Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

İngiliz Edebiyatı Öğreten Öğretmenlerin İngiliz Edebiyatını Öğretme ile İlgili Görüşleri:Libya Yüksek Öğretim Örneği

Year 2019, Volume: 25 Issue: 97, 391 - 406, 20.09.2019
https://doi.org/10.22559/folklor.951

Abstract

Bu çalışma İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı’nın Libya yüksek öğretiminde İngilizce’yi yabancı bir dil olarak
öğrenenlere nasıl öğretilmesi konusunda, İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı öğretmenlerinin görüşlerini araştırmayı
hedeflemiştir. Bu amaçla gerçekleştirilen çalışmada on altı İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı öğretmeni yer almıştır.
Söz konusu araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak yarı yapı landırılmış mülakat uygulanmıştır. Toplanan
veri daha sonra nitel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları Libya’da İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı
öğretiminin geliştirilmesi gerektiğini göstermiştir. Verilerin analizi sonucunda İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı öğretiminde üç farklı yaklaşımın kullanıldığı ortaya çıkmıştır: Açıklayıcı Yaklaşım (Paraphrastic
Approach), Bilgi Temelli Yaklaşım (Information-based Approach) and Dil temelli yaklaşım (Languagebased Approach). En çok kullanılan yaklaşımın Açıklayıcı Yaklaşım (Paraphrastic Approach) olduğu
tesbit edilmiştir. Buna ek olarak , araştırmanın bulguları katılan öğretmenlerin İngiliz Dili Edebiyatı
öğretirken öğretim yaptıkları ortamlar ve kendileriyle ilgili bazı güçlükler yaşadıklarını
göstermiştir.Öğrenme-öğretme ortamı ile ilgili sorunların öğretimsel araç-gereç eksikliği, görsel
öğrenmeyi destekleyici araç-gereç ve materyal eksikliği, teknolojik destek eksikliği ve sınıfın uygun
öğrenme ortamına uygun olmaması olarak saptanmıştır. Öğretmenlerin kendileri kaynaklı olarak ortaya
koydukları sıkıntılar ise Edebiyat öğretimi ile ilgili bilgi, beceri eksikliği ve dil yetersizliğinden dolayı
öz-güven eksikliği yaşadıkları ve sınıf içerisinde öğrencilerle olumlu ilişkiler kurmakta zorlandıkları
yönünde olmuştur.

References

  • Barduhn, S. (1989). Review of Maslach, C. 1982 Burnout: The cost of caring. IATEFL SIG Newsletter, 11, 2-3.
  • Carter, R. & Long, M. (1991). Teaching literature. London: Longman. Dhilloni K. K., Mogan, S. (2014). Language-based Approaches to Understanding Literature:
  • A Creative Activitiy Module.The English Teacher, XLIII (2), 63-78.
  • Hirvela, A. (1996). Reader-response theory and ELT. ELT Journal, 50(2), 127–134. OUP.
  • Hwang, D and Embi, A. (2007). Approaches Employed by Secondary School Teachers to Teaching the Literature Component in English. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 22, 1- 21,51[Online]Available:myais.fsktm.um.edu.my/.../Approaches_Employed_By_Secon dary_School_Teachers_To_Teaching_The_Literature Component_In_English.pdf (Feb 5, 2010).
  • Johnston, P. H. (2004). Choice words: How our language affects children’s learning. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.
  • Keshavarzi, A. (2012). Use of Literature in Teaching English. Procedia:Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 554-559.
  • Lindemann, E. (2001). A rhetoric for writing teachers (4th ed.). New York and Oxford: OUP. Maley, A., & Duff, A. (1989). The Inward Ear. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • McKay. S. (1982). Literature in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 16 (4), 529- 536.
  • Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (2nd ed.). Australia and others: Thomson Heinle.
  • Peregoy, S. F. & Boyle, O. F. (2008). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A resource book for teaching K-12 English learners (5th ed.). Boston and others: Pearson.
  • Rosli, T. (1995). Teaching literature in ESL the Malaysian context. Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit University Pertanian Malaysia.
  • Zanger, V. V. (1991). Social and cultural dimensions of the education of language minority students. In A. N. Ambert (Ed.). Bilingual education and English as a second language: A research handbook, 1988-1990. (pp. 3-54). New York: Garland Publishing

A Study on the Views of English Literature Teachers about How to Teach English Literature: Libyan Higher Education Context

Year 2019, Volume: 25 Issue: 97, 391 - 406, 20.09.2019
https://doi.org/10.22559/folklor.951

Abstract

This study examined the views of the English Literature teachers about how to teach English Literature
in Libyan higher education context. Sixteen English Literature teachers teaching in higher education were
the participants of this study. In order to collect data about the phenomena under investigation, semistructured interviews were employed. Then, the collected data were analyzed qualitatively. The findings
indicated that the teaching of English Literature still needs improvements. It was also found that basically
three different approaches were followed by the partcipant teachers: Paraphrastic Approach, Informationbased Approach and Language-based Approach. Among the preferred approaches to teach English
literature, the most commonly followed approach of teaching literature was the Paraphrastic Approach.
The findings also revealed that the participant English Literature teachers face some difficulties related
to their teaching context and themselves. Context- specific difficuties
were lack of facilities, visual aids, technology and lack of appropriate classroom environment while
teacher related difficulties were lack of self-confidence in teachers and lack of establishing rapport in
teachers with their students in class.

References

  • Barduhn, S. (1989). Review of Maslach, C. 1982 Burnout: The cost of caring. IATEFL SIG Newsletter, 11, 2-3.
  • Carter, R. & Long, M. (1991). Teaching literature. London: Longman. Dhilloni K. K., Mogan, S. (2014). Language-based Approaches to Understanding Literature:
  • A Creative Activitiy Module.The English Teacher, XLIII (2), 63-78.
  • Hirvela, A. (1996). Reader-response theory and ELT. ELT Journal, 50(2), 127–134. OUP.
  • Hwang, D and Embi, A. (2007). Approaches Employed by Secondary School Teachers to Teaching the Literature Component in English. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 22, 1- 21,51[Online]Available:myais.fsktm.um.edu.my/.../Approaches_Employed_By_Secon dary_School_Teachers_To_Teaching_The_Literature Component_In_English.pdf (Feb 5, 2010).
  • Johnston, P. H. (2004). Choice words: How our language affects children’s learning. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.
  • Keshavarzi, A. (2012). Use of Literature in Teaching English. Procedia:Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 554-559.
  • Lindemann, E. (2001). A rhetoric for writing teachers (4th ed.). New York and Oxford: OUP. Maley, A., & Duff, A. (1989). The Inward Ear. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • McKay. S. (1982). Literature in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 16 (4), 529- 536.
  • Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (2nd ed.). Australia and others: Thomson Heinle.
  • Peregoy, S. F. & Boyle, O. F. (2008). Reading, writing, and learning in ESL: A resource book for teaching K-12 English learners (5th ed.). Boston and others: Pearson.
  • Rosli, T. (1995). Teaching literature in ESL the Malaysian context. Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit University Pertanian Malaysia.
  • Zanger, V. V. (1991). Social and cultural dimensions of the education of language minority students. In A. N. Ambert (Ed.). Bilingual education and English as a second language: A research handbook, 1988-1990. (pp. 3-54). New York: Garland Publishing
There are 13 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Turkish Folklore
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Almakki Rumadhan Al Sabiri This is me

Sibel Ersel Kaymakamoğlu This is me

Publication Date September 20, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 25 Issue: 97

Cite

APA Al Sabiri, A. R., & Ersel Kaymakamoğlu, S. (2019). A Study on the Views of English Literature Teachers about How to Teach English Literature: Libyan Higher Education Context. Folklor/Edebiyat, 25(97), 391-406. https://doi.org/10.22559/folklor.951

Journal website: https://folkloredebiyat.org
The journal’s publication languages are both English and Turkish. Also despite articles in Turkish, the title, abstract, and keywords are also in English. Turkish articles approved by the reviewers are required to submit an extended summary (750-1000 words) in English.
The journal is indexed by TR-Dizin, Web of Science (ESCI), DOAJ, and many other indexes and datebases.
Within the scope of TR DIZIN 2020 Ethical Criteria and as of the year 2020, studies requiring ethics committee approval must indicate Ethics Committee Approval details (committe-date-issue) in the article’s methods section. With this in mind, we request from our author candidates to edit their article accordingly before sending it to the journal.

Field EdItors

Folklore:
Prof.Dr. Hande Birkalan-Gedik
(Frankfurt University- birkalan-gedik@em.uni.frankfurt.de)
Prof. Dr. Arzu Öztürkmen
(Bosphorus University- ozturkme@boun.edu.tr)
Edebiyat-Literature
Prof. Dr. G. Gonca Gökalp Alpaslan (Hacettepe University - ggonca@
hacettepe.edu.tr)
Prof. Dr. Ramazan Korkmaz
(President, Caucasus University Association- r_korkmaz@hotmail.com)
Antropoloji-Anthropology
Prof. Dr. Akile Gürsoy
(Beykent University - gursoyakile@gmail.com)
Prof.Dr. Serpil Aygün Cengiz
(Ankara University - serpilayguncengiz@gmail.com)
Dil-Dilbilim/Linguistics
Prof.Dr. Aysu Erden
(Maltepe University - aysuerden777@gmail.com)
Prof. Dr. V. Doğan Günay
(Dokuz Eylul University- dogan.gunay@deu.edu.tr)