2.0 tools increase
students’ interest and performance in lessons and the contents are easily accessible, the use of Web 2.0 in lessons
can be expanded. This study was carried out with 40 students on a specific subject within the scope of the
‘Measurement of Force and Friction’ unit. Different results may occur if more sampling is applied within the
same or different unit. This study was carried out with activities prepared with Web 2.0 tools according on the
5E learning model. Researchers can be carried out on the using of Web 2.0 tools with different learning models.
References
Adıgüzel, A., & Yüksel, I. (2012). Evaluation of teachers’ instructional technologies integration skills: a
qualitative need analysis for new pedagogical approaches. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 265-
286.https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/balikesirnef/issue/3374/46574
Akgün, A., Özden, M., Çinici, A., Aslan, A., & Berber, S. (2014). An investigation of the effect of technology-
based education on scientific process skills and academic achievement. Electronic Journal of Social
Sciences, 13(48), 27-46. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.97729
Baig, M. A. (2011). Research papers a critical study of effectiveness of online learning on students’
achievement. I-Manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 7(4), 28–34.
Barak, M. (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for
technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 283-303. DOI
10.1007/s11165-015-9501-y
Bayrak, B. (2011). The effect of problem based instruction supported with web technology on the academic
achievement, conceptual understanding, scientific process skills of 8th grade students in science and
techonology instruction: Acid base sample. [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Marmara University,
Bozdoğan, A. E., & Altunçekiç, A. (2007). The opinion of pre-service science teachers about the utility of 5E
teaching model. Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(2), 579 - 590. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.1251
13/237
Bower, M., Hedberg, J., & Kuswara, A. (2009). Conceptualizing Web 2. 0 enabled learning designs. In same
places, different spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009. (pp. 1153- 1162).
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland09/procs/bower.pdf
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In Search of Understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms
Virginia: ASCD Alexandria.
Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. and Demirel, F. (2016). Scientific Research
Methods. (21 th
ed). Pegem Pub . DOI 10.14527/9789944919289

166
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006).
The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, Co: BSCS, 5, 88-98.
Campbell, M. (2006). The effects of the 5E learning cycle model on students understanding of force and motion
concepts. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 809. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/809
Çetin, O., & Günay, Y. (2010). The impact of web-based teaching in academic success and students in science
education. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 3(38), 19-34.
http://egitim.cu.edu.tr/efdergi
Çetin, O. (2010). The assessment of the effects of web-based teaching which is designed according to
‘hypermedia design model’ in science and technology classes to the academic performance and
attitudes of students and the assessment of the views of teachers and students about the content of web-
based teaching. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Dokuz Eylül.
Çoruhlu, T. Ş., Nas, S. E., & Keleş, E. (2016). Evaluation of efficacy the web-based instructional material
prepared according to brain-based learning approach: “light and sound” unit. Amasya Education
Journal, 5(1), 104-132. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/amauefd/issue/24319/257703
Eken, Ö , Tosun, N , Tuzcu Eken, D . (2020). Urgent and compulsory move to distance education upon covid-
19: a general evaluation. Journal of National Education, The epidemic process in Turkey and the World
Education, 113-128. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.780722
Fahser-Herro, D., & Steinkuehler, C. (2009). Web 2.0 literacy and secondary teacher education. Journal of
Computing in Teacher Education, 26(2), 55-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10402454.2009.10784633
Fırat, E. A., & Köksal, M. S. (2019). Effects of instruction supported by Web 2.0 tools on prospective teachers'
biotechnology literacy. Computers & Education, 135, 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2019.
02.018
Fu, J., & Pow, J. (2011). Fostering digital literacy through web-based collaborative inquiry learning--a case
study. Journal of Information Technology Education, 10.
Gürleroğlu, L. (2019). Investigation of the effect of science teaching on student achievement, attitude to
motivation and digital literacy performed with Web 2.0 applications suitable for 5E model. [Master
thesis].Marmara University,
Güven, G., & Sülün, Y. (2012). The effects of computer-enhanced teaching on academic achievement in 8th-
grade science and technology course and students attitudes towards the course. Journal of Turkish
Science Education, 9(1), 68-79. http://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/421
Hamutoğlu, N. B., Güngören-Canan, O., Uyanık-Kaya, G., & Erdoğan-Gür, D. (2017). [Adapting digital literacy
scale into Turkish]. Ege Journal of Education, 18(1), 408-429. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.295306
Hursen, C. (2020). The effect of problem-based learning method supported by Web 2.0 tools on academic
achievement and critical thinking skills in teacher education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-
19.
Holland, A. A. (2019). Effective principles of informal online learning design: A theory-building metasynthesis
of qualitative research. Computers & Education, 128, 214-226 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018
.09.026
Irmak, B , Demirci- Güler, M . (2018). Fen eğitiminde teknoloji kullanımı üzerine yapılan çalışmaların içerik
analizi [Content Analysis of Research on Technology Use in Science Education]. Ahi Evran University
Kırşehir Faculty of Education Journal, 19(3), 2473-2496. https://doi.org/ 10.29299 /kefad. 2018.
19.03.019

167
İnce, E. Y., Kabul, A., & Diler, İ. (2020). Distance education in higher education in the Covid-19 pandemic
process: A case of Isparta Applied Sciences University. International Journal of Technology in
Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 343-351.
Jofili, Z., Geraldo, A., & Watts, M. (1999). A course for critical constructivism through action research: A case
study from biology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(1), 5-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0263514990170101
Konstantinidis, A., Theodosiadou, D., & Pappos, C. (2013). Web 2.0 tools for supporting teaching. Turkish
Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(4), 287-295.
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojde/issue/16898/176108
Korkmaz, Ö., Vergili, M., Çakir, R., & Erdoğmuş, F. U. (2019). The impact of plickers Web 2.0 assessment and
evaluation tool on exam anxiety and academic success of students. Gazi Journal of Education
Sciences, 5(2), 15-37. https://dx.doi.org/10.30855/gjes.2019.05.02.002.
Kozan, M., & Özek, M.B. (2019). Examination of department of ceit teacher candidates’ digital literacy levels
and cyberbullying sensitivities. Firat University Journal Of Social Sciences, 29(1).
https://doi.org/10.18069/firatsbed.538657
Kölemen, S. (2018). The effect of research-based education and computer-assisted instruction in structured
learning approach on achievement, learning approaches, motivations and self-efficacy of students in
6th-grade science course. (Master's thesis). Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya.
Lim, W. Y., Hung, D., & Cheah, H. M. (2009). An interactive and digital media literacy framework for the 21st
century. In Handbook of research on new media literacy at the K-12 level: Issues and challenges (pp.
119-127). IGI Global.
London, M., & Hall, M. J. (2011). Web 2.0 support for individual, group and organizational learning. Human
Resource Development International, 14(1), 103-113.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2011.542902
MEB. (2020). Minister Selçuk, received in the field of education against coronavirus explained the measures.
https://www.meb.gov.tr/bakan-selcuk-koronaviruse-karsi-egitim-alaninda-alinan-tedbirleri-
acikladi/haber/20497/tr, Web
Merriam, S. B. (2002). Introduction to qualitative research. Qualitative research in practice: Examples for
discussion and analysis, 1(1), 1-17.
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy?. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
O'reilly, T. (2005). What Is Web 2.0-Design Pattern and Business Models for the Next Generation
Software. http://www. oreillynet.com/1pt/a/6228. What Is Web 2.0 - O'Reilly Media
O’Reilly, T. (2006). Web 2.0 compact definition: Trying again. Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again -
O'Reilly Radar https://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
O'reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of
software Communications & strategies, (1), 17.
Ozan, F. & Uluçınar-Sağır, Ş. (2019). Development of Stem Activities for "Measurement of Force and the
Friction" Unit. Journal of Inquiry Based Activities, 9(1), 52-66.
Ozan, F. (2019). An investigation of STEM applications efficiency related to different variables towards 5th-
grade unit measuring the force and friction. [Master thesis]. Amasya University.

168
Öçal, F. N. (2017). Perceptions of digital literacy competence related to primary school teacher and parents
themselves with their children. [Unpublished master's thesis]. Gazi University, Ankara.
Özenç, M., Dursun, H., & Şahin, S. (2020). The effect of activities developed with web 2.0 tools based on the 5e
learning cycle model on the multiplication achievement of 4th graders. Participatory Educational
Research, 7(3), 105-123. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.37.7.3
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry: A personal, experiential
perspective. Qualitative social work, 1(3), 261-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325002001003636
Pieri, M., & Diamantini, D. (2014). An e-learning Web 2.0 experience. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 116, 1217-1221. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.371
Sönmez, E. E., & Çakir, H. (2021). Effect of Web 2.0 technologies on academic performance: a meta-analysis
study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5(1), 108-127.
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. (9 th
ed.). Seçkin Pub.
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H.(2018). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. (11 th
ed.). Seçkin Pub.
Yıldırım, M., & Gürleroğlu, L. (2021). A teaching suggestion in the covid-19 disease pandemic period: the
educational website enriched by Web 2.0 tools. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and
Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 17(2), 1-17.
WHO (2020). WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on Covid-19.
https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-atthe-media-
briefing-on-covid-19
Acknowledgment
This study was presented at the 14th National Science and Mathematics Congress, May 19-21, 2021, Turkey.
Authors:
Hatice Merve Korkut
Email: koyustuhaticemerve@gmail.com
Hatice Cansu Özpir Mantaş
Email: cansuozpir@gmail.com
Mehtap Yıldırım
Email: mehtap.yildirim@marmara.edu.tr

Analysis Of The Effect Of Use Of Web 2.0 Tools In Online Science Courses On Students Achievements And Digital Literacy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Analysis Of The Effect Of Use Of Web 2.0 Tools In Online Science Courses On Students Achievements And Digital Literacy

Similar to Analysis Of The Effect Of Use Of Web 2.0 Tools In Online Science Courses On Students Achievements And Digital Literacy (20)

More from Scott Donald

More from Scott Donald (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Analysis Of The Effect Of Use Of Web 2.0 Tools In Online Science Courses On Students Achievements And Digital Literacy