journ studies vol. - eric · ts, have brou ducation is be e opportunity hnology’s poc and impleme...

A Com

Corresponden

Received: Jan

doi:10.11114/j

Abstract

In this study, preschool studprivate and oftest and Moduand descriptivdetermined thhigher than thbetween the su

Keywords: co

1. Introductio

We can feel din the forefrothemselves, anused in almostoday’s conditresults that ubeneficial for 2006).

Computer-assto affiliate wipreschool are educational tethe problem seducational techildren havecomfortable wand Trollip (1they can be uwhat they’ve or not. The ch2004).

Computers copresented to tgives the oppowhat they’ve lof the childregetting informstimulus. This

mputer As

nce: Nilüfer Ok

nuary 25, 2016

jets.v4i3.1332

it is aimed to dents on the acfficial schools ule Tests applive statistics andhat the academhe other group’uccess of the s

omputer assist

on

distinctly the raont particularlynd it is arguedst every field itions in which

using computethe children (

isted educationith the technol

as the childreechnology suppsolving skills oechniques, edue the opportunwhile learning,

991) are in thused as an instrlearnt, it provihildren can al

ontribute to ththe children thortunity to thelearnt, it contrn (Alabay, 20

mation, commus richness cat

ssisted Ap

kur Akçay, Fac

Accepted:

U

determine thecademic succein Ağrı city ceied after finishd independent

mic success of ’s academic suschool boys or

ed education, p

apid changes iny in educationd that using tein education, th the individuers in prescho(Sprigle & Sc

n starts at an elogy. Arı and Ben learn and dports the increof the childrenucational tech

nity to meet w and the schoo

he opinion thatrument througides fluency, also use the com

he education phrough using ce children to reributes the chil06; Chen & C

unicating and ches the atten

pplicationTheir C

Nilüfe

culty of Educa

February 27, 2

URL: http://dx.

e effect of comss. The sampleenter. As data hing the subject test are used

f the group onuccess on whicgirl, and succ

preschool, scie

n the technolon environmenchnology in ethey provide th

uals live in tecool education chaefer, 1984;

early age as mBayhan (2003develop at difase in the qual

n, it improves hnologies provwith advanced ols increase prt using computgh which the cand children camputer as an

process in precomputers, theeview the subjeldren to develoChang, 2006; Dhaving fun is

ntion of the ch

223

n in Prescharacteri

er Okur Akçay

ation, Ağrı İbra

2016 On

doi.org/10.111

mputer-assistede of the study collecting too

ct every weekd in the analysin which compuch traditional iess is in favor

ence, seasons

ogy in recent ynts, have brouducation is behe opportunitychnology’s poc

and implemeClements & S

much as possibl) stated that th

fferent rates, blity and quantithe sense of a

vides meaningtechnologies,

roduction and ters in prescho

children can inan be evaluatedinstrument wi

eschool educate children are ect they don’t op new methodDemir, 2007). the fact that c

hildren and co

Journ

I

chool Edustics

y

ahim Çeçen Un

nline Published

114/jets.v4i3.1

d instruction wconsists of 86

ols General Ac. The collectedis of the data. uter-assisted ininstruction hasof the student

years in every ught the term eneficial in may to give educacket, it can beenting educatiSaramo, 2002;

le, it will be phe reasons whbecome skilledity in the thinkart, the childregful studying , educational ttheir efficacy ool education interact with ead whether theyith which they

tion. Various allowed to leaunderstand as

ds in problem The main rea

computers are ontribute to th

nal of EducatioVol.

SSN 2324-805XPublished

URL

ucation: S

niversity, Ağrı

d: February 28

332

while teaching children from

chievement Tesd data is calcuIn the light of nstruction hass been appliedts in private sch

phase of our deducational t

any ways. Besation to the stue inferred fromion through t; Sancak, 2003

positive at that hy educationald in evaluationking and writinen can use the

opportunities technology mwith educationis important in

ach other, childy’ve learnt they can get infor

and rich learnarn by having

s much as theysolving by stim

ason why the rich in terms

he hand-eye co

on and Training4, No. 3; Ma

X E-ISSN 2by Redfame P

L: http://jets.redf

Seasons a

ı, 04100, Turke

, 2016

the subject sem the nursery c

st used as pre ulated with SPf the obtained ds been applied, there is no dihools.

daily lives. Coechnology aloides computerudents at any

m the conductthe computers3; Yaşar, 2004

rate for the in technology isn and communng subjects, it d sources at hofor the child

makes the childnal technologyn terms of the dren can keep e subject beingrmation (Li &

ning environmg fun, using coy want and to rmulating the ccomputers areof visual and oordination (u

g Studies arch 2016 324-8068

Publishing fame.com

and

ey.

easons to lasses of test-post SS 16.0, data, it is

is quite ifference

mputers, ong with rs can be level. In ed study can be

4; Kacar,

ndividual s used in nication, develops

ome with dren, the dren feel y. Allessi fact that in mind

g thought & Atkins,

ments are omputers reinforce creativity e used in auditory

using the

Journal of Education and Training Studies Vol. 4, No. 3; March 2016

224

mouse, painting, drawing studies, etc.), problem solving, fast decision making, long term memory, maintaining their attention and acting purposefully if this richness has an educational content (Lankshear & Knobel, 2003; Tracey & Young, 2007; Couse & Chen, 2010; Macaruso & Rodman, 2011).

Thanks to computers, the creativity and critical thinking skills of the children are improved, children communicate with each other, and they can work together to reach the target (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997). And this has positive effects on the children’s social development (Haugland, 2000; Scoter, Ellis & Railsback, 2001; Stevenson & Hackett, 2009). Besides the computers have advantages, some of the researchers emphasize that the computers can have negative effects on children. Using computers more than necessary, software which is not appropriate for the children’s age, spending time in front of the computer without adult supervision can create negative results. According to Okan (2003), as the learning environments are designed using with animations and sounds, the children learn without any trouble, and other learning environments are expected to be designed as so. Besides, that the computers have some negative elements can affect the children’s development negatively (Hatzigianni & Margetts, 2012). The studies conducted in recent years have been focused on how the computers help children’s learning and how they do this best (Judge, Puckett & Cabuk, 2004; Nir-Gal & Klein, 2004; Penuel et al. 2009). Clements and Samara (2003) determined in their study that the children are quite interested in the subject while using computers and react positively, many teachers can make learning process a lot funnier by using computer activities, and computers have effects which make it easier for the children to learn. While implementing computer-assisted education in preschool education, it should be paid attention that supervision by parents or teachers should be done, the computer should be used in teaching-learning process, the computer should not be used for social media or game purposes, the children should use the computer for formal education purposes, which should be supervised by teachers and parents.

According to Tondeur et al. (2007), using computer in the classroom serves three main purposes. The first of all these is that the skills of the students related to using computer are developed. Other purposes are that the computers provide the students to get information and learn. In this direction, the teachers who use computers in learning environments have big duties. As a matter of fact, the problems occurring in the implementation process of this method were determined in the studies that the teachers have limited or inadequate knowledge and skills about computers and they are inadequate in using computers in preschool activities (Ljung, Bengtsson & Ottosson, 2005). The fact that the teachers have positive attitudes towards computers during their undergraduate education is affective in solving these problems. In the studies conducted with the preschool preservice teachers related to implementing computer-assisted education, it was found that the preservice teachers have positive attitudes towards this subject, and preschool preservice teacher can use computers effectively as a teaching method in their classes (Oğuz, Ellez, Akamca, Kesercioğlu & Girgin, 2011; Akçay & Halmatov, 2015). With the use of computers in teaching-learning process, abstract concepts can become concrete. Abstract concepts can become concrete with the use of the computers in the education process. Computers should be used in preschool education especially for development of the researcher side of characteristics of the children and to create more effective learning environments. Louis Robinson likens the children’s learning to use computers as learning to talk and states that the children can learn computer easier and faster than the adults (Arı & Bayhan, 2003).

In the preschool period in which the children start to wonder about what’s going on in their environments, science which is a part of our lives should be given the necessary importance and it should be related with the daily life for the children (Eliason & Jenkins, 2003; Akçay, 2014). Children in the preschool period construct their own knowledge by actively researching the world they live in and they construct the basis of the construction of each information they get (Namlu, 2002; Tuğrul, 2005; Aktaş, 2007; Kandır & Orçan, 2010). Science education is necessary for the preschool children in terms of being able to think critically more, finding different solutions to the problems, being able to make comparisons of different events, developing their observation skills and increasing their attention span (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997). With a science class which would be conducted with a computer, it becomes possible that the children have the opportunities that a computer provides to the education. Turkey has a location in which four seasons are experiences because of geographic conditions. It is quite important in direction of the science class aims that understanding the features of the seasons spring, summer, fall and winter which the children find the opportunity in the environments to observe. In this study, seasons subject was dealt and it was aimed that the children learn the features of the seasons. According to the literature view, the effect of computer-assisted education on different courses and subjects were done before (Lui, 1997; Şahin, 2006; Kacar & Doğan, 2007; Ayvacı & Devecioğlu, 2010), however, no study has been conducted about seasons. In this direction, answers to the questions below are sought.

1. Does the computer-assisted education have effect on the children’s learning of seasons subject?

2. Is there a difference between the academic success of male and female students in teaching the subject of seasons?

3. Is there difference between the schools the children get educated in teaching the subject of seasons?

Journal of Edu

2. Method

In this study, tnursery class. with experime

2.1 Research G

The sample ofpreschools (screlated to the and Control G

Table 1. Data

As it is seen inthe study. 48 ogroup. 22 femwas paid atten

2.2 Data Colle

In the directiotwo assistant tools in the stuvalidity analyGeneral achieMT2= .75; Mthe content of

Module 1 and

Table 2. The C

Module Te Modul Modul Modul Modul Modul

ucation and Tra

the effectivity The study is ent and control

Group

f this study cochool A: privasample of the

Group (CG) in

related to the

GeFemMaTot

n Table 1, 86 cof these childr

males and 20 mntion that the n

ection Tools

on of this studprofessors andudy. Pilot stud

ysis of the testevement test w

MT3= .77; MT4f the module te

d Module 2 test

Content Inform

esting le 1 le 2 le 3 le 4 le 5

aining Studies

of computer-ain the model ol groups.

onsists of 86 nuate, school B: study is indic

both schools w

Sample of the

ender

male ale tal children gettinren were in co

males from schnumber of the m

dy, data collectd two teachers

dy was first cont (Croanbachswas used as 4= .69; MT5=esting is indica

ting sample ar

Figure 1. Mo

mation of the M

Matching thMatching thDrawing suExpressing Matching th

assisted educatof semi-exper

ursery class chofficial) in A

cated in Table were created ra

Study

A (private) CAEG CG 10 12 12 8 22 20

ng educated in omputer-assistehool A and 24 fmale and fema

ting instrumens. General achnducted in the s’ alpa=.72) wpretest-posttes .79) was cond

ated in the Tabl

e indicated in

odule 1 (left) an

Module Testing

Contehe clothes with whe food belonginummer and winte

the features of fhings related to

225

tion on teachinimental study

hildren (averagAğrı city center

1. Two groupsandomly.

Preschools

the nursery claed education gfemales and 2ale students in

nts were develhievement testdevelopment

were done andst in the studducted at the ele 2.

the figure belo

nd Module 2 (

g

entweather forecastng to summer aner clothes four different sefour different se

ng of seasons swith pretest-p

ge of age: 66 mr in fall term s as Computer

B (official) CAEG C

16 8 10 10 26 18

asses of A andgroup and 38 o0 males from each group wa

loped by the rt and module tof the achieve

d the last formdy. Module tesend of weekly

ow.

(right) Testing

tnd winter

easons easons (food-bev

Vol.

subject to the 5posttest repetit

month-72 monof 2014-2015

r-Assisted Edu

CG

0

d B primary schof them were inschool B partias close to eac

researcher by atesting were ument test and

m of the test wsting (Croanbsubjects. The

Sample

verages-clothes)

4, No. 3; Mar

5-6 year-old chtive measurem

nth) from two academic yea

ucation Group

hools were incn traditional eicipated in the ch other.

asking the opiused as data cthen the reliab

was used in thbachs’ alpa M

information r

)

rch 2016

hildren in ments and

different ars. Data (CAEG)

cluded in ducation study. It

inions of ollection

bility and he study.

MT1=.70; elated to

Journal of Edu

2.3 Implement

Teaching of thchild was takeand traditiona

2.3.1 Teaching

Before startingcomputer-assiinstruction whThe researchethe children wconducted thewrong”, “no, situations wheand if he coulactivity was d

2.3.2 Teaching

While the seabecame a modthe activities activities were

2.4 Analysis of

The obtained analyses of th

3. Findings

The graphic rindicated belo

ucation and Tra

tation Process

he seasons suben care of sepa

al education wa

g with CAE

g to teach withisted teaching hich was givener prepared aniwere given vere tasks correcttry again” wheen the childrenld not have do

dealt. Figure 2

F

g with Traditio

sons subject wdel for the chiland he provid

e prepared thro

of the Data

data was analye data.

related to the ow.

aining Studies

s

bject to nurseryarately. In the as implemente

h computer, thactivities, the

n by the compuimations and arbal prizes suctly in the chilen they did it wn could not fulone it, they weindicates the a

Figure 2. The

onal Method

was being taughldren and he dded that the chough each wee

yzed by using

results of the

Figure 3. Th

y class studentteaching proced in the other g

he teacher exple game that wauter was followactivities by usch as “well donld games; andwrong, and thelfill the task inere helped andactivity exampl

screenshots of

ht in the class decided what thhildren did th

ek.

SPSS 16.00 a

e pretest and p

he pretest and

226

ts was conductess, computer-group.

lained necessaras to play on wed. The teachsing Macromene, you did it d they were ge children wern the games, thd the child wasles.

f the animation

where educatihe children did

he activities. A

and descriptive

posttest condu

posttest result

ted in 5 weeks-assisted educa

ry informationthat day was her explained

edia Flash MXright”, “nicelyiven verbal nore encouraged hey were waites provided to d

ns used in CAE

ion took placed during the le

As parallel wit

e statistics and

ucted in the s

s of A and B sc

Vol.

s. In the data coation was imp

n and rules reladetermined byagain what wa

X software. In ty done”, congrotifications suto play the gaed to fulfill thdo it himself a

E groups.

e with traditionearning procesth the experim

d independent

schools partici

chools

4, No. 3; Mar

ollection procelemented in on

ated to the aimy the teachersas asked whenthe prepared aratulations” wuch as “no, yoames once morhe task for a feand then the fo

nal method, thes. The teacher

mental group,

t-test were use

ipating in the

rch 2016

ess, each ne group

ms. In the and the

n needed. activities, hen they ou did it re. In the w times, ollowing

e teacher planned

different

ed in the

study is

Journal of Edu

As a result of the standard ddifference betmean of the p57.80 and the school B, it w10.1; the arithnot significanCAEG was 63was 10.34, annursery class c

Table 3. The r

On analyzing standard devidifference betresult of CAEthe differenceapplied at the

As a result of 19.2 and the sas 6.20, and determined th6.08, the arithsignificant; wof CAEG and

Table 4. Data

According to and the standathe difference

ucation and Tra

f the analysis indeviation was tween them waposttest resultsstandard devi

was determinedhmetic mean ont (t(42)= -.7993.84 and the std the differencchildren from

results of prete

Tests Pretes Postte

the Table 3, ation was 12.tween them w

EG was 74.58 ae between themend of the sub

F

the analyses, istandard deviait is seen tha

hat the arithmethmetic mean o

which can be seCG.

related to the r

the results of mard deviation wbetween them

F

aining Studies

n school A, it w13.58; the aritas not significs of CAEG wation was 11.2d that the arithof CG was 29.39; p>0.05). In tandard deviatice between thethe general ach

est-posttest ind

Groups st CAEG CG

est CAEG CG it is seen that36; the arithm

was not significand the standam was significbjects each wee

Figure 4. The r

in school A, thation as 4.01, tat the differentic mean of th

of CG was 12.4een in Figure 4

results obtaine

Groups CAEG CG

module testingwas 5.04, and t

m was significa

Figure 5. The r

was determinethmetic mean

cant (t(40)= 1.was 87.27 and 21, and the diffhmetic mean o3 and the stanaddition, it waion was 10.02;em was significhievement test

dependent t-tes

N X 48 29.6 38 27.8 48 74.5 38 56.7

t the arithmetimetic mean of cant (t(84)= .5ard deviation wcant (t(84)= 5.ek is indicated

results of modu

he arithmetic mthe arithmetic nce between the module testi4 and the stan4 (t(42)= 1.12

ed from modul

N X 48 18.23

38 13.05g 1, it can be sthe arithmetic ant (t(84)= .702

results of modu

227

ed that the arithof CG was 26884; p>0.05). standard devi

fference betweeof the pretest odard deviationas determined ; the arithmeticcant (t(42)= 2.t according to

st according to

X sd 62 12.36 89 14.44 58 14.72 73 13.34 ic mean of theCG was 27.8

598; p>0.05). Iwas 14.72, the .59; p<0.05). T

d in the graphic

ule testing 1 re

mean of the momean of CG whem is signifiing 1 results ofdard deviation; p<0.05). Tab

le testing 1

sd t 5.04 .70

8.25 seen in Table 4mean of CA w2; p<0.05).

ule testing 2 re

hmetic mean o6.6 and the staIn addition, it

iation was 11.0en them was a

of CAEG was n was 12.51, a

that the arithmc mean of CG .66; p<0.05). Tthe education

groups

t .598

5.59 .

e pretest resul89 and the staIt is seen that arithmetic me

The data relatecs and tables b

elated to schoo

odule testing 1was determineficant (t(40)= f CAEG was 1n was 10.29, able 4 indicates

p02 .000

4 that the arithwas 13.05 and

elated to schoo

Vol.

of the pretest oandard deviatit was determin05, the arithm

a significant (t(26.0 and the s

and the differenmetic mean of was 55.5 and

The pretest andtype are indica

p.551

.000

lts of the CAEandard deviatio

the arithmeticean of CG wased to the modelow.

ol A and B

results of CAd as 14.1 and .621; p<0.05)

17.26 and the sand the differen

the general ac

hmetic mean ofthe standard d

ol A and B

4, No. 3; Mar

of CAEG was ion was 11.31;ned that the ar

metic mean of (40)= 7.06; p<standard deviance between thf the posttest rthe standard d

d posttest resulated in Table 3

EG was 29.62on was 14.44,c mean of thes 56.73 was 14dule testing wh

AEG was determthe standard d

). In school Bstandard deviance between thchievement tes

f the CAEG wdeviation was 8

rch 2016

33.9 and ; and the rithmetic CG was 0.05). In tion was hem was results of deviation lts of the

3.

and the and the

posttest 4.72, and hich was

mined as deviation B, it was ation was hem was st results

was 18.23 8.25, and

Journal of Edu

As a result of 18.56 and the as 4.20, and determined th8.98, the arithsignificant; wof CAEG and

Table 5. Data


As a result of 20 and the sta7.28, and it is that the arithmarithmetic mewhich can be CG.

Table 6. Data


As a result of 17.85 and the as 7.14, and determined th6.57, the arithsignificant; wof CAEG and

ucation and Tra

the analyses, istandard deviit is seen tha


which can be seCG.

related to the r


F

the analyses, iandard deviatio

seen that the metic mean of ean of CG was seen in Figure

related to the r


F



which can be seCG.

aining Studies

in school A, thation as 6.01,

at the differentic mean of th


results obtaine

Groups CAEG CG


m was significa

Figure 6. The r

in school A, thon as 7.65, thedifference betw

f the module te9.14 and the s

e 4 (t(42)= .562

results obtaine

Groups CAEG 4 CG


m was significa

Figure 7. The r

in school A, thation as 7.11, tat the differentic mean of th


he arithmetic mthe arithmetic

nce between the module testi

65 and the stan5 (t(42)= .712

ed from modul

N X 48 16.37 38 11.54

g 2, it can be sthe arithmetic ant (t(84)= 1.51

results of modu

he arithmetic me arithmetic meween them is sesting 3 resultstandard devia2; p<0.05). Tab

ed from modul

N X 48 19.01 38 14.87g 3, it can be sthe arithmetic ant (t(84)= 2.07

results of modu


nce between the module testi8 and the stan7 (t(42)= 1.03

228

mean of the mo mean of CG whem is signifiing 2 results ofndard deviation; p<0.05). Tab

le testing 2

sd t 7.58 1. 5.63

seen in Table 5mean of CA w1; p<0.05).

ule testing 3 re

mean of the moean of CG wassignificant (t(4s of CAEG w

ation was 6.85ble 5 indicates

le testing 3

sd 8.48

8.16 seen in Table 6mean of CA w7; p<0.05).

ule testing 4 re

mean of the momean of CG whem is signifiing 4 results ofdard deviation; p<0.05). Tab

odule testing 2was determine

ficant (t(40)= f CAEG was 1n was 6.85, an

ble 5 indicates

t p51 .000


elated to schoo

odule testing 3s determined a40)= 1.36; p<0

was 18.02 and t, and the diffe

s the general ac

t p2.07 .000


elated to schoo

odule testing 4was determinedficant (t(40)= f CAEG was 1n was 10.36, able 7 indicates

Vol.

2 results of CAed as 14.5 and 2.21; p<0.05)

14.19 and the snd the differenthe general ac


ol A and B

3 results of CAas 16.7 and the0.05). In schoothe standard drence betweenchievement tes

0


ol A and B

4 results of CAd as 12.22 and 2.67; p<0.05)


the general ac

4, No. 3; Mar




AEG was determe standard devol B, it was detdeviation was 9n them was sigst results of CA




rch 2016


was 16.37 5.63, and

mined as viation as termined 9.28, the

gnificant; AEG and

was 19.01 9.16, and


Journal of Edu

Table 7. Data


As a result of 18.78 and the as 9.48, and determined th11.07, the aritsignificant; wof CAEG and

Table 8. Data

Grou CA C

According to and the standaand the differesignificant dif

It is seen that was 37 and thdeviation wasmean of the pof the male significant (t(2

It is seen in Fischool B was

ucation and Tra

related to the r


F


hat the arithmetthmetic mean o

which can be seCG.

related to the r

ups N AEG 48 CG 38

the results of mard deviation wence between fference among

Figure

the arithmetiche standard d 9.43, and the

post test resultsstudents was 20)= -1.203; p

igure 9 that thes 27 and the s

aining Studies

results obtaine

Groups N CAEG 4 CG 3module testing

was 6.84, and tm was significa

Figure 8. The r

in school A, thation as 6.85, tat the differentic mean of thof CG was 9.6een in Figure 7

results obtaine

X sd 18.31 8.

12.02 10module testingwas 8.96, and them was signg the children

9. The succes

c mean of the pdeviation was

difference betws of the female89.83 and th

p>0.05).

e arithmetic mstandard devia

ed from modul

N X 48 15.98 38 10.65 g 4, it can be sthe arithmetic ant (t(84)= .412

results of modu


nce between the module testi

68 and the stan7 (t(42)= .877

ed from modul

d t .96 2.15

0.75 g 5, it can be s

the arithmeticnificant (t(84)=in terms of gen

s status of the

pretest results 17.39; the ariween them wae students was he standard de

mean of the pretation was 10.7

229

le testing 4

sd 6.84 8.75

seen in Table 7mean of CG w2; p<0.05).

ule testing 5 re

mean of the momean of CG whem is signifiing 5 results ofndard deviation; p<0.05). Tab

le testing 5

p .000

seen in Table 8c mean of CG= 2.15; p<0.05nder.

CAE in terms

of the female thmetic mean

as not significa84.2 and the s

eviation was

test results of t78; the arithme

t p.412 .000


elated to schoo

odule testing 5was determinedficant (t(40)= f CAEG was 1n was 12.02, able 8 indicates

8 that the arithG was 12.02 an5). The Figure

of gender in s

students who of the male

ant (t(20)= .973standard devia8.11, and the

the female studetic mean of t

Vol.

p0


ol A and B

5 results of CAd as 14.36 and 3.59; p<0.05)


the general ac

hmetic mean ofnd the standard9 indicates da

schools A and B

got educated students was 3; p>0.05). Anation was 13.6

difference be

dents who got the male stude

4, No. 3; Mar


AEG was determ the standard d


f the CAEG wd deviation wa

ata whether the

B

with CAE in s31.3 and the

nd also the ar1; the arithmeetween them

educated withents was 24.4

rch 2016

was 15.98 8.75, and


was 18.31 as 10.75, ere was a

school A standard rithmetic tic mean was not

h CAE in and the

Journal of Edu

standard deviaarithmetic mearithmetic mewas not signif

Table 9. The p

On analyzing standard deviastandard deviathat the arithmand the arithmthe differencesignificant dif

Figure 10. T

As it seen Figwas 33.9 and 10.13; and thewas determinethe arithmeticsignificant (t(4

4. Discussion

In this study, istudents and conducted is results obtainepreschool, it difference betnumber concewhich got edtraditional teachild developimportant roleteaching methand he determgot educated wthe color concAlabay (2006)concepts to prsuccessful com

ucation and Tra

ation was 9.32ean of the posean of the malficant (t(24)= -

pretest-posttest

Tests Pretest Posttest

Table 9, it is sation was 14.2ation was 9.81

metic mean of metic mean of e between thefference among

The compariso

gure 10 that a the standard de difference bed that the arit

c mean of B sc46)= 7.69; p<0

and Conclusi

it was aimed toit was determquite higher ted as a result ois seen that ctween computeepts in terms oducated with caching methodpment in theire on child devehod on bringin

mined that the swith traditionacept with comp) conducted a reschool childrmpared to tho

aining Studies

2, and the diffest test results le students wa-.862; p>0.05).

t independent t

Gender Girls Boys

t Girls Boys

seen that the a25, and the ar1, and the diffethe post test rthe post test r

em was not sig the school ty

on of the pretes

result of the adeviation was 1etween them wthmetic mean

chool was 63.80.05).

ion

o determine thmined that the than the groupof the study. Wcomputer-assiser-assisted edu

of academic sucomputer-assisd. Sandberg (2r study conduelopment. San

ng the six-year students got edal teaching meputer-assisted study analyzin

ren and determose got educate

erence betweenof the female

as 66 and the s. Overall score

t-test results o

N X 26 30. 22 28.1 26 70.8 22 79

arithmetic mearithmetic meanerence betweenresults of the feresults of the mignificant (t(4

ypes of the stud

st and posttest

analyses it was13.58; the arithwas significanof the post te

84 and the stan

he effectivity oacademic suc

p’s on which tWhen reviewing

ted education ucation and traccess in their ssted education2002) analyzeducted on prescncak (2003) an

children contiducated with coethod. Demir (2education is su

ng the effectivmined that the ced with traditi

230

n them was noe students wastandard deviaes of the boys a

f the male and

sd 84 14.25 18 9.81 84 15.53

9 15.10 an of the pretesn of the pretesn them was no

female studentsmale students w46)= -1.83; p>dents participa

achievement s

s determined thhmetic mean o

nt (t(46)=2.30; st of A school

ndard deviation

of computer-asccess of the gtraditional edug the studies oincreases the

aditional teachstudy and they

n is more succd the effects ochool teachersalyzed the effeinuing preschoomputer-assist2007) dealt wiuperior to teacity of computechildren got edional teaching

ot significant (as 62.5 and thation was 10.3and girls are g

d female studen

t .740 -1.83

st results of thst results of thot significant (s was 70.84 anwas 79 and th

>0.05). Figureating in the stud

scores of the C

hat the arithmof B school wa

p<0.05). Andl was 87.27 ann was 10.02; a

sisted educatiogroup on whicucation methodon the effectivie success. Kaçhing method iny determined acessful than tof computer gs, and he detects of computool institutionsted education aith color conceching the subjeer-assisted eduducated with cg method. Craw

Vol.

(t(24)= .629; phe standard de37, and the difgiven in Table 9

nt

p .463

.073

he female studehe male studen(t(46)= .740; pnd the standard

he standard deve 10 indicates dy.

CAE groups in

metic mean of tas 26 and the sd also that a rend the standardand the differen

on on teachingch computer-ad was conducity of computeçar and Doğann teaching the as a result of ththe group whigames on defintermined that ter-assisted eds in the numbeare more succeepts and he deect with traditiucation on teaccomputer-assistwford (2000)

4, No. 3; Mar

p>0.05). And aeviation was 9fference betwe9.

ents was 30.84nts was 28.18p>0.05). And id deviation waviation was 15

whether ther

terms of schoo

the pretest of Astandard deviaesult of the and deviation wance between th

g seasons subjeassisted educatcted in the ligher-assisted edun (2010) analygeometric fig

he study that thich got educaning the concthe computer

ducation and trer and figure cessful than the etermined that ional teaching ching the mathted education analyzed the

rch 2016

also the 9.89; the een them

4 and the and the it is seen as 15.53, 5.10, and re was a

ol type

A school ation was nalyses it as 11.05; hem was

ect to the tion was ht of the cation in yzed the ures and he group ted with epts and r has an aditional concepts, students teaching method.

hematical are quite effect of

Journal of Edu

computer on tbehaviors of number and amore effectivesome of the sand determineteaching with positively gainskills, it affectand skills.

The children, computers useThis provides this makes thethe process ofComputer-assfear of being were asked tostudents, it cacompared to teaching group

When Figure to the one drarelated to winwith Fletcher-science, art, re

As a result of academic succterms of gendthe study showtype they get successful is teducation leveresult of the aprivate school

According thecomputer-assiused in teachknowledge abpreschool teacbelow:

T1: “I don’t cto ask everyth

ucation and Tra

the social behathe children.

amount subjecte than the teacience subjected that compucomputer-assi

ning basic knots positively th

in general, cane various meth the children te learning to bf learning and isted educationunable to do

o think freely an be seen that those in CG. ps.

Figure 11

11 is analyzedawn by the CGnter and impro-Flinn and Graeading and wri

f the data obtaicess of male a

der, similar resws that there ieducated in a

that the materiels of the pareanalysis of thel.

e results of theisted educationhing other sciebout the scienchers consider

consider myselfing they see in

aining Studies

aviors of the prSan and Arı

ts and determiaching with trats (plants, anim

uter assisted edisted education

owledge and skhe attention spa

nnot generalizehods for differeto generalize thbe permanent athey can compn provides the(Arı & Bayhaand draw pictthe students iBelow are th

1. The pictures

d, it is seen thaG student. It canoves the imaginavatt (1995), ititing skills of t

ined through tand female stusults were detes significant d

and this differeials used in edents are highere conducted M

e study, a moren and it is expence subject.

nce subjects. Bthemselves in

lf adequate in n their environ

reschool childr(1988) invest

ined as a resuladitional teachmals, heat, ourducation is mon increases thekills related to an, the interest

e the method tent problems ahe method. Wand natural. Wprehend not one children the oan, 2003). Fortures about sean CAEG drew

he pictures of

s of the student

at the picture dn be said that tnation of the ct was stated thathe children th

the study, it waudents. In the ermined (Passidifference betwence is in favoducation are rir-up. It was de

Module testing

e concrete and pected that thiTo train a be

But during thenadequate in sc

science subjecments and I m

231

ren and stated tigated the efflt of the study hing method. Şr body, air, waore effective ine motivation o science, it impt of the student

they use to soland each time

With computer, With computer-nly the knowleopportunity tor a better undeasons within t

w more colorfuthe students

ts of CAEG (le

drawn by the Cthe reason of tchildren and mat computer-asan traditional t

as determined studies in wh

ig & Levin, 19ween the acadeor of private sich, the studenetermined thatat the end of s

effective teachis method canetter science le interviews cocience subjects

cts at all, thusmostly have diff

that the compufects of compthat teaching Şahin (2006) ater, sound, lign academic suof the science t

mproves problemts towards the

ve a problem tthey discover the children le-assisted educaedge and skills discover freel

erstanding of tthe study. On aul, more undersfrom compute

eft) and CG (ri

CAEG studentthis is because makes them mssisted educatiteaching metho

that there is nhich computer999; Wilson, 2emic success oschools. The rents have better t CAE group isubjects each

hing was donen show positivliterate individonducted thros. The views o

I hesitate to dfficulty in respo

Vol.

uter has positivputer-assisted e

with computeanalyzed the

ght) via compuuccess and remteaching progrm solving, colcourse and ga

to other situatithe method th

earn by doing ation, the childs but how to thly the differenthe mentionedanalyzing the standable and er-assisted edu

ight) about win

t has more visthe computer

more creative. Iion is more effod.

no significant dr-assisted educ2004). Anothe

of the students eason why prisocio-econom

is more succesweek, and the

e in teaching thve effect on acdual, the teachough the studyof the teachers

do science actionding them.”

4, No. 3; Mar

ve effects on theducation on er-assisted edueffectivity of uter-assisted e

membering, in ram students, illaboration andaining basic kn

ions. Children hemselves and

and experiencdren can partihink and learn

nt solutions witd features, the

pictures drawmore creative

ucation and tr

nter

sual richness cprovides rich

In the study cofective in math

difference betwcation was anaer result obtain

in terms of thivate schools a

mic conditions,ssful than the

e success is in

he seasons subjcademic succehers should aly, it was seen

about this can

ivities, the chi

rch 2016

he social teaching cation is teaching ducation addition it affects

d helping nowledge

who use apply it.

cing, and cipate in

n as well. thout the children

wn by the pictures

aditional

ompared stimulus

onducted hematics,

ween the alyzed in ned from he school are more , and the CG as a favor of

ject with ess when lso have that the

n be seen

ldren try


232

T2: “I experience difficulty in finding experiments and activities about science subjects from the books and internet, however, when I conduct an experiment in the classroom, the children ask different questions and I can say that I have difficulty in answering these questions.”

As a result of the interviews done with the preschool teachers during the study, it was determined that the teachers concentrate on different activities instead of science activities and the children get educated lack of scientific skills which is gained via science class. The teachers can bring science into the classroom by utilizing the materials such as animations and simulations prepared for education purposes via computers. As the computer is a tool that increases the motivation and interest of the children, it is important to use it in the classroom as a teaching and learning tool (Aktaş-Arnas, 2005; Vorkapić &

Milovanović, 2012; Balat et al. 2015; Bird & Edwards, 2015). Besides, the teachers

can show the experiments through the computers without giving up doing experiments when they cannot supply materials. In this way, the teaching and learning can be accomplished without any cost. It was revealed that the preschool teachers do not use computer-assisted education in teaching the basic science subjects as a result of the conducted studies (Vernadakis et al. 2005; Akçay, 2015). It is a fact that the children learn faster and better with computer. Thus, the teachers should always keep in their mind that they can conduct a more effective teaching with computers (Vernadakis et al. 2005). According to the obtained data, it was determined that materials prepared with computers are more effective in increasing the success of the students. Materials provided the children the opportunity for self-learning and the children get information about seasons appropriate to their learning speed. Concepts related to seasons are made concrete thanks to computers and that the children use these concepts in their daily lives increased, and they achieved a more permanent and a more associable learning compared to the children in the group in which traditional teaching methods was conducted. Because the children consider the computers as a funny and interesting gaming tool more than a learning tool and thus they have positive attitudes towards computers. This makes the academic success to increase. In this direction, the preschool teachers should be supported by giving them seminars and courses to use computers in their classes actively. Besides, the teachers who consider themselves inadequate about science subjects should be given supportive science training and their knowledge levels should be increased.

References

Akçay, N. O. (2015). Okul öncesi öğretmen adaylarının fen öğretimi öz yeterlik inançlarının çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Route Educational&Social Science Journal, 2(4), 268-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.17121/ressjournal.448

Akçay, N. O., & Halmatov, M. (2015). Okul öncesi öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar destekli eğitim yapmaya ilişkin tutumlarının incelenmesi. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 44-50.

Aktaş, A. Y. (2005). Okul öncesi dönemde bilgisayar destekli eğitim. Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 20, 36-47.

Aktaş, Y. A. (2007). Okul öncesi çocuklarda gelişim ve öğrenme, okul öncesi dönemde fen eğitimi. Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.

Alabay, E. (2006). Altı yaş okul öncesi dönemi çocuklarına bilgisayar destekli matematiksel kavramların öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi. Selçuk Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.

Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1991). Computer-Based Instruction: Medhods and Development. New Jersey Prentice-Hall:Englewood Cliffs.

Arı, M. V., & Bayhan, P. (2003). Okulöncesi dönemde bilgisayar destekli eğitim. İstanbul: Epsilon Yayıncılık.

Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Devecioğlu, Y. (2010). Computer-assisted instruction to teach concepts in pre-school education. Innovation and Creativity in Education, 2(2). 2083–2087. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.285

Balat, G. U., Dağal, A. B., & Kanburoğlu, V. (2015). The Effect of Computer Aided Education Program on the Development of Concept in 48-60 Months Children. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 20-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.439

Bird, J., & Edwards, S. (2015). Children learning to use technologies through play: A Digital Play Framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1149–1160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12191

Botha, L., & Reddy, C. (2011). In-service teachers’ perspectives of pre-service teachers’ knowledges of science. South African Journal of Education, 31(2), 257-274.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.) (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Chen, J., & Chang, C. (2006). Using computers in early childhood classrooms: Teachers’ attitudes, skills and practices. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 4(2), 169-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476718X06063535

Clements, D. H., & Samara, J. (2003). Strip mining for gold: Research and policy in educational technology a response


233

to “Fool’s Gold”. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal, 11(1), 7-69.

Clements, D. H., & Saramo, J. (2002). The role of technology in early childhood learning. Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 340-344.

Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for early childhood education. International Society for Technology in Education, 43(1), 75-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782562

Crawford, C. (2000). Impacting learning environments from prekindergarten through graduate school: Technologically appropriate Professional development and classroom integration opportunities for educators. In D.A. Willis, J.Price & J. Willis (Eds.), Society for information technology &teacher education international conference (pp. 601-603). Chesapeake, VA, USA: AACE.

De Villiers, R. (2011). Student teachers’ views: what is an interesting Life Sciences curriculum? South African Journal of Education, 31, 535-548.

Demir, N. (2007). Okul öncesi öğrencilerine renk kavramının kazandırılmasında bilgisayar destekli ve geleneksel öğretim yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.

Demirbaş, M., & Ertuğrul, N. (2014). A study on preschoolers’ conceptual perceptions of states of matter: a case study of Turkish students. South African Journal of Education, 34(3), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.15700/201409161115

Eliason, C., & Jenkins, L. (2003). A practical guide to early childhood curriculum. Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Fletcher, F., Claire, M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction (cai): a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(3), 219-241. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/51D4-F6L3-JQHU-9M31

Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(4), 451–458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(96)00045-5

Hatzigianni, M., & Margetts, K. (2012). I am very good at computers: Young children's computer use and their computer self- esteem. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(1), 3-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2012.650008

Haugland, S. W. (2000). What role should technology play in young children's learning? Part 2. Early childhood classrooms for the 21st century. Using computers to maximize learning. Young Children, 55(1), 12-18.

Judge, S., Puckett, K., & Cabuk, B. (2004). Digital equity: New findings from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(4), 383-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782421

Kacar, A. Ö. (2006). Okul öncesi eğitimde bilgisayar destekli eğitimin rolü. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Türkiye.

Kacar, A. Ö., & Doan, N. (2007). Okulöncesi eğitimde bilgisayar destekli eğitimin rolü. Akademik Bilişim, 2007. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi, Kütahya.

Kacar, A. O., & Dogan, N. (2010). The role of computer aided education in pre-school education. e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy NWSA, 5, 472–484.

Kandır, A., & Orçan, M. (2010). Okul öncesi dönemde matematik eğitimi. İstanbul: Morpa Kültür Yayınları.

Kol, S. (2012). Okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin bilgisayar destekli eğitime yönelik görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(2), 887-903.

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New technologies in early childhood literacy research: A review of research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3(1), 59–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14687984030031003

Li, X., & Atkins, M. S. (2004). Early childhood computer experience and cognitive and motor development. Pediatrics, 113(6), 1715-1722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.113.6.1715

Ljung, A. D., Bengtsson, L. A., & Ottosson, T. (2005). Ways of relating to computer use in pre‐school activity. International Journal of Early Years Education, 13(1), 29-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669760500048295

Macaruso, P., & Rodman, A. (2011). Efficacy of computer assisted instruction for the development of early literacy skills in young children. Reading Psychology, 32(2), 172-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702711003608071

Man, L. (1997). The effects of computer-assisted instruction and teacher- assisted instruction on preschool children's

Journal of Edu

learning

Namlu, A. G.

Nir-Gal, O., &the Comp

Oğuz, E., Elleattitudes

Okan, Z. (200

Passig, D., & Behavior

Penuel, W. R.teachers randomizCenter. h

Şahin, B. (20Yüksek L

San, P., & Arbilgisaya

Sancak, Ö. (kazandırYüksek L

Sandberg, A. Educatio

Scoter, J. V., EOR: Nort

Sprigle, E. J.programmhttp://dx.

Stevenson, H.study of t

Tondeur, J., VCompute

Tracey, D. H.high-riskhttp://dx.

Tuğrul, B. (20

Vernadakis, NPreschoohttp://dx.

Vorkapić, S. Tteachers 42(2), 21

Wilson, C. G.Kinderga

Yaşar, Ş. (200içinde (s.

This work is l

ucation and Tra

of arithmetic t

(2002). Okul ö

& Klein, P. S. puter Learning

ez, A. M., Aktowards comp

03). Edutainme

Levin, H. (19r, 15, 173–183

, Pasnik, S., Bcan use a m

zed controlledhttp://cct.edc.or

006). Okul öncLisans Tezi, Ye

rı, M. (1988).arla yapılan eği

(2003). Okulöılmasında bilgLisans tezi, Ga

(2002). Prescon Annual, 1, 2

Ellis, D., & Rathwest Region

., & Schaeferming ability. E.doi.org/10.108

. J., & Hackettthe waterford

Van Braak, J., &er Assisted Lea

, & Young, J. k kindergartner.doi.org/10.108

005). Çocuk ge

N., Avgerinos, ol Education: .doi.org/10.100

T., & Milovanoin Croatia. Ed

17-229. http://d

(2004). Seymarten Students

04). Okul önces.1-10). Eskişeh

icensed under

aining Studies

tasks. Unpubli

öncesinde bilg

(2004). Compg Environment

kamca, G. Ö., puter and comp

ent: Is learning

999). Gender in. http://dx.doi.

Bates, L., Townmedia-rich currd trial. Summarg/sites/cct.edc

cesı̇ dönemdeedı̇Tepe Ünı̇ve

Anaokuluna itimin etkisinin

öncesi eğitim gisayar desteklazi Üniversites

chool teacher’s245-263.

ailsback, J. (20nal Educational

r, L. (1984). Early Child De80/030044384

t, R. K. (2009)early reading p

& Valcke, M. arning, 23, 197

W. (2007). Ters’ achievemen80/027027107

elişiminde anao

A., Tsitskari, Making Tea

07/s10643-005

ović, S. (2012)ducation 3-13dx.doi.org/10.1

mour Papert’s Vin Discovery-b

si eğitimde bilghir: Anadolu Ü

a Creative Co

shed Master T

gisayar öğretim

puters for Cognt. Information

Kesercioğlu, puter assisted i

g at risk? Britis

nterest differeorg/10.1016/S

nsend, E., Gallriculum to prative evaluatioc.org/files/ms-

bı̇lgı̇sayar deersı̇tesı̇ Sosyal

giden 5-6 yaşn incelenmesi.

kurumlarına li eğitim ile gesi, Eğitim Bilim

s conceptions

001). Technologl Laboratory.

Age, gender evelopment and40140306

). Should fourprogram. The J

(2007). Towar7-206. http://dx

echnology andnt. Reading Psy701568488

okulu eğitimin

E., & Zachopaching Meanin5-0026-2

). Computer us

: Internationa1080/03004279

Vision for Earlbased, Logo-ri

lgisayarın yeri Üniversitesi Ya

ommons Attrib

234

Thesis, the Univ

mi. TC. Anadol

nitive DevelopTechnology in

T. İ., & Girgininstruction. Ele

sh Journal of E

nces with mulS0747-5632(99

lagher, L. P., Lrepare low-incon of the “Reresources/RTL

esteklı̇ fen öğrBı̇lı̇mler Enstı̇

ş çocuklarında. Çocuk Sağlığ

devam eden eleneksel eğitimmleri Enstitüsü

of computers

gy in Early Ch

and spatial kd Care, 14, 243

r-year olds useJournal of Lite

rds a typologyx.doi.org/10.11

d early literacyychology, 28(5

nin önemi. Bili

poulou, E. (200ngful. Early

se in pre-schooal Journal of P9.2012.673003

ly Childhood Eich Classroom

ve önemi. A.Gayınları.

ution 3.0 Licen

versity of Hon

lu Üniversitesi

pment in Early Childhood Ed

n, G. (2011).ementary Educ

Educational Te

ltimedia learni9)00016-3

Llorente, C., &come childreneady to learn LEvalReport.p

retı̇mı̇ ve etkı̇lıtüsü.

a sayı ve miktğı ve Eğitimi D

6 yaş çocuklm yöntemlerinü, Ankara.

s and play. Inf

hildhood Educa

knowledge inf3-250.

e computers toeracy and Tech

y of computer u111/j.1365-272

y: The impact 5), 443–467.

im ve Aklın Ayd

05). The Use Childhood E

ol education: TPrimary, Elem3

Education? A ms. Early Child

G.Namlu (Ed.)

nse.

Vol.

ng Kong, Hong

i Yayını, No: 1

y Childhood—ducation Annu

Early childhocation Online,

echnology 34, 2

ing interfaces.

& Hupert, N. (2n for school Initiative”. Eddf

lerı̇nı̇n ı̇ncelen

tar korunumunDergisi, 3, 27-3

larına sayı vein karşılaştırıl

formation Tec

ation: Finding

fluences on pr

develop emerhnology, 10(2)

use in primary29.2006.00205

of an integrat

dınlığında Eği

of Computer AEducation Jou

The attitudes omentary and E

Descriptive Stdhood Research

), Okul öncesin

4, No. 3; Mar

g Kong.

366. Eskişehir

—The Teacher’sal, 2004(1), 97

od teacher can 10(3), 934-95

255–265.

Computers in

2009). Early chsuccess: Resuducation Deve

nmesı̇. Yayınla

nun kazandırıl4.

e şekil kavralması. Yayımla

chnology in Ch

g the Balance.

reschoolers’ c

rgent literacy s, 64-84.

y education. Jo5.x

ted learning sy

itim Dergisi, 62

Assisted Instruurnal, 33(2),

of the future prEarly Years Ed

tudy of Head Sh & Practice,

nde bilgisayar

rch 2016

r.

s Role in 7-119.

ndidates’ 50.

n Human

hildhood ults of a elopment

anmamış

lmasında

mlarının anmamış

hildhood

Portland,

computer

skills?: a

ournal of

ystem on

2.

uction in 99-104.

re-school ducation,

Start and 6(1).

öğretimi

journ studies vol. - eric · ts, have brou ducation is be e opportunity hnology’s poc and impleme...

Documents