<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article         dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                                                <journal-id>eku</journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>Journal of Theory and Practice in Education</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">1304-9496</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id/>
                                                                                                                                                                                            <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <article-title>ÇALIŞMA PLANI OLARAK ÖDEVİN DEĞERİ VE DOĞRULUĞU: SINIF İÇİ  UYGULAMA DEĞİŞKENLİĞİ</article-title>
                                                                                                                                        </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Rıvers</surname>
                                    <given-names>Damian</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20130114">
                    <day>01</day>
                    <month>14</month>
                    <year>2013</year>
                </pub-date>
                                        <volume>5</volume>
                                        <issue>2</issue>
                                        <fpage>227</fpage>
                                        <lpage>243</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20121214">
                        <day>12</day>
                        <month>14</month>
                        <year>2012</year>
                    </date>
                                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 2005, Journal of Theory and Practice in Education</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>2005</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>Journal of Theory and Practice in Education</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <abstract><p>Bu araştırma ödev temelli dil öğretiminin sınıf içi uygulamalardaki değişkenliğin materyal tasarımı&amp;nbsp;kaynaklı sebeplerini daha yakından belirlemek için &amp;nbsp;yürütülmüştür. Özel olarak tasarlanan ödev temelli&amp;nbsp;dersin gelişimine odaklanmış, örnek olay incelemesine dayalı bir projedir. Bir seri iletişimsel mikrodüzey ödev iki üniversite okutmanına verilmiştir. Bu okutmanlar, yabancı dil (İngilizce) sınıfı ortamında&amp;nbsp;bu mikro-düzey ödevleri işlemişlerdir. İngilizce dili öğretimi bağlamında bu iki okutmanla, ödevin temel&amp;nbsp;yapısına ilişkin tutumları hakkında bir ön görüşme &amp;nbsp;yapılmıştır. Ayrıca, verilen ödev materyalini nasılkullanacaklarını belirten bir çalışma planı sunmaları da istenmiştir. Daha sonra 90 dakikalık ders&amp;nbsp;gözlemlenmiş ve alınan notlar ders sonrası görüşmelerden elde edilen verilerle birleştirilmiştir. Her&amp;nbsp;okutmanın işlediği dersin ayrıntılı raporları sunulmuş, ödev dizaynı ve ödevin işlenmesi arasındaki&amp;nbsp;değişkenliğe dayalı olarak &amp;nbsp;daha geniş ölçekli çalışmaların yapılması gerekliliği vurgulanmıştır. &amp;nbsp;</p></abstract>
                                                                                    
            
                                                            <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>pedagojik ödev</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>   materyal dizaynı</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>   canlandırma</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>   ödev temelli dil öğretimi</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                        
                                                                                                                                                    </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Breen, M. (1989). The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In R.K Johnson (Eds.), The second language curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Brown, G., &amp; Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Carless, D. (2004). Issues in teachers’ reinterpretation of a task-based innovation in primary schools. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 639-662.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 19, 1-23.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gass, S. M., &amp; Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass &amp; C. Maden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990). Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lam, W. S. E. (2004). Second language socialization in a bilingual chat room. Language Learning &amp; Technology, 8(3), 44-65.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lave, J., &amp; Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, N.Y: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Long, M. H., &amp; Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27-56.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mahenthiran, S., &amp; Rouse, P. (2000). The impact of group selection on student performance and satisfaction. The International Journal of Educational Management, 14(6), 255-264.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Murphy, J. (2003). Task-based learning: The interaction between tasks and learners. ELT Journal, 57(4), 352-359.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Newton, J. (1991). Negotiation: Negotiating what? Paper given at SEAMEO Conference on Language Acquisition and the Second/Foreign Language Classroom, RELC, Singapore.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Norman, D. A. (1988). The design of everyday things. New York, N.Y: Basic Books.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref16">
                        <label>16</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref17">
                        <label>17</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International Ltd.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref18">
                        <label>18</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Richards, J. C. (1987). The dilemma of teacher education in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 209-226.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref19">
                        <label>19</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Seedhouse, P. (1999). Task-based interaction. ELT Journal, 53, 149-156.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref20">
                        <label>20</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Shavelson, R. J., &amp; Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers’ pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51, 455-498.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref21">
                        <label>21</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-base instruction. In J. Willis &amp; D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref22">
                        <label>22</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref23">
                        <label>23</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wartofsky, M. (1973). Models. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref24">
                        <label>24</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wright, T. (1987). Instructional task and discoursal outcome in the L2 classroom. In C. N. Candlin &amp; D. Murphy (Eds.), Lancaster practical papers in English language education: Language learning tasks (pp. 5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
