Z KUŞAĞININ YARDIMCI TEKNOLOJİLERE YÖNELİK TUTUMLARI İLE ENDÜSTRİ 4.0 KAVRAMSAL FARKINDALIK DÜZEYLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN İNCELENMESİ: ÜNİVERSİTE ÖĞRENCİLERİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA
Author :
Abstract
Amaç: Araştırmanın amacı, Z kuşağında bulunan üniversite öğrencilerinin yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumlarını farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmek ve yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları ile endüstri 4.0 kavramsal farkındalıkları aralarındaki ilişki durumunu incelemektir.
Tasarım/Yöntem: Araştırmada tesadüfi olmayan yöntemlerden olan kolayda örneklem yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Bu yöntemle saptanan 425 katılımcıya yüz yüze anket uygulanmış, analiz için uygun olmayan anketler araştırma dışı bırakılarak kalan 405 anket analiz için değerlendirmeye alınmıştır. Toplanan veriler SPSS 25 paket programı kullanılarak analize tabi tutulmuştur.
Bulgular: Katılımcıların yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları ile endüstri 4.0 kavramsal farkındalıkları arasında anlamlı bir farklılığa ulaşılamamıştır. Katılımcıların öğrenim gördüğü fakülteler itibariyle yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı bir farklılığa ulaşılamamıştır. Cinsiyetler itibariyle yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı bir farklılığa ulaşılamamıştır. Katılımcıların akademik başarıları ile yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunamamıştır. Katılımcıların orta öğretim mezuniyet alanları ile yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı bir farklılığa ulaşılamamıştır. Katılımcıların akademik eğitim süreleri/sınıfları ile yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı bir farklılığa ulaşılamamıştır.
Sınırlılıklar: Kısmen küçük bir denek örneklemi, zaman ve fakülte bazında (İİBF-Mühendislik/Mimarlık) eşit sayıda öğrenciye ulaşılamamış olması bu araştırmanın kısıtlarını oluşturmuştur.
Özgünlük/Değer: Literatür incelemesi sonucunda yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutum ile endüstri 4.0 kavramsal farkındalık arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirildiği bir araştırmaya rastlanmamıştır. Bu sebeple araştırma iki kavramın birlikte değerlendirilmesi açısından özgünlük bir değer taşımaktadır.
Keywords
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of the research is to examine the attitudes of Z generation university students towards assistive technologies in terms of different variables and to examine the relationship between their attitudes towards assistive technologies and their industry 4.0 conceptual awareness.
Design/Method: Convenience sampling method, which is one of the non-random methods, was used in the study. A face-to-face questionnaire was applied to 425 participants determined by this method, questionnaires that were not suitable for analysis were excluded from the study, and the remaining 405 questionnaires were evaluated for analysis. The collected data were analyzed using the SPSS 25 package program.
Results: There was no significant difference between the participants' attitudes towards assistive technologies and their industry 4.0 conceptual awareness. There was no significant difference between the attitudes of the participants towards assistive technologies according to their faculties. There was no significant difference between the attitudes towards assistive technologies by gender. There was no significant difference between the academic achievements of the participants and their attitudes towards assistive technologies. There was no significant difference between the secondary education graduation areas of the participants and their attitudes towards assistive technologies. There was no significant difference between the academic education periods/classes of the participants and their attitudes towards assistive technologies.
Limitations: Partially a small sample of subjects and the fact that an equal number of students could not be reached on the basis of time and faculty (FEAS-Engineering/Architecture) constituted the limitations of this study.
Originality/Value: As a result of the literature review, no research was found that evaluated the relationship between attitude towards assistive technologies and industry 4.0 conceptual awareness. For this reason, the research has a unique value in terms of evaluating the two concepts together.
Keywords
- 1. Ahmad, F.K. (2015), “Use of assistive technology in inclusive education: making room for diverse learning needs”, Transcience, Vol. 6 No. 2.
- 2. Aslan, C., Kan, A. (2017). “Yardımcı teknolojilere yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması”, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17 (1), 48-63.
- 3. Behrmann, M. and Schaff, J. (2001), “Assisting educators with assistive technology: enabling children to achieve independence in living and learning”, Children and Families, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 24-28.
- 4. Behrmann, M. and Jerome, M. (2002), “Assistive technology for students with mild disabilities:update2002”, www.researchgate.net/publication/228847830_Assistive_Technology_for_Students_with_Mild_Disabilities_Up date_2002
- 5. Beier, G., Niehoff, S.B. (2018). “More sustainability in industry through industrial internet of things?” ,Appl. Sci., 8 (2) , pp. 1-12.
- 6. Can, A. (2014). “SPSS ile yapılacak işlemler nicel veri analizi “, 3. Baskı, Pegem Akademi.
- 7. Chiacchio, F., Petropoulos, G., Pichler, D. (2018). “The impact of industrial robots on EU employment and wages: A local labour market approach”, Bruegel Work. Pap., 2, 1–34.
- 8. Chiarello , F., Trivelli, L., Bonaccorsi, A., Fantoni, G.,(2018). “Extracting and mapping industry 4.0 technologies using wikipedia”, Comput. Ind., 100 , pp. 244-257.
- 9. Cho, M., Bonn, M.A. and Han, S.J., (2018). “ Generation Z’s sustainable volunteering: motivations, attitudes and job performance. Sustainability”, 10(5): 1400. DOI: 10.3390/su10051400.
- 10. Cook, A. and Hussey, S. (2002), Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed., Mosby, Inc, St. Louis.
- 11. Criteo. (2018)., “Gen Z Report. Based on the Criteo Shopper Story.”, https://www.criteo.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/05/GenZ-Report.pdf (27.07.2022).
- 12. Doğan, O. ve Baloğlu, N. (2020). “Endüstri 4.0 kavramsal farkındalık ölçeği”, Kmü sosyal ve ekonomik araştırmalar dergisi, 22(38), 58-81.
- 13. Dalton, E.M., Lyner-Cleophas, M., Ferguson, B.T. and McKenzie, J. (2019), “Inclusion, universal design and universal design for learning in higher education: south Africa and the United States”, African Journal of Disability, Vol. 8, p. 519, doi: 10.4102/ajod.v8i0.519.
- 14. Dalenogare, L.S., Benitez, G.B., Ayala, N.F., Frank, A.G., (2018). “ The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance”, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 204, pp. 383-394.
- 15. Deloitte.(2019).”Welcome to Generation Z.”, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/ Documents/consumer-business/welcome-to-gen-z.pdf (27.07.2022).
- 16. Ernst & Young. (2015). “What If the Next Big Disruptor Isn’t a What but a Who?”, https://assets.ey.com/content/dam/ey-sites/ey-com/en_gl/topics/digital/ey-rise-of-gen-z-new-challenge-forretailers.pdf (27.07.2022).
- 17. Ganschow, H., Philips, L. and Schneider, D. (2001), “Closing the gap: accommodating students with language learning disabilities in college”, Topics in Language Disorders, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 17-37.
- 18. Gilchrist, A. (2016). “Industry 4.0: the Industrial Internet of Things”, Springer, Heidelberg.
- 19. Johnson, R.W., Toohey, D. and Wiener, J.M. (2007), “Meeting the long-term care needs of the baby boomers: How changing families will affect paid helpers and institutions”, The Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
- 20. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J., (2013). “Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0: Securing the Future of German Manufacturing Industry. Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group”, Acatech, Forschungsunion.
- 21. Lee, J., Bagheri, B., Kao, H.A.,(2015). “A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems”, Manuf. Lett., 3, pp. 18-23.
- 22. Lestari D. (2019). “Measuring e-commerce adoption behaviour among gen-Z in Jakarta”, Indonesia. Econ Anal Pol, 64: 103–115. DOI: 10.1016/j.eap.2019.08.004.
- 23. MacGregor P. and MacGregor RK. (2020). “ The will- ´ ingness of Generation Z to financially support CSR”, A central European study. DANUBE, L Econ Social Issues Rev , 11(4): 271–282. DOI: 10.2478/danb-2020-0016.
- 24. McKinsey & Company. True Gen (2018). “Generation Z and Its Implications for Companies”,www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Consumer%20Packaged%20Goods/Our%20Ins ights/True%20Gen%20Generation%20Z%20and%20its%20implications%20for%20companies/Generation-Zand-its-implication-for-companies.pdf ( 27.07.2022).
- 25. Nakip, M. (2006). “Pazarlama araştırmaları, teknikler ve SPSS destekli uygulamalar”, Seçkin Yayınları.
- 26. Preiser, W.F.E. and Ostroff, E. (Eds) (2001). “Universal Design Handbook”, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
- 27. Prensky, M.(2001). “Digital natives, Digital immigrants”, Horizon, 9, 1–6.
- 28. Priporas, C.V., Stylos, N., Fotiadis, A.K. (2017). “ Generation Z consumers’ expectations of interactions in smart retailing: A future agenda”, Comput. Hum. Behav, 77, 374–381.
- 29. Radabaugh, M.P. (2014), “Assistive technology: independent living Centre Nsw”, available at: www.ilcnsw.asn.au/home/assistive_technology/assistive_technology.
- 30. Raguseo, E., Gastaldi, L., Neirotti, P.,(2016). “Smart work: supporting employees' flexibility through ICT, HR practices and office layout”,Evidence-based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, vol. 4, Emerald Group Publishing Limited , December), pp. 240-256,No. 3.
- 31. Sahu (2010), “Role of assistive technology for inclusive education in India”, www.academia.edu/3090712/Role_of_Assistive_Technology_for_Inclusive_Education_in_India.
- 32. Savela, N., Kaakinen, M., Ellonen, N., Oksanen, A., (2021). “ Sharing a work team with robots: The negative effect of robot co-workers on in-group identification with the work team”, Comput. Hum. Behav., 115, 106585.
- 33. Scherer, M. (2004). “Connecting to Learn: Educational and Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities”, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
- 34. Schlossberg, M., (2016). “Teen Generation Z is being called 'millennials on”, http://uk.businessinsider.com/millennials-vs-gen-z-2016-2, (27.07.2022).
- 35. Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P., Simchi-Levi, E., (2004). “Managing the Supply Chain: Definitive Guide”, Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
- 36. Traeger, M.L., Sebo, S.S., Jung, M., Scassellati, B., Christakis, N.A.,(2020), “Vulnerable robots positively shape human conversational dynamics in a human–robot team”,Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2020, 117, 6370– 6375.
- 37. Xu, L.D., Xu, E.L., Li, L. (2018). “Industry 4.0: state of the art and future trends”, Int. J. Prod. Res., 56 (8), pp. 2941-2962.
- 38. Wang, S., Wan, J., Zhang, D., Li, D., Zhang, C., (2016). “ Towards smart factory for industry 4.0: a self- organized multi-agent system with big data based feedback and coordination”, Comput. Network., 101, pp. 158
- 39. Wood, S., (2013). “Generation Z as consumers: Trends and innovation”, Institute for Emerging Issues, NC State University.
- 40. Woodcock, B., Middleton, A.., Nortcliffe, A.(2012). “ Considering the Smartphone Learner: An investigation into student interest in the use of personal technology to enhance their learning”, Stud. Engagem. Exp. J., 1, 1–
- 41. Van den Bergh, J., Behrer, M.,(2016). “How cool brands stay hot: Branding to Generations Y and Z”, Kogan Page Publishers, London.
