KURAM VE UYGULAMA ARASINDAKİ BOŞLUK ÜZERİNE BİR ÇALIŞMA: İNGİLİZCE ÖĞRETMENLERİ KENDİ LİSANS EĞİTİMLERİNİ NASIL ANLAMLANDIRMAKTADIRLAR

Abstract

Öğretmen eğitmenleri genellikle kuram ve uygulam a arasındaki boşluğa sadece öğretmenlerin neden 

olduğunu düşünegelmişleredir. Ancak, bu çalışmaya katılan  iki öğretmen adayı kendi aldıkları dersler 

hakkında farklı düşünceler ortaya koydular ve bu derslerin öğretmen olarak kendileri için 

oluşturdukları kimliklerlerle bağlantılı olduğunu beyan ettiler. Bu makalede, öğretmen adaylarının 

kendi lisans eğitimlerini nasıl anlamlandırdıkları konusundaki farklılıkların incelenmesinin önemi ve 

kendileri için oluşturdukları öğretmen kimliklerininin, eğitimleri sırasında aldıklarının derslerin 

kuramsal ve uygulamalı ögeleriyle ilişkileri hakkındaki düşünceleri tartışılmaktadır. Diğer bir 

ifadeyle, kuram ve uygulama arasında zorlama bağlantılar kurmadan önce, öğretmenlerinin 

kendilerinin bu bağlantıyı nasıl kurduklarını araştırmak gerekmektedir. Bu araştırma sonucunda 

öğretmen eğitimi ile ilgili deneyimleri, öğretmenlerin benzersiz gereksinimlerine daha iyi bir şekilde 

uyarlamamız mümkün olacaktır.

Keywords

• kuram-uygulama ilişkisi, ikinci dil olarak İngilizce, Öğretmen yetiştirme, öğretmen kimliği

References

1. Alexander, D., Muir, D., & Chant, D. (1992). Interrogating stories: How teachers think they learned to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(1), 59-68.
2. Ball, A.F. (2000). Teachers’ developing philosophies on literacy and their use in urban schools: A Vygotskian perspective on internal activity and teacher change. In C.D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bell, L. A. (2002). Sincere fictions: The pedagogical challenges of preparing white teachers for multicultural classrooms. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(3), 236-244.
4. Borg, S. (2003a). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81-109.
5. Borg, S. (2003b). Teacher cognition in grammar teaching: A literature review. Language Awareness, 12(2), 96-108.
6. Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition in language education: Research and practice. London: Continuum.
7. Britzman, D.P. (1986). Cultural myths in the making of a teacher: Biography and social structure in teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 56(4), 442-456.
8. Britzman, D.P. (1991). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. Albany: SUNY Press.

9. Brown, H.D. (1983). From ivory tower to real world: A search for relevance. In J.E. Alatis, H.H. Stern, & P. Strevens (Eds.), Georgetown University Roundtable in Languages and Linguistics (pp. 53-59). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
10. Brumfit, C. (1983). The integration of theory and practice. In J.E. Alatis, H.H. Stern, & P. Strevens (Eds.), Georgetown University Roundtable in Languages and Linguistics (pp. 59-74). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
11. Buendía, E. (2000). Power and possibility: The construction of a pedagogical practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 147-163.
12. Butin, D.W. (2005a). Identity reconstruction and student resistance. In D.W. Butin (Ed.), Teaching social foundations of education: Contexts, theories, and issues (pp. 109-126). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Butin, D.W. (2005b). Guest Editor’s introduction: How social foundations of education matters to teacher preparation: A policy brief. Educational Studies, 38(3), 214-229.
14. Canagarajah, S. (1999). Interrogating the ‘native speaker fallacy’: Non- linguistic roots, non-pedagogical results. In G. Braine (Ed.), Non-native educators in English language teaching (pp. 77-92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Chizhik, E. W. (2003). Reflecting on the challenges of preparing suburban teachers for urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 35 (4), 443- 461.
16. Clay, M. (1993). Reading Recovery: A guidebook for teachers in training. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
17. Comber, B. & Simpson, A. (2001). Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Coughlan, P.J. (1995). Sociocultural theory, second language discourse, and teaching: An interview with James Lantolf. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6 (2), 137-145.
19. Cross, B. E. (2003). Learning or unlearning racism: Transferring teacher education curriculum to classroom practices. Theory into Practice, 42, 203-209.
20. Cross, R. (2010). Language teaching as sociocultural activity: Rethinking language teacher practice. Modern Language Journal, 94(3), 434-452.
21. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 166-173.
22. Dozier, C., Johnston, P., & Rogers, R. (2006). Critical literacy, critical teaching: Tools for preparing responsive teachers. New York: Teachers College Press.
23. Farrell, T.S.C. (2007). Failing the practicum: Narrowing the gap between expectations and reality with reflective practice. TESOL Quarterly, 41 (1), 193-201.
24. Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (1997). Discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285-300.
25. Freeman, D. & Richards, J.C. (1996). Teacher learning in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. Freeman, D. & Johnson, K.E. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 397-417.
27. Golombek, P. R. & Johnson, K. E. (2004). Narrative inquiry as a mediational space: Examining emotional and cognitive dissonance in second language teachers’ development. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 10(3), 307-327.
28. Good, T.L., McCaslin, M., Tsang, H.Y., Zhang, J., Wiley, C.R.H., Bozack, A.R., & Hester, W. (2006). How well do 1-year teachers teach: Does type of preparation make a difference? Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 410-430. st
29. Hascher, T., Cocard, Y., & Moser, P. (2004). Forget about theory—practice is all?: Student teachers’ learning in a practicum. Teachers and Teaching, 10(6), 623-637.
30. Hobson, A. J., Malderez, A., Tracey, L., Giannakaki, M., Pell, G., & Tomlinson, P. D. (2008). Student teachers’ experiences of initial teacher preparation in England: Core themes and variation. Research Papers in Education, 23(4), 407-433.
31. Hodkinson, H. & Hodkinson, P. (1999). Teaching to learn, learning to teach? School-based non-teaching activity in an initial teacher education and training partnership scheme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(3), 273-285.
32. Ilieva, R. (2010). Non-native English speaking teachers’ negotiations of program discourses in their construction of professional identities within a TESOL program. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(3), 343-369.
33. Johnson, K.E. (1992). Learning to teach: Instructional actions and decisions of preservice ESL teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 507-535.
34. Johnson, K.E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of preservice ESL teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10, 439- 452.
35. Johnson, K.E. (1996). The role of theory in L2 teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 765-771.
36. Johnson, K. (2006). The sociocultural turn and its challenges for second language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 235-257.
37. Johnson, K.E. (2009). Second language teacher education: A sociocultural
38. perspective. London: Routledge.
39. Johnson, K. E. & Golombek, P. R. (2003). “Seeing” Teacher Learning.
40. TESOL Quarterly. (The Forum), 729-737.
41. Johnson, K. E. & Golombek, P. R. (Eds.). (2011). Research on second language teacher education: a sociocultural perspective on professional development. New York: Routledge.
42. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
43. Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Reading between the lines and beyond the pages: A culturally relevant approach to literacy teaching. In M.A. Gallego & S. Hollingsworth (Eds.), What counts as literacy: Challenging the school standard (pp. 139-152). New York: Teachers College Press.
44. Lantolf, J.P. (1996). SLA theory building: “Letting all the flowers bloom ” Language Learning, 46 (4), 713-749.
45. Lantolf, J.P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J.P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46. Lantolf, J.P. & Appel, G. Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
47. Lantolf, J.P. & Pavlenko, A. (1995). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 108-124.
48. Liston, D., Whitcomb, J., & Borko, H. (2006). Too little or too much: Teacher preparation and the first years of teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 351-358.
49. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50. Lynn, M. & Smith-Maddox, R. (2007). Preservice teacher inquiry: Creating a space to dialogue about becoming a social justice educator. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 94-105.
51. MacDonald, M., Badger, R., & White, G. (2001). Changing values: What use are theories of language learning and teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(8), 949-963.
52. McKay, S.L. & Wong, C.S.L. (1996). Multiple Discourses, Multiple Identities: Investment and agency in second-language learning among Chinese adolescent immigrant students. Harvard Educational Review, 66(3), 577-608.
53. McWilliam, E. (1994). In broken images: Feminist tales for a different teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
54. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2 nd
55. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Morgan, B. (2004). Teacher identity as pedagogy: Towards a field-internal conceptualization in bilingual and second language education. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(2&3), 172-188.
57. Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning. London: Longman.
58. Pavlenko, A. (2003). “I never knew I was a bilingual”: Reimagining teacher identities in TESOL. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2(4), 251-268.
59. Peirce, B.N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 9-31.
60. Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
61. Rogers, R. & Mosley, M. (2006). Racial literacy in a second-grade classroom: Critical race theory, whiteness studies, and literacy research. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 462-495.
62. Sachs, G.T. (1996). Thinking and talking like real teachers: Bridging the gap. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages: Chicago, IL. ED 394308.
63. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
64. Sutherland, L., Howard, S., & Markauskaite, L. (2010). Professional identity creation: Examining the development of beginning preservice teachers’ understanding of their work as teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 455-465.
65. Varghese, M. (2001). Professional development as a site for the conceptualization and negotiation of bilingual teacher identities. In B. Johnston & S. Irujo (Eds.), Research and practice in language teacher education: Voices from the field (pp. 213-232). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Center for Advanced Research in Second Language Acquisition.
66. Varghese, M., Morgan, B., Johnston, B., & Johnson, K.A. (2005). Theorizing language teacher identity: Three perspectives and beyond. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 4 (1), 21-44.
67. Wilson, S.M., Floden, R., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations. Seattle: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
68. Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University press. Notes
69. The shifting nature of identity, particularly for preservice teachers, makes it unrealistic to claim that
70. the identities of the participants in this study are fixed and remain constant over time. However, I
71. chose to examine how their constructions of the theory-practice relationship, and their identities
72. during the academic year in which I interacted with them, related to and informed one another.