Yabancı Uyruklu Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Türkçe Deyimleri Öğrenmeleri Sürecinde Bağlam Temelli Öğrenme

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, yabancı uyruklu üniversite öğrencilerinin bağlam temelli öğrenme (BTÖ) temelli dijital ortamda Türkçe deyimleri öğrenme süreçlerindeki deneyimlerin incelenmesidir. Çalışmaya Fırat Üniversitesi’nde öğrenim gören 12 yabancı uyruklu öğrenci ve ana dili Türkçe olan 9 öğrenci gönüllü olarak katıldı. Hem nicel hem de nitel verilerin toplandığı bu araştırmada, Araştırmada yabancı uyruklu öğrencilerin bağlam temelli öğrenme temelli ortamlarda bireysel ve işbirlikli çabaların Türkçe deyimleri öğrenmelerini nasıl desteklediğini incelemek amacıyla keşfedici çoklu durum çalışması yöntemi kullanıldı. Çalışmanın verileri için dört kaynak belirlendi: (1) log verileri, (2) odak grup görüşme verileri, (3) Türkçe deyim başarı testi ve (4) takip görüşme verileri. Verilerinin analizi bize, bağlam temelli e-öğrenme ortamının etkili bir dil öğrenme süreci oluşturduğunu ispatladı. Çalışmada bağlam temelli bir öğrenme ortamının dijital ortamda oldukça etkili bir biçimde sunumunu ve öğrenci davranışları ve performanslarındaki değişimi sunmaktadır. Genelde sosyal yapılandırmacı yaklaşımı özelde ise BTÖ etkililiğini gösteren bu çalışma akran desteği ve işbirliğinin önemini savunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Yabancı dil öğretimi
• bağlam temelli öğrenme
• durum çalışması
• akran desteği

Context-Based Learning in Turkish Idioms Learning by International University Students

Abstract

This research examines international university students' experiences learning Turkish idioms in context-based learning (CBL) digital environment. Twelve international students studying at Fırat University and nine students whose native language does Turkish voluntarily participate in the study. In this study, in which quantitative and qualitative data were collected, the embedded mixed method research design was used to examine how individual and collaborative efforts of international students in context-based learning-based environments support their learning of Turkish idioms. Four sources were identified for the data of the study: (1) log data, (2) focus group interview data, (3) Turkish idiom achievement test, and (4) follow-up interview. Analysis of its data proved that the context-based e-learning environment constitutes an effective language-learning process. The study presents a very effective presentation of a context-based learning environment in the digital environment and the change in student behaviors and performances. This study, which shows the social constructivist approach in general and the effectiveness of CBL in particular, advocates the importance of peer support and collaboration.

Keywords

• Foreign language teaching
• context-based learning
• case study

References

1. Aljaafreh, A., & Lantolf, J. (1994). Negative feedback as regulation and second language learning in the zone of proximal development. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (4), 465-483.
2. Angelova, M., Gunawardena, D., & Volk, D. (2006). Peer teaching and learning: Co-constructing language in a dual language first grade. Language and education, 20(3), 173-190.
3. Bennett, J., Holman, J., Lubben, F., Nicolson, P., & Otter, C. (2005). Science in context: The Salters approach. Making it relevant: Context based learning of science, 121-154.
4. Bülbül, M. S., Garip, B., & Demirtas, D. (2013). Testing context based, self learning material with a blind student: a wisdom box. New Perspective in Science Education.
5. Chen, C. (2021). Using scaffolding materials to facilitate autonomous online chinese as a foreign language learning: A study during the covid-19 pandemic. Sage Open, 11(3), 21582440211040131
6. Chen, Z. H., Chen, H. H. J., & Dai, W. J. (2018). Using narrative-based contextual games to enhance language learning: A case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 186-198.
7. Choi, H. J., & Johnson, S. D. (2005). The effect of context-based video instruction on learning and motivation in online courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(4), 215-227.
8. Coştu, S. (2009). Teacher experiences from a learning environment based on contextual teaching and learning in mathematics teaching. Master‟s Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.

9. Darhower, M. (2002). Instructional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 249-278.
10. DiCamilla, F. J., & Antón, M. (2004). Private speech: A study of language for thought in the collaborative interaction of language learners. International journal of applied linguistics, 14(1), 36-69.
11. Ellis, A. (2000). A continuation of the dialogue on issues in counseling in the post-modern era. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 22, 97–106.
12. Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., ... & Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 412-433.
13. Fahim, M., & Haghani, M. (2012). Sociocultural perspectives on foreign language learning. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 3(4). Gilbert, J. K., Bulte, A. M. W., & Pilot, A. (2011). Concept development and transfer in contextbased science education. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 817–837.
14. Glynn, S., & Koballa, T. R. (2005). The contextual teaching and learning instructional approach. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), Exemplary science: Best practices in professional development (pp. 75–84). National Science Teachers Association Press.
15. Huang, S., Eslami, Z., & Hu, R. J. S. (2010). The Relationship between Teacher and Peer Support and English-Language Learners' Anxiety. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 32-40.
16. Jamali Kivi, P., Namaziandost, E., Fakhri Alamdari, E., Ryafikovna Saenko, N., Inga-Arias, M., Fuster-Guillén, D., ... & Nasirin, C. (2021). The Comparative Effects of Teacher Versus Peer-Scaffolding on EFL Learners’ Incidental Vocabulary Learning and Reading Comprehension: A Socio-Cultural Perspective. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 50(5), 1031-1047.
17. Kaliampos, J. (2021). Scaffolding Learner Agency in Technology-Enhanced Language Learning Environments. Perspektiven Inklusiven Englischunterrichts–Gemeinsam lehren und lernen.
18. Karslı, F., & Yiğit, M. (2015). Lise 12. sınıf öğrencilerinin alkanlar konusundaki kavramsal anlamalarına bağlam temelli öğrenme yaklaşımının etkisi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(1), 43-61.
19. Korkmaz, S., & Güneyli, A. (2017). Impact of Technology-Assisted Context-Based Teaching on the Listening Skills of Teacher Candidates. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 4669-4677. Kuo, Y. C., Belland, B. R., & Kuo, Y. T. (2017). Learning through blogging: Students’ perspectives in collaborative blog-enhanced learning communities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 37-50.
20. Kwon, C., Kim, Y., & Woo, T. (2016). Digital–Physical reality game: Mapping of physical space with fantasy in context-based learning games. Games and Culture, 11(4), 390-421. Lantolf, J. P. (2007). Sociocultural theory. In International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 693-700). Springer. Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford University Press. Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
21. Lata, P., & Luhach, S. (2016). Redefining Pedagogy by Using Technical Scaffolding for Teaching Advanced ESL Learners. In Conference proceedings. ICT for language learning (p. 191).
22. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
23. Lee, L. (2007). Fostering second language oral communication through constructivist interaction in desktop videoconferencing. Foreign language annals, 40(4), 635-649.
24. Lee, L. (2008). Focus-on-form through collaborative scaffolding in expert-to-novice online interaction. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 53-72.
25. Levitt, H. M., Motulsky, S. L., Wertz, F. J., Morrow, S. L., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2017). Recommendations for designing and reviewing qualitative research in psychology: Promoting methodological integrity. Qualitative psychology, 4(1), 2.
26. Marzban, A. (2011). Improvement of reading comprehension through computer-assisted language learning in Iranian intermediate EFL students. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 3-10.
27. Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language awareness, 9(1), 34-51.
28. Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. Routledge.
29. Oliver, K., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student management of web-based hypermedia resources during open-ended problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 75-92.
30. Opperman, A. (2016). The application of culturally-relevant instructional scaffolding techniques into English language learning (Doctoral dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University).
31. Özay, E., & Çam, F. (2011). Effect of" context based learning" in students’ achievement about nervous system. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8(2), 91-106.
32. Ozverir, I., Osam, U. V., & Herrington, J. (2017). Investigating the effects of authentic activities on foreign language learning: A design-based research approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 261-274.
33. Parchmann, Ilka, Karolina Broman, Maike Busker, and Julian Rudnik. 2015. “Context-based Learning on School and University Level.” In Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Innovative Strategies and New Technologies, edited by Javier Garcia-Martinez and Elena Serrano-Torregrosa, 259–278.
34. Rose, D. E. (2012). Context-based learning. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 799–802). Springer US.
35. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 64(4), 479-530.
36. Samuels, M., & Betts, J. (2007). Crossing the threshold from description to deconstruction and reconstruction: Using self‐assessment to deepen reflection. Reflective Practice, 8(2), 269-283.
37. Satriani, I., Emilia, E., & Gunawan, M. H. (2012). Contextual teaching and learning approach to teaching writing. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 10-22.
38. Şensoy, Ö., & Gökçe, S. (2017). Yaşam temelli öğrenme yaklaşımının öğretmen adaylarının başarı ve motivasyonları üzerine etkisi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 56(3), 37-52. Doi. 10.9761/JASSS6997.
39. Sercu, L. (2002). Autonomous learning and the acquisition of intercultural communicative competence: Some implications for course development. Language culture and curriculum, 15(1), 61-74.
40. Stockwell, G., & Reinders, H. (2019). Technology, motivation and autonomy, and teacher psychology in language learning: Exploring the myths and possibilities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 39, 40-51.
41. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied linguistics, 16(3), 371-391.
42. Trimmer, W., Laracy, K., & Love-Gray, M. (2009). Seeing the bigger picture through context-based learning.
43. Turuk, M. C. (2008). The relevance and implications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in the second language classroom. Arecls, 5(1), 244-262.
44. Vurdien, R., & Puranen, P. (2020). Enhancing students' intercultural competence and learner autonomy via facebook telecollaboration. In Multicultural instructional design: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 646-666). IGI Global.
45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
46. Westera, W. (2011). On the changing nature of learning context: Anticipating the virtual extensions of the world. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 201-212.
47. Williams, P. (2008). Assessing context-based learning: Not only rigorous but also relevant. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 395–408.
48. Wood, D., Bruner, J. & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.
49. Yang, J., Li, Q., Wenyin, L., & Zhuang, Y. (2005). Searching for flash movies on the web: A content and context based framework. World Wide Web, 8(4), 495-517.
50. Yeh, E., & Wan, G. (2019). The use of virtual worlds in foreign language teaching and learning. In Computer-assisted language learning: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1949-1972). IGI Global.
51. Yu, K. C., Fan, S. C., & Lin, K. Y. (2015). Enhancıng Students’problem-Solvıng Skılls Through Context-Based Learnıng. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1377-1401.