Bilgi Veren Metinleri Anlama: Metin Yapısına Dayalı Stratejilerin Kullanımı

Abstract

Okuma becerisine sahip olma, insanların bağımsız olarak bilgiye ulaşmalarında önemli faktörlerden biridir. Okumanın çözümleme ve anlama olarak iki bileşeni bulunmakta ve okuma becerisi bu iki bileşene dayalı olarak gelişmektedir. Bu bileşenlerden birinin sınırlı olması okuma becerisinin tam anlamıyla kazanılmadığı anlamına gelmektedir. Anlama becerisinin karmaşık doğası ve yapılan araştırmalar yalnızca çözümleme becerisi kazanmanın anlama becerisinin kazanılması için yeterli olmadığını göstermektedir. Alan yazında, metin anlama becerisinin kazandırılmasında, metin yapısının öğretimine dayalı stratejilerin öğretimi dikkat çeken araştırmalar arasındadır. Bu çalışmada bilgi veren metinleri anlama becerisinin kazandırılmasında metin yapısı öğretiminin alt yapısını oluşturan Yapı-Bütünleştirme Modeli’nin kuramsal yapısının ve bu kuramsal çerçevede uygulamada kullanılan stratejilerin tanıtılması amaçlanmıştır.             

Keywords

• okuma,metin yapısı,metni anlama,yapı-bütünleştirme modeli

Comprehension of Expository Texts: Using Strategies Based on Text Structure

Abstract

To have reading skills is one of the important factors in the independent access to information. There are two components of reading as decoding and comprehension, and reading skills are based on these two components. When one of these components is limited, it means that reading is not fully acquired. The complex nature of comprehension and the studies carried out indicate that acquiring only decoding skills is not enough to acquire comprehension skills. In the literature, the instruction of strategies based on the teaching of text structure is one of the most remarkable researches in the acquisition of text comprehension skills. In this study, it is aimed to introduce the theoretical structure of the Construction-Integration Model which constitutes the sub-structure of text structure teaching and the strategies used in practice in this theoretical framework in gaining expository text comprehension skills.

Keywords

• reading,text comprehension,text structure,construction-integration model

References

1. Alvermann, D.E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on descriptive text. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 44–48.
2. Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H. ve Ostertag, J. (1987). Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from exprository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 22 (3), 331-346.
3. Ausubel, P. D. (2002). The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
4. Bakken, J. P., Mastropieri, M. A. ve Scruggs, T. E. (1997). Reading comprehension of expository science material and students with learning disabilities: A comparison of strategies. The Journal of Special Education, 31 (3), 300-324.
5. Block, C. C. ve Pressley, M. (2002). Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (s. 42-61). New York: Guilford Press.
6. Cain, K. ve Oakhill, J. (2009). Reading Comprehension Development from 8 to 14 Years: The Contribution of Component. Skills and Processes. Wagner, R. K., Schatschneider, C. ve Phythian-Sence, C. (Ed.) içinde, Beyond Decoding: The Behavioral and Biological Foundations of Reading Comprehension. (s.143-176), The Guilford Press. NY.
7. Carnahan R. C. ve Williamson, P. S. (2013). Does compare-contrast text structure help students with autism spectrum disorder comprehend science text. Council for Exceptional Children, 79 (3), 347-363.
8. Clarke, P. J., Truelove, E., Hulme, C. ve Snowling, M. J. (2014). Developing Reading Comprehension. Wiley Blackwell. John Wiley ve Sons, Ltd. UK.

9. Degand, L. ve Sanders, T. (2002). The impact of relational markers on expository text comprehension in L1 and L2. Reading and Writing, 15, 739-757.
10. Duman, N. ve Tekinarslan, İ. (2007). Hikâye haritası yönteminin hafif düzeyde zihinsel yetersizliği olan öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama becerileri üzerindeki etkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi, 8 (1) 33-55.
11. Dymock, S. (2005). Teaching expository text structure awareness. The Reading Teacher, 59 (2), 177-181.
12. Ferstl, E. C. ve von Cramon, D. Y. (2001). The role of coherence and cohesion in text comprehension: an event-related fMRI study. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 325-340.
13. Gaddy, A. S., Bakken, J. P. ve Fulk, M. B. (2008). The effects of teaching text-structure strategies to postsecondary students with learning disabilities to improve their reading comprehension on expository science text passages. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 20 (2), 100-119.
14. Hall, K. M., Sabey, B. L. ve McClellan, M. (2005). Expository text comprehension: Helping primary-grade teachers use expository texts to full advantage. Reading Psychology, 26, 211-234.
15. Harris, K. R. ve Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
16. Idol, L. (1987). Group story mapping: A comprehension strategy for both skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(4), 196-205.
17. Işıkdoğan, N. ve Kargın, T. (2010). Hikâye haritası tekniğinin zihin engelli öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama becerilerini kazanmalarındaki etkililiği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 10 (3), 1489-1531.
18. Kintsch, W. ve van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85 (5), 363-394.
19. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-ıntegration model. Psychological Review, 95 (2),163-182.
20. Kintsch, W. (1998) Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Kintsch, W. ve Rawson, K. A. (2005). Comprehension. Snowling M. J. ve Hulme C. (Ed.) içinde, The science of reading: A handbook (s. 209–26). Oxford: Blackwell.
22. Kintsch, W. (2013). Revisiting the construction–integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. Alverman, D. E., Unrau, N. J., Ruddell, B. R. (Ed.) Theoretical Models and Procesess of Reading. (6th ed.), (s. 807–839). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
23. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S. ve Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching reading comprehension to students with learning disabilities. New York, NY: Guildford Press
24. Martins, I. (2002). Visual imagery in school science text. Otero, J., León, J. A ve Graesser, A. C. (Ed.) içinde, The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension. Mahwah, N.J. : L. Erlbaum Associates, 73-91.
25. McGee, M. L. ve Richgels, D. J. (1992). Text structure strategies. E.K., Bean, T.W., Readence, J.E., Moore, D.W. (Ed.) içinde, Reading in the content areas:Improving classroom instruction. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
26. McNamara, D. S. ve Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247-288.
27. Meyer, B. J. (1987). Following the author’s top-level organization: An important skill for reading comprehension. Understanding readers’ understanding, 59-76.
28. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.709.8864verep=rep1vetype=pdf adresinden alınmıştır.
29. Meyer, B.J.F. (1979). Organizational patterns in prose and their use in reading. M.L. Kamil ve A.J. Moe (Ed.) içinde, Reading research: Studies and applications. Clemson, S.C.: National Reading Conference, Inc.
30. Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, D. M. ve Bluth, G. J. (1980). Use of the top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72-103.
31. Meyer, B. J. F. ve Ray, M. N. (2011). Structure strategy interventions: Increasing reading comprehension of expository text. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education (Special Issue on Reading Comprehension), 4 (1), 127-152.
32. Meyer, B.J.F., Wijekumar, K.K. ve Lin, Y. C. (2011). Individualizing a web-based structure strategy intervention for fifth graders’ comprehension of nonfiction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 140–168.
33. Oakhill, J., Cain, K. ve Elbro, C. (2014). Understanding and Teaching Reading Comprehension: A Handbook. Routledge. NY.
34. Özmen, R. (2011). Bir metin yapısı örneği: Evrensel dünya problemlerine ilişkin problem çözüm yapısı. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 8, 49 – 62.
35. Pearson, P. D. ve J. A. Dole. (1987). "Explicit Comprehension Instruction: A Review of Research and a New Conceptualization of Instruction." Elementary School Journal, 88 (2), 151-165.
36. Pearson, P. D. ve Cervetti, G.N. (2017). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. S.E. Israel (Ed.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension. (2nd.Ed.), (ss.12-56) New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
37. Pressley, M. (2002). Effective Beginning Reading Instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 34 (2), 165-188.
38. Smith, P.L. ve Friend, M. (1986). Training learning disabled adolescents in a strategy for using text structure to aid recall of instructional prose. Learning Disabilities Research, 2(1), 38–44.
39. Spires, H.A., Gallini, J. ve Riggsbee, J. (1992). Effects of schema-based and text structure-based cues on expository prose comprehension in fourth graders. Journal of Experimental Education, 60(4), 307–320.
40. Van den Broek, P., Virtue, S., Everson, M. G., Tzeng, Y. ve Sung, Y. (2002). Comprehension and Memory of Science Texts: Inferential Processes and the Construction of a Mental Representation. Otero, J., León, J. A ve Graesser, A. C. (Ed.) içinde, The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension. Mahwah, N.J. : L. Erlbaum Associates, 131-155.
41. Van Dijk, T. A. ve Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. Academic Press, Inc. New York.
42. Weisberg, R. ve Balajthy, E. (1989). Transfer effects of instructing poor readers to recognize expository text structure. National Reading Conference Yearbook, 38, 279–286.
43. Westby, C., Culatta, B., Lawrence, B. ve Hall-Kenyon, K. (2010). Summarizing expository texts. Topics in Language Disorders , 30 (4), 275-287.
44. Wijekumar, K.K., Meyer, B.J.F. ve Lei, P. (2012). Large-scale randomized controlled trial with 4th graders using intelligent tutoring of the structure strategy to improve nonfiction reading comprehension. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(6), 987– 1013.
45. Williams, J. P. (2003). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, ve S. Graham (Ed.) içinde, Handbook of learning disabilities, (ss. 293-305). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
46. Williams, J.P. Hall, K.M. & Louer, K.D. (2004). Teaching expository text structure to young at-risk learners: Building the basics of comprehension instruction. Exceptionality, 12 (3), 129-144.
48. Williams, J.P., Hall, K.M., Lauer, K.D., Stafford, K.B., DeSisto, L.A., ve deCani, J.S. (2005). Expository text comprehension in the primary grade classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 538–550.
49. Williams, J. P. (2005). Instruction in reading comprehension for primary-grade students: A focus on text structure. The Journal Of Special Education, 30 (1), 6-18.
50. Williams, J. P., Nubla-Kung, A. M., Pollini, S., Stafford, K. S., Garcia, A. & Snyder, A. E. (2007). Teaching cause-effect text structure through social studies content to at-risk second graders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40 (2), 111-120.
51. Williams, J.P., Stafford, K.B., Lauer, K.D., Hall, K.M. ve Pollini, S. (2009). Embedding reading comprehension training in content-area instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 1–20.
52. Williams, J. P., Pollini, S., Nubla-Kung, A. M., Snyder, A. E., Garcia, A., Ordynans, J. G., & Atkins, J. G. (2014). An Intervention to Improve Comprehension of Cause/Effect Through Expository Text Structure Instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology. 106 (1), 1-17.
53. Yazıcı, K. (2006). Hikâye edici metinlerin çözümlenmesinde hikâyenin yüzü stratejisinin kullanımı. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, 1 (20), 229-241.
54. Yılmaz, M. (2008). Hikâye haritası yönteminin okuduğunu anlamaya etkisi. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10 (2), 213-225.