Opinions of Classroom Teachers and Prospective Classroom Teachers about the Learning Difficulties Encountered in the Teaching Process of Reading and Writing

Year 2010, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 44 - 51, 26.06.2010

Seyit Ateş Kasım Yıldırım Mustafa Yıldız

Abstract

This case study was carried out with 137 primary school classroom teachers in Krehir provincial
center and with 100 prospective classroom teachers studying at Ahi Evran University Faculty of Education in the
fall semester of the 2007-2008 academic year. Questionnaire form was used in the research as the data collection
tool. It is demonstrated in this study that the classroom teachers and prospective classroom teachers who participated
in this research do not have the correct information on the nature of reading and writing disorders; but that they have
sufficient information on the problems encountered by students with reading and writing disorders; that they may
feel scared, upset, worried and insufficient besides the feeling of more responsible when they encounter such
students in their classes; that this causes the concern that it will slow down the educational process; that different
methods and techniques are thus required; that they have insufficient information on how to cope with these
difficulties though they possess the necessary equipment to identify such students; and that the education which they
get does not meet this requirement.

Keywords

Learning difficulties, teaching reading and writing, classroom teachers, prospective classroom teachers.

Opinions of Classroom Teachers and Prospective Classroom Teachers about the Learning Difficulties Encountered in the Teaching Process of Reading and Writing

Abstract

-

Keywords

-

References

• Akyol, H. (2005). Türkçe ilk okuma yazma ö&retimi. [Teaching Turkish early reading-writing]. Ankara: Pegem A Yay nc l k.
• Chafouleas, S.M., Martens, B.K., Dobson, R.L., Weinstein, K.S., & Gardner, K.B. (2004). Fluent reading as the improvement of stimulus control: Additive effects of performance-based interventions to repeated reading on students’ reading and errors rates. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 67– 81.
• Coltheart, M., & Weekes, B. (1996). Surface dyslexia and surface dysgraphia: Treatment studies and their theoretical implications. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 13, 277-315.
• Coyne, M.D., Zipou, R.P., & Ruby, M.F. (2006). Beginning reading instruction for students at risk for reading disabilities: What, how, and when. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41, 161-168.
• Gaffney, J. S. (1994). Reading Recovery: Widening the scope of prevention for children at risk of reading failure. In K. D. Wood & B. Algozzine (Eds.), Teaching reading to highrisk learners: A unified perspective (pp. 231-246). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Hiebert, E. H., & Taylor, B. M. (1994). Interventions and the restructuring of American literacy instruction. In E. H. Hiebert & B. M. Taylor (Eds.), Getting reading right from the start: Effective early literacy interventions (pp. 201-217). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Mather, D.S. (2003). Dyslexia and dysgraphia: More than written language difficulties in common. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 307–317.
• National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (1993). Providing appropriate education for students with learning disabilities in regular education classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 330-332.
• National Reading Panel. (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. Washington, DC: National Academy Pres.
• Piotrowski, J., & Reason, R. (2000). The national literacy strategy and dyslexia: A comparison of teaching methods and materials. Support for Learning, 15, 51-52.
• Singleton, C. (2005). Dyslexia and oral reading errors. Journal of Psychology, 28, 4-14.
• Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.
• Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The sociopsychometrics of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 350–361.
• Taylor, J. (2006). Beaton, A. A. (2004). Dyslexia, reading and the brain: A sourcebook of psychological biological research. Hove and New York: Psychology Press. ISBN 1841695068. [Review of the book dyslexia, reading and the brain: A sourcebook of psychological biological research]. Journal of Research in Reading, 293, 63–364.
• Therrien, W. J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated reading: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 252–261.
• Valleley, R.J., & Shriver, M.D. (2003). An examination of the effects of repeated reading with secondary student. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 55-76.
• Y ld r m, K., & Ate , S. (2007). Learning disabilities faced during the period of learning to read and write and the necessary measures to be taken. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Affective Education in Action, Adana, Turkey.
• Y ld r m, A., & 5im ek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel ara:t;rma yöntemleri. [Qalitative inquiry methods in social science]. Ankara: Seçkin Yay nc l k.
• Ziolkowska, R. (2007). Early intervention for students with reading and writing difficulties. Reading Improvement. 44, 76-86.