English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?

DEMİRTAŞ, İsmail; SERT, Nehir

English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?

İsmail DEMİRTAŞ, (Başkent Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye)

Nehir SERT (Başkent Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye)

Novitas-Royal

0 0

Yıl: 2010 Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 159 - 172 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?

Öz:

Bu durum çalışmasında; 1) Ankarada bir Özel Üniversitede İngilizce Hazırlık eğitiminin öğrenci gereksinimlerine ne ölçüde uygun olduğu, 2) öğrenen özerkliğini geliştirmeye yönelik öğrenci merkezli etkinliklere ne ölçüde yer verildiği, 3) öğrencilerin İngilizce öğrenme konusunda özerklik becerileri algılarının ne olduğu ve 4) öğrencilerin İngilizce öğrenme özerkliği becerileri algılarının akademik başarıları üzerindeki etkileri araştırılmıştır. Çalışma 2009–2010 akademik yılı güz döneminde uygulanmıştır. Çalışmanın katılımcıları 173 İngilizce hazırlık eğitimi öğrencisidir. Çeşitleme yoluyla araştırma desenini güçlendirmek amacıyla nitel ve nicel veri toplama araçları bir arada kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin İngilizce hazırlık eğitiminin gereksinimlerine uygunluğu konusundaki görüşlerini belirlemek amacıyla bir ‘Öğrenme Gereksinimleri Ölçeği” geliştirilmiştir. Aynı amaçla geliştirilmiş yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formlarıyla ölçek ile toplanan veriler güçlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır. Öğrencilerin İngilizce öğrenmeye ilişkin özerklik becerileri algılarını ölçmek amacıyla ‘Özerklik Algı Ölçeği’ geliştirilmiştir. Gözlem ile toplanan nitel verilerle ‘Özerklik Algı Ölçeği’ile elde edilen veriler desteklenmeye çalışılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları; 1) öğrencilerin yaklaşık üçte ikisinin İngilizce eğitim programının gereksinimlerini uygun bulduğunu, 2) öğrencilerin gereksinimleri konusundaki algılarının mezun oldukları okullara göre farklılık gösterdiğini, 3) eğitim sürecinde öğrenci merkezli öğrenme etkinliklerinin etkili kullanılmadığını, 4) öğrenme süreçlerinde sorumluluk alma konusundaki özerklik algılarının yetersiz olduğunu, 5) öğrencilerin İngilizce akademik başarıları ile özerklik algıları arasında ilişki bulunmadığını göstermektedir. Bulgular doğrultusunda sorunun çözümüne yönelik öneriler getirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Dil ve Dil Bilim

Öz:

This case study investigates: 1) how the English Language Preparatory Education (ELPE) at a Private University in Ankara matches with the learners’ needs, 2) the extent of learner-centred activities to improve learner autonomy, 3) the level of autonomy perceptions of the learners, 4) and its influence on the General Point Averages (GPAs). The study was conducted in the fall of 2009-2010 academic year. Population for the study consisted of 173 learners. The study employed both qualitative and quantitative research techniques to strengthen the design through triangulation. A ‘Learning Needs Scale’ was developed to identify learners’ perceptions in view of appropriateness of the ELPE for their learning needs. The data collected through the scale was supported with semi-structured interviews. An ‘Autonomy Perception Scale’ was developed to measure perceptions of the learners considering their autonomous learning skills. Data through semi-structured observations were also obtained to support the data collected by the scale. Findings indicated that: 1) approximately two thirds of the learners think the ELPE matches with their needs, 2) their perceptions in view of appropriateness of the ELPE for their needs change according to the schools they graduated from, 3) learner-centred activities are not practised effectively in the classes, 4) the level of autonomous skills of the learners is not sufficient to take responsibility for their own learning, 5) there is no correlation between the ‘Autonomy Perception Scale’ scores and the GPAs of the learners. In line with the findings, suggestions have been made to solve the problem.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Dil ve Dil Bilim

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London: Longman.
Benson, P. & Voller, P. (Eds.) (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning. London: Longman
Breen, P. & Mann, S. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspectives on a pedagogy for autonomy. In Benson, P. &Voller, P. (Eds) Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 132-149). London: Longman
Brindley, G. (1990). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL programme design. In Johnson R. K. (Ed.), The second language (pp. 63-78). Cambridge: CUP.
Cotterall, S. M. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy through the : principles for designing language courses. ELT Journal, 54(2), 109-117.
Çelik, V. (1996). Örgütsel Değişime ve Geleceğin Okulu. Yeni Türkiye,29.
Çoban, Z. (2002). Attitudes Towards Learner Autonomy in Gazi University and Yıldız Teknik University. Paper presented at the 6th International INGED Conference ‘Interchanges and Exchanges: Current Trends in ELT. METU, 11-13 October, 2002, Ankara.
Dafei, D. (2007). An Exploration of the relationship between learner autonomy and English proficiency. Asian EFL Journal, 24, 1-23.
Dam, L. & Legenhausen, L. (1996). The acquisition of vocabulary in an autonomous learning environment- the first months of beginning English. In Pemberton, R. (Ed.). Taking control: autonomy in language learning. (pp. 265-80). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge:CUP.
Dickinson, L. (1992). Learner autonomy 2: learning training for language learning. Dublin: Authentik.
Dubin, F. & Olshtain, E. (1986). Course design: Developing programs and materials for language learning. Cambridge: CUP.
Gardner, D. & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing Self-Access: from Theory toPractice.Cambridge: CUP.
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Holec, H. (1985). On autonomy: some elementary concepts. In Riley, P. (Ed.), Discourse and learning. (pp. 173-90)London: Longman.
Jeong, J. (2004). Analysis of The Factors And The Roles of Hrd in Organizational Learning Styles As Identified By Key Informants At Selected Corporations in The Republic of Korea. Unpublished doctoral thesis. A&M University: Texas.
Kennedy, J.(2002). Learner Autonomy: A Realistic Proposition for Turkish Students. In
Monty, M. & Godfrey, M. (Eds.). Global Problems and Local Solutions. (pp.118-122). Istanbul: Işık University.
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. NY: The Adult Education Company.
Kohonen, V. (2001). Developing the European language portfolio as a pedagogical instrument for advancing student autonomy. www.uta.fi/laitokset/okl/projektit/eks/Kohonen2001.pdf. Accessed 12 January, 2010.
Koyuncu, S. U. (2006). The effect of the European language portfolio on learnerautonomy for young learners. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Çukurova Üniversitesi: Adana.
Köse, N. (2006). Effects of portfolio implementation and assessment on critical reading and learner autonomy of ELT students.Unpublished doctoral thesis. Çukurova Universitesi: Adana.
Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy. 1: definitions, issues and problems. Dublin: Authentik.
Little, D. (1995). Learning as dialogue: the dependence of learner autonomy on teacher autonomy. System, 23(2), 175-82.104
Little, D. & Dam, L. (1998) Learner autonomy: what and why? The Language Teacher Online 22.10. http://langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/98/oct/littledam.html. Accessed 12 January, 2010.
Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40, 120–123.
Mynard, J. & Sorflaten, R. (2003). Independent learning in your classroom. URL:http://jomynard.tripod.com/ilyourclass.htm. Accessed 15 February, 2006.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: CUP.
Nunan, D. (1990). The Learner Centered . Cambridge: CUP.
Patton, Q. M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
Pemberton, R. (1996). Introduction. In Pemberton, R., Li, E.S.L., Or, W.W.F. & Pierson H.D. (Eds.) Taking Control: Autonomy in Language Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Richterich, R. (Ed.) (1983). Case studies in identifying Language Needs. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Salisbury-Glennon, J., Young, A., & Stefanou, C. (2001). Creating contexts for motivation and self-regulated learning in the college classroom. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching, 12, 19-35.
Sert, N., (2006). EFL student teachers’ learning autonomy. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(2), 180-201.
Sert, N., (2007). Öğrenen özerkliğine ilişkin bir ön çalışma. İlköğrtetim Online, 6(1), 180- 196.
Sert, N.,(2008) The language of the instruction dilemmain the Turkish context. System 36, 156-171.
Tezbaşaran, A. (1997). Likert Tipi Ölçek Geliştirme Kılavuzu. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
The Council of Europe’s Modern Languge Project (2001). http://www.ecml.at/efsz/files/Trim.pdf. Accessed 12 January, 2010.
Tudor, I. (1993). Teacher roles in the learner-centered classroom. ELT Journal, 47(1), 23-24.
Ustunoglu, E., (2009). Autonomy in language learning: Do students take responsibility for their learning? Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 5 (2):148-169. http://eku.comu.edu.tr/index/5/2/e_ustunluoglu.pdf. Accessed 13 July, 2010.
Voller, P. (1997). Does the teacher have a role in autonomous learning? In Benson, P. &
Voller, P. (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 98-113). London: Longman.
Yıldırım, Ö. (2005). Anadolu University ELT department students’ readiness for learner autonomy. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Anadolu Universitesi: Eskisehir.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (1999). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
Young, R. (1986). Personal autonomy: beyond negative and positive liberty. London: Croom Helm.
Yumuk, A. (2002). Letting go of control to the learners: the role of the Internet in promoting a more autonomous view of learning in an academic translation course. Educational Research, 44(2), 141-156.

APA	DEMİRTAŞ İ, SERT N (2010). English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. , 159 - 172.
Chicago	DEMİRTAŞ İsmail,SERT Nehir English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. (2010): 159 - 172.
MLA	DEMİRTAŞ İsmail,SERT Nehir English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. , 2010, ss.159 - 172.
AMA	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. . 2010; 159 - 172.
Vancouver	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. . 2010; 159 - 172.
IEEE	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N "English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?." , ss.159 - 172, 2010.
ISNAD	DEMİRTAŞ, İsmail - SERT, Nehir. "English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?". (2010), 159-172.

APA	DEMİRTAŞ İ, SERT N (2010). English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. Novitas-Royal, 4(2), 159 - 172.
Chicago	DEMİRTAŞ İsmail,SERT Nehir English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. Novitas-Royal 4, no.2 (2010): 159 - 172.
MLA	DEMİRTAŞ İsmail,SERT Nehir English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. Novitas-Royal, vol.4, no.2, 2010, ss.159 - 172.
AMA	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. Novitas-Royal. 2010; 4(2): 159 - 172.
Vancouver	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?. Novitas-Royal. 2010; 4(2): 159 - 172.
IEEE	DEMİRTAŞ İ,SERT N "English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?." Novitas-Royal, 4, ss.159 - 172, 2010.
ISNAD	DEMİRTAŞ, İsmail - SERT, Nehir. "English education at university level: Who is at the centre of the learning process?". Novitas-Royal 4/2 (2010), 159-172.