İngilizce Öğretmen Adayı Hazırlık Öğrencilerinin Yazma Öz-yeterlik Algılarında Dijital Araçların Rolünün İncelenmesi

Öz

Yazma becerisi, çok yönlü doğası nedeniyle dil öğrenenler için en zorlayıcı becerilerden biri olarak kabul edilir, bu da onu kaçınılan bir beceri haline getirir. Benzer şekilde, yazma eğitimi, yapısal bilginin öğretilmesinden, uygun sözcük dağarcığı ve bağlayıcı araçlar kullanarak fikirleri mantıksal olarak birbirine bağlamaya kadar değişen bileşik bir beceri setini içerir. Diğer birçok EFL öğrencisi gibi, Türkiye'deki üniversitelerde yoğun İngilizce eğitimi alan öğrencilerin çoğu, sınıf içi ve ders dışı yazma görevlerinde zorluk yaşadıklarını ve İngilizce yazmada başarı ve öz yeterlilik duygusu hissetmediklerini bildirmektedir. Bu çalışma, öğrencilere planlama, ön yazma, düzenleme, gözden geçirme ve yayınlama gibi yazma sürecinin farklı aşamalarında destek olacak dijital araçları entegre eden müdahale yoluyla İngilizce yazma eğitimi vermeyi amaçlamıştır. Ayrıca, çalışma öğrencilerin İngilizce yazmada öz yeterlilik düzeylerini ve başarı duygularını geliştirmedeki etkinliğini incelemektedir. 35 İngilizce hazırlık öğrencisine, öğrencilerin yazma süreçlerini desteklemek için çeşitli yararlı web araçlarının tanıtıldığı ve öğrencilerin hem sınıf içinde hem de dışında bu uygulamaları kullanmayı teşvik edildiği altı haftalık bir eğitim verilmiştir. Çalışmada, Bruning ve diğerleri (2013) tarafından oluşturulan Öz-yeterlik Yazma Ölçeği'nin (ÖYÖ) nicel veri aracı olarak, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme ve ders değerlendirme formlarının da nitel veri aracı olarak kullanıldığı karma yöntemli bir araştırma modeli benimsenmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları, dijital araç destekli yazma eğitiminin, öğrencilerin yabancı dilde yazmada öz yeterliliklerini artırma konusunda umut verici etkileri olduğunu ve fikir üretme, yazma kurallarını kullanma ve öz düzenleme becerilerinde kazanımlara yol açtığını ortaya koymuştur. Nitel bulgular ayrıca dijital araçların öğrencileri yabancı dilde yazar olarak güçlendirdiğini ve yazma görevlerinde algılanan başarı duygularında iyileşmelere yol açtığını göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yazma Becerisi
• Dijital Araçlar
• Yazma Özyeterliliği.
• İngilizce Öğretimi

Examining the Role of Digital Tools in Pre-service English Language Teachers’ Self-efficacy in Writing

Abstract

Writing is considered as one of the most compelling skills by nature. Similarly, teaching writing embodies a series of skills. Majority of students in English Language Preparatory program at Turkish universities state that they have difficulties in writing, and they do not feel a sense of achievement and self-efficacy in writing in English (L2 henceforth). This study aims to deliver students writing instruction in L2 through a 6-week-intervention integrating digital tools, which will support them throughout the writing processes. Also, the study examines the efficiency of the intervention to foster the students' self-efficacy levels and sense of achievement in L2 writing. 35 English preparatory students were given a six-week training in which digital tools were utilized to maximize their potential and experience during writing processes and students were scaffolded in a guided way in and outside the school environment. A mixed-method research design was used to gather quantitative data through Self-Efficacy Writing Scale (SEWS) (Bruning et al., 2013) and qualitative data through interviews and minute papers. The findings of the study revealed that digital tool supported writing instruction had promising impacts on fostering students’ self-efficacy in L2 writing, leading to gains in their ideation, use of writing conventions, and self-regulation abilities. The qualitative findings also suggested that digital tools empowered them as writers in L2 and led to improvements in their perceived sense of achievement in writing tasks.

Keywords

• EFL
• Writing
• Digital Tools
• Writing Self-efficacy

References

1. Akkaş-Baysal, E., & Ocak, G. (2020). Dil öğrenme stratejilerinin kullanılmasını etkileyen faktörler. NEÜ Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 91-103.
2. Aloni, N. (2007). Enhancing humanity. Springer.
3. Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques, 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass.
4. Badenhorst, C. (2010). Productive writing: Becoming a prolific academic writer.Van Schaik Publishers.
5. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman and Company.
6. Bandura, A. & Barab, P. G. (1973). Processes governing disinhibitory effects through symbolic modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 82, 1-9.https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034968
7. Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 553–570. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2000.1048
8. Bruning, R., Dempsey, M., Kauffinan, D. F., McKim, C., & Zumbrunn, S. (2013). Examining dimensions of self-efficacy for writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 25- 38.

9. Chen, Y. H., & Tsai, M. J. (2017). Writing with digital video: Conceptions of prospective English teachers. Computers & Education, 115, 92-106.
10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. 6th ed. Routledge Falmer.
11. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
12. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). Sage Publications
13. Çoklar, A. & Çalışkan, M. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının özgüvenleri ile teknoloji kullanımları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (2), 86-98 . DOI: 10.38151/akef.578807 Demirkol, T., & Demiröz, H. (2022). Exploring the relationship between L2 writing self-efficacy and language proficiency level. The Literacy Trek, 8(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.47216/literacytrek.1148773 Fernández-Domínguez, J., Fernández-Cruz, M., & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2019). The impact of digital storytelling on EFL learners’ writing performance and motivation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(56), 555-576.
14. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw Hill Education.
15. Godwin-Jones, R. (2015). Enhancing foreign language learning through mobile technology. Language Learning & Technology, 19(3), 18-25. Godwin-Jones, R. (2018). Second language writing online: An update. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 1–15. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44574 Han, Y., Zhao, S., & Ng, L. L. (2021). How technology tools impact writing performance, lexical complexity, and perceived self-regulated learning strategies in EFL academic writing: A comparative study. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 752793.
16. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2017). Self-Regulated strategy development: Theoretical bases, critical instructional elements, and future research. In R. Fidalgo & T. Olive (Series Eds.) & R. Fidalgo, K. R. Harris, & M. Braaksma (Vol. Eds.) Studies in Writing Series: Vol. 34. Design Principles for Teaching Effective Writing (pp. 119-151). Brill.
17. Hayes, J.R. (2000). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In R. Indrisano & J.R. Squire (Eds.), Perspectives on writing: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 6–44). International Reading Association.
18. Holstein, J. A. & Gubrium, J. F. (2002). Active interviewing. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. Sage Publications.
19. Hyland, F. (2000). Teacher management of writing workshops: Two case studies. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(2), 272-296. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.2.272 Jinga, D. (2012). Application of humanism theory in the teaching approach. Higher Education of Social Science. 3 (1), 32-36. https://doi.org/10.3968/j.hess.1927024020120301.1593
20. Kaleci, F. & Cihangir, A. (2019). The integration of information and communication technologies for education: comparative analysis of Turkey and Singapore. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (2) , 139-161 . DOI: 10.38151/akef.641913
21. Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 51-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a001320
22. Kessler, G. (2018). Teaching L2 writing in the age of digital communication. Routledge.
23. Lan, Y. J. (2015). The effectiveness of using digital storytelling for EFL oral performance under the context of technology acceptance theory. Computers & Education, 88, 75-85.
24. Lane, J., Lane, A.M., & Kyprianou, A. (2004). Self-efficacy, self-esteem and their impact on academic performance. Social Behaviour and Personality, 32, 247–256. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2004.32.3.247
25. Lei, Q. (2007). EFL Teachers’ factors and students’ affect. US-China Education Review, 4(3), 60–67.
26. Li, Y. (2023). The effect of online collaborative writing instruction on enhancing writing performance, writing motivation, and writing self-efficacy of Chinese EFL learners. Frontiers in Psychology, 14.
27. Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being.New York: Van Nostrand.
28. McCarthy, P., Meier, S., & Rinderer, R. (1985). Self-efficacy and writing: A different view of self-evaluation. College Composition and Communication, 36, 465-471. https://doi.org/10.2307/357865
29. Merriam-Webster. (2017). Efficacy. Retrieved from https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/efficacy
30. Ofori, R., & Charlton, J.P. (2002). A path model of factors influencing the academic performance of nursing students. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 38, 507–515. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02212.x.
31. Parker, G. (2015). Teachers' autonomy. Research in Education, 93(1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.7227/RIE.0008 Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222
32. Pajares, F. & Johnson, M. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing: The role of writing self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension. Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 313-331. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171341
33. Prat-Sala, M. & Redford, P. (2012). Writing essays: does self-efficacy matter? The relationship between self-efficacy in reading and in writing and undergraduate students’ performance in essay writing. Educational Psychology, 32 (1), 9–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2011.621411
34. Reinders, H., & White, C. (2016). Digital technology in the second language writing classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 202-218.
35. Richardson, J.T.E. (2007). Motives, attitudes, and approaches to studying in distance education. Higher Education, 54, 385–416. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29735118
36. Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Constable.
37. Rogers, C. (1980). A way of being. Houghton Mifflin.
38. Schunk, D.H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B.J. Zimmerman & D.H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 125–151). Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Shell, D.F., Colvin, C., & Bruning, R.H. (1995). Self-efficacy, attribution, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement-level differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 386–398. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.386
40. Sırmacı, N. & Konyalıoğlu, A.C. (2021). İlköğretim matematik öğretmeni adaylarının öğretim sürecine yönelik özyeterlik inançları. Ereğli Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (2), 144-155. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/neueefd/issue/67780/638886
41. Silva, T., & Matsuda, P. K. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
42. Ustun, A. B. , Karaoğlan-Yılmaz, F. G. & Yılmaz, R. (2020). Öğretmenler E-öğrenmeye hazır mı? Öğretmenlerin E-öğrenmeye yönelik hazır bulunuşluklarının incelenmesi üzerine bir araştırma. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 2 (1) , 54-69 . https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/akef/issue/55203/759099
43. Wang, G. (2005). Humanistic approach and affective factors in foreign language teaching. Sino-US English Teaching, 2(5), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.45-51
44. Wilson, K. M. & Trainin, G. (2007). First-grade students’ motivation and achievement for reading, writing, and spelling. Reading Psychology, 28, 257-282. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710601186464