FLUENCY DEVELOPMENT LESSON: EFFECTIVENESS OF IT IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGE AND SOCIOCULTURAL CONTEXT

Abstract

In this research, we explored whether or not fluency development lesson had positive effects on the students’ reading fluency, reading comprehension and listening comprehension. This study used quasi-experimental method and was conducted in 2011-2012 school year in Turkey’s Kirsehir province. A total of 29 third-grade students studying at a public elementary school constituted the research sample. Prior to the intervention and after the intervention, the students’ reading fluency, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension were measured. The research findings showed that fluency development lesson had positive and significant effects on improving the students’ word recognition automaticity, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension.

Keywords

• Fluency development lesson, reading fluency, reading comprehension, listening comprehension

AKICI OKUMAYI GELİŞTİRME DERSİ: FARKLI BİR DİL VE SOSYOKÜLTÜREL KONTEKSTTE ETKİLİLİĞİ

Öz

Bu araştırmada akıcı okumayı geliştirme dersi öğretim programının öğrencilerin akıcı okuma, okuduğunu anlama ve dinlendiğini anlama becerileri üzerine etkileri araştırılmıştır. Çalışma yarı deneysel bir araştırma olup 2011-2012 eğitim-öğretim yılında Kırşehir ili merkezinde bulunan bir devlet ilkokulunun 3. sınıfında okuyan toplam 29 öğrenciyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma başlamadan önce ve çalışma tamamlandıktan sonra öğrencilerin akıcı okuma, okuduğunu anlama ve dinlediği anlama becerileri değerlendirilmiş ve araştırmanın amacına uygun analizler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, akıcı okumayı geliştirme dersi öğretim programının öğrencilerin okuma hızı, okuduğunu anlama ve dinlediğini anlama becerilerini geliştirmede etkili olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akıcı okumayı geliştirme dersi, akıcı okuma, okuduğunu ve dinlendiğini anlama

References

1. Akyol, H. (2006). Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. New Jersey: PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs.
3. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical Synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-281.
4. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
5. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (Second edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
6. DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Workman, K. (2012). A quasi experimental study of afterevent reviews and leadership development. Journal of Applied Psychology 97, 681-689.
7. Dixon-Krauss, L. (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom: Mediated instruction and assessment. New York: Longman Publishing.
8. Gambrell, L. B., Mazzoni, S. A., & Almasi, J. F. (2000). Promoting collaboration, social interaction, and engagement with text. In L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, & J.T. Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 119-139). New York: Guilford Press.

9. Guthrie, J. T., & Anderson, E. (1999). Engagement in reading. In J.T. Guthrie, and D.E. Alvermann (Eds.), Engaged reading: Processes, practices, and policy implications (pp. 17-45). New York: Teachers College Press.
10. Hepler, S. I., & Hickman, J. (1982). “The book was okay. I love you”: Social aspects of response to literature. Theory into Practice, 21, 278-283.
11. Kasten, W. C., & Yıldırım, K. (2011). Türk öğrencilerin iyi birer okuryazar olmalarına yönelik öneriler. Ankara: Maya Akademi.
12. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 230-251.
13. Morrow, L. M., Kuhn, M. R., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2006). The family fluency program. The Reading Teacher, 60, 322-333.
14. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00–4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
15. O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In A.M. O’Donnell, & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179-196).
16. Rasinski, T. V. (1989). Fluency for everyone: incorporating fluency instruction in the classroom. The Reading Teacher, 42, 690–693.
17. Rasinski, T. V. (2004). Creating fluent readers. Educational Leadership, 61, 46-51.
18. Rasinski, T. V., & Hoffman, J. V. (2003). Theory and research into practice: Oral reading in the school literacy curriculum. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 510-522.
19. Rasinski, T. V., Padak, N. D., Linek, V., & Sturtevant, E. (1994). Effects of fluency development on urban secondgrade readers. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 158-165.
20. Rasinski, T. V., Rikli, A., & Johnston, S. (2009). Reading fluency: More than automaticity? More than a concern for primary grades? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 350-361.
21. Rasinski, T.V. (2010). The fluent reader: Oral & silent reading strategies for building fluency, word recognition & comprehension (2nd.). New York: Scholastic.
22. Rasinski,T. V., & Padak, N. D. (2005). Three-minute reading assessments: Word recognition, fluency & comprehension 5-8. New York: Scholastic.
23. Reutzel, D. R., & Hollingsworth, P. M. (1993). Effects of fluency training on second graders’ reading comprehension. The Journal of Educational Research, 86, 325-331.
24. Rosenblatt, L. M. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
25. Royer, J. M. (2001). Developing reading and listening comprehension tests based on the sentence verification technique (SVT). Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45, 30-41.
26. Royer, J. M., Greene, B. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1987). The sentence verification technique: A practical procedure for testing comprehension. Journal of Reading, 30, 414-422.
27. Ruddell, R. B. (2002). Teaching children to read and write: Becoming an effective literacy teacher (Third edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
28. Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. J. (2004). Reading as a meaning construction process: The reader, the text, and the teacher. In R.B. Ruddell, & N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., p. 1462-1521). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
29. Rumelhart, D. E. (2004). Toward an interactive model of reading. In R.B. Ruddell, & N.J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., p. 1149-1180). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
30. Tompkins, G. E. (2007). Literacy for the 21st Century. Teaching reading and writing in prekindergarten through grade 4 (Second Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
31. Ulusoy, M., & Çetinkaya, Ç. (2012). Cümle doğrulama tekniğinin okuma ve dinlemenin ölçülmesinde kullanılması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 43, 460-471.
32. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Wigfield, A. (2000). Facilitating children’s reading motivation. In L. Baker, M.J. Dreher, and J.T. Guthrie (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 140-158). New York: Guilford Press.
34. Winne, P. H (1985). Steps toward promoting cognitive achievements. The Elementary School Journal, 85, 673693.
35. Yildirim, K., Yildiz, M., Ates, S., & Cetinkaya, C. (2009). Effect of prosodic reading on listening comprehension. World applied Sciences Journal, 7, 744-747.
36. Zutell, J., & Rasinski, T. V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students’ oral reading fluency. Theory into Practice, 30, 211-217.