ELT STUDENTS’ REFLECTIONS ON READING AND WRITINGCOURSE AT PREPARATORY CLASS

Abstract

The study aimed to analyze ELT students’ reflections on reading and writing course at preparatory class. Case study design and convenient sampling technique were used. 15 ELT students participated in the focus group interviews voluntarily in which semi-structured interview form was used. The data were analyzed using content analysis. The students’ reflections were grouped into four themes as objectives and outcomes, content and materials, learning experiences and evaluation process. The findings of the study indicated that the outcomes of the instruction in preparatory class mostly met the students’ expectations and the objectives of the course were reached. The majority of them were satisfied with the content. Each student had unique learning experiences. The students expressed their satisfaction with the classroom atmosphere. They were also satisfied with the evaluation process. The research findings were discussed in the light of the literature, and recommendations were made for curriculum/syllabus designers, instructors and researchers.

Keywords

• ELT students
• preparatory class
• prospective teachers of English
• reading and writing course
• reflection.

İNGİLİZCE ÖĞRETMENLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN HAZIRLIK SINIFINDAKİ OKUMA VE YAZMA DERSİNE İLİŞKİN GÖRÜŞLERİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, İngilizce Öğretmenliği bölümü öğrencilerinin hazırlık sınıfındaki okuma yazma dersine ilişkin düşüncelerini incelemektir. Durum çalışması deseni ve kolay ulaşılabilir durum örneklemesi tekniği kullanılmıştır. Yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formunun kullanıldığı odak grup görüşmelerine 15 öğrenci gönüllü olarak katılmıştır. Veriler içerik analizi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Öğrencilerin görüşleri, öğrenme hedef ve çıktıları, içerik ve materyaller, öğrenme deneyimleri ve değerlendirme süreci olmak üzere dört tema altında gruplanmıştır. Araştırmanın bulguları, hazırlık sınıfındaki öğrenme çıktılarının çoğunlukla öğrencilerin beklentilerini karşıladığını ve dersin hedeflerine ulaşıldığını göstermiştir. Öğrencilerin çoğunluğu içerikten memnun olduklarını belirtmiştir. Her öğrenci kendine özgü öğrenme deneyimlerine sahiptir. Öğrenciler sınıf ortamından ve değerlendirme sürecinden memnun olduklarını ifade etmişlerdir. Araştırma bulguları literatür ışığında tartışılmış ve program/izlence tasarımcılarına, öğretim görevlilerine ve araştırmacılara önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

• İngilizce Öğretmenliği bölümü öğrencileri
• hazırlık sınıfı
• İngilizce öğretmen adayları
• okuma ve yazma dersi
• görüş.

References

1. Ahmadi, R., & Hasani, M. (2018). Capturing student voice on TEFL syllabus design: Agenticity of pedagogical dialogue negotiation. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1522780. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1522780
2. Al Bloushi B.J., & Al Shuraiaan, A. (2024). Product approach and process approach and their significance to teaching writing in TESOL and how they are utilized in ELT classes. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(3), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.37745/ijelt.13/vol12n722
3. Albore, A. K., Woldemariam, G. S., & Chali, G. T. (2024). Effects of process-genre approach on students’ writing strategy use in paragraphs: Second-year Wachemo University students. Education Research International, 2024, 5527768. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/5527768
4. Alhujaylan, H. (2020). Evaluating the effectiveness of ıntegrating reading and writing pedagogy in EFL setting and teachers' perceptions. English Language Teaching, 13(5), 177-190. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n5p177
5. Ali, H. F., & Ulker, V. (2020). The effect of inquiry-based approach on development of reading and writing skills of a university EFL students. Asian EFL Journal Research, 27(2), 84-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3621259
6. Bahou, L. (2011). Rethinking the challenges and possibilities of student voice and agency. Educate, 1(1), 2-14.
7. Beal, C. R. (1996). The role of comprehension monitoring in children’s revision. Educational Psychology Review, 8, 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01464074
8. Bovill, C. (2013a) Students and staff co-creating curricula: An example of good practice in higher education? In E. Dunne, & D. Owen, (Eds.), The student engagement handbook: Practice in higher education (pp. 461-476). Emerald Group Publishing.

9. Bovill, C. (2013b). Students and staff co-creating curricula: A new trend or an old idea we never got around to implementing? In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning through research and scholarship: 20 Years of ISL (pp. 96-108). The Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
10. Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 133-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568690
11. Canbay, F. (2017). Investigation of the reading habits and interests of ELT students. Berlin: Lambert Academic Publishing.
12. Canniveng, C., & Martinez, M. (2014). Materials development and teacher training. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing materials for language teaching (pp. 479-489). Bloomsbury Academic.
13. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203029053
14. Çelik, B. (2019). Developing writing skills through reading. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 6(1), 206-214. doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v6i1p206
15. Dixon, C. N., & Nessel, D. (1983). Language experience approach to reading (and writing) Language-experience reading for second language learners. Alemany Press.
16. DuBrowa, M. (2011). Integrating reading and writing: One professor’s story. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 28(1), 30-33. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42802379
17. Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_5
18. Flutter, J. (2006). ‘This place could help you learn’: Student participation in creating better school environments. Educational Review, 58(2), 183-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910600584116
19. Flutter, J. (2007). Teacher development and pupil voice. The Curriculum Journal, 18(3), 343-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170701589983
20. Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2013). Reading and writing together: A critical component of English for Academic Purposes teaching and learning. TESOL Journal, 4(1), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.65
21. Islam, C., & Mares, C. (2014). Adapting classroom materials. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing materials for language teaching (pp. 86-100). Bloomsbury Academic.
22. Keyvanoğlu, F. B., & Atmaca, Ç. (2023). An investigation into preparatory class EFL students’ L2 writing anxiety. Journal of Higher Education and Science/Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 13(1), 73-85. https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1135409
23. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th Ed.). SAGE Publications.
24. Lenski, S. D. (1998). Strategic knowledge when reading in order to write. Reading Psychology, 19, 287-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0270271980190303
25. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley.
26. Miftah, M. Z. (2015). Enhancing writing skill through writing process approach. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v5i1.88
27. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE Publications.
28. Mitra, D. L. (2008). Balancing power in communities of practice: An examination of increasing student voice through school-based youth-adult partnerships. Journal of Educational Change, 9(3), 221-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-007-9061-7
29. Morgan, W., & Streb, M. (2001). Building citizenship: How student voice in service-learning develops civic values. Social Science Quarterly, 82(1), 154-169. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/slceslgen/83
30. Moses, R. N., & Mohamad, M. (2019). Challenges faced by students and teachers on writing skills in ESL Contexts: A literature review. Creative Education, 10(13), 3385-3391. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1013260
31. Mulatu, E., & Regassa, T. (2022) Teaching reading skills in EFL classes: Practice and procedures teachers use to help learners with low reading skills. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2093493. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2093493
32. Nam, E., & Seong, M. (2020). Teaching activities and students’ preferences in integrated college English reading and writing classes. English Teaching, 75(2), 69-91. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.75.2.202006.69
33. Nazario, L. A., Borchers, D., & Lewis, W. (2010). Bridges to better writing. Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
34. Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. C. (1998). The reading-writing connection. In N. Nelson & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Ninety-seventh yearbook of the national society for the study of education (pp. 1-52). National Society for the Study of Education.
35. Pardede, P. (2019). Integrated Skills Approach in EFL Classrooms: A Literature Review. In Proceeding English Education Department Collegiate Forum (EED CF) 2015-2018. UKI Press, Indonesia, Jakarta, pp. 147-159.
36. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri (Çev. Ed. M. Bütün & S. B. Demir). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
37. Piri Ardakani, M., & Lashkarian, A. (2015). Using mind mapping strategy to improve reading comprehension ability to intermediate Iranian student. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi (CFD), 36(3), 1077-1095.
38. Pysarchyk, O. L., & Yamshynska, N. V. (2015). The importance of integrating reading and writing for the EFL teaching. Advanced Education, 3, 77-83. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.44298
39. Rahmat, N. H. (2020). Knowledge transforming in writing: An analysis of read-to-write process. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(4), 1-17. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3883649
40. Rudduck, J., & Fielding, M. (2006). Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review, 58(2), 219-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910600584207
41. Rumenapp, J. C. (2016). Analyzing discourse analysis: Teachers’ views of classroom discourse and student identity. Linguistics and Education, 35, 26-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2016.04.002
42. Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications.
43. Shah, T. A., Hussain, S., & Rashid, S. (2023). Challenges of teaching writing to ESL learners in a Pakistani public high school: Issues, contributing factors, and solutions based on personal reflections. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 7(2), 550-563. https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2023(7-II)49
44. Slotte, C., & Lonka, K. (1999). Review of process effects of spontaneous note-taking on text comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0980
45. Tang, R. (2013). Two sides of the same coin: Challenges and opportunities for scholars from EFL backgrounds. In R.Tang (ed.), Academic writing in a second or foreign language (pp.204-232). Continuum.
46. Tierney, R. J., & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading–writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), The handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 246-280). Longman.
47. Varol, M., & Varol, V. (2022). Reading Comprehension Strategies Taught by Turkish EFL Teachers. 19 Mayıs Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(4), 393-399. https://doi.org/10.52835/19maysbd.1220121
48. Vasu, K., Ling, C. H., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2016). Malaysian tertiary level ESL students’ perceptions toward teacher feedback, peer feedback and self-assessment in their writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(5), 158-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.5n.5p.158
49. Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (2008). Research methods in education: An introduction (9th ed.) Pearson Education Inc.
50. Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2015). Embedding formative assessment: Practical techniques for K-12 classrooms. Learning Sciences International.
51. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
52. Yin, Q. (2015). Reflections on observing ESL reading and writing course at University of Ottawa. Overseas English, 6, 6-9.
53. Yulianti, A., Lestari, H. A., & Yana, L. (2019). Think pair share (TPS) technique for improving students reading comprehension of narrative text in the seventh grade students of SMPN 3 Klari Karawang. Project Professional Journal of English Education, 2(6), 830-837. DOI: 10.22460/project.v2i6.p830-837
54. Van Zant, A. B., & Kray, L. J. (2014). “I can't lie to your face”: Minimal face-to-face interaction promotes honesty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 234-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.07.014