Dogme ELT Yaklaşımında İngilzce Konuşma Becerilerini Geliştirmek: Bir Öz-Düzenleme Perspektifi

Year 2024, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 577 - 601, 29.10.2024

Muhammed Fatih Gökmen

https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.1500164

Abstract

İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenenler için konuşma becerileri, öğrenciler ve öğretmenler için her zaman zorluklar yaratmıştır. Bu eylem araştırması, ‘Konuşma Becerileri’ dersi süresince İngilizce Öğretmenliği programında okuyan 72 birinci sınıf öğrencilerinin konuşma becerilerini Dogme ELT ilkeleriyle iyileştirmeyi amaçlamıştır. Bu araştırma deseni, öz-düzenleme aşamalarından da esinlenerek, öğrenci ihtiyaçlarını analiz etmek için öz değerlendirme raporları, ilerlemelerini izlemek için yansıtıcı günlükler ve uygulama hakkında geri bildirim almak için açık uçlu anketlerini barındırmaktadır. İçerik analizi, katılımcıların konuşma yeterliliklerinde ve özgüvenlerinde belirgin gelişmeler olduğunu ortaya koydu ve bu da özellikle dilsel ve eğitimle ilgili engellerin üstesinden gelinmesini sağladı. Dogme ELT’nin temel prensipleri açısından, bulgular, konuşma pratiği eksikliğinin, sınıf içi konuşma pratiği ile telafi edilebileceğini ve konuşma etkinliklerinden ortaya çıkan dil formlarının öğretilmesiyle daha fazla dilsel kazanım elde edilebileceğini önermektedir. Konuşma etkinliklerine yerleştirilen çevrimiçi teknolojik araçlar, öğrencilere artan dilsel deneyim sağlayabilir. Bu araştırma bulguları ışığında, eğitimsel çıkarımlar ve gelecekteki araştırmalar için de öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

Dogme ELT, İngilizce iletişim becerileri, öz-düzenleme

Enhancing English Conversational Skills in Dogme ELT Approach: A Self-Regulation Perspective

Abstract

Conversational skills in EFL contexts have perennially posed challenges for learners and teachers. This action research aimed to ameliorate the conversational skills of 72 first-grade ELT students within the ‘Speaking skills’ course by intervening with the principles of Dogme ELT. Inspired by self-regulation phrases, the methodology involved self-reports to analyse student needs, reflective journals to monitor their progress, and open-ended questionnaires to receive feedback on the intervention. The content analysis revealed conspicuous development in participants’ conversational proficiency and self-confidence, consequently overcoming linguistic and schooling obstacles. As for the pillars of Dogme ELT, the findings suggest that the paucity of conversational practice could be compensated with extensive in-class speaking practice, leading to more linguistic gains through the coverage of linguistic pointes emerging out of interactions. Technological tools integrated into interactions could effectively equip students with increased linguistic exposure. As per the research findings, educational implications and research suggestions were also elucidated.

Keywords

Dogme ELT, English conversational skills, self-regulation

References

• Akça, C.(2012). Dogme Unplugged. In Institute of Language and Communication Studies (ILCS) (Eds.), International symposium on language and communication: research trends and challenges – proceedings book (pp. 1743–1756). Mega Press. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320585179_Dogme_Unplugged/citations
• Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency. Continuum.
• Ali, I., Ali, Z., & Ngah, E. (2023). A review of the use of the Dogme ELT method in speaking skills. In M. Rahim, A. A. Ab Aziz, I. Saja @ Mearaj, N. A. Kamarudin, O. L. Chong, N. Zaini, A. Bidin, N. Mohamad Ayob, Z. Mohd Sulaiman, Y. S. Chan, & N. H. M. Saad (Eds.), Embracing Change: Emancipating the Landscape of Research in Linguistic, Language and Literature, vol 7. European Proceedings of Educational Sciences (pp. 670-680). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epes.23097.60
• Arslan, S., & Whitehead, G. E. (2022). Fostering pre-service teachers’ perceived ability to implement dialogic teaching in Turkey: Examining the contributing factors of an intensive short-term teacher education program from the teacher-learners’ vantage point. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221093755
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
• Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching principles. P. Ed Australia.
• Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
• Chappell, P. (2013). Engaging learners: conversation-or dialogic-driven pedagogy? ELT Journal, 68(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct040
• Chen, W. (2017). The effect of conversation engagement on L2 learning opportunities. ELT Journal, 71(3), 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw075
• Christison, M., & Murray, D. E. (2021). What English language teachers need to know Volume III: Designing curriculum. Routledge.
• Coşkun, A. (2017). Dogme: What do teachers and students think? International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 6(2), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2016.1445
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper & Row.
• Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Macmillan Education.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Questionnaires in second language research. Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Foot, M. C. (1999). Relaxing in Pairs. ELT Journal, 53(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/53.1.36
• Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of the heart. Continuum
• Glover, P. (2019). Awareness of speaking abilities in English over four years of undergraduate study. Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.605911
• Gökmen, M. F. (2020). Post-method pedagogies for English language teaching: Emerging research and opportunities. Nobel.
• Gökmen, M. F. (2023). The preferences of ELT pre-service teachers regarding conventional language teaching approaches. Proceedings of the 9th International KTUDELL Conference: Language, Literature, and Translation, (pp. 192–197). Türkiye.
• Gökmen, M. F. & Takkaç. M. (2020). English language teaching professionals’ grip of post-modern language teaching. In Z. S. Genç & I. G. Kaçar (Eds.), TESOL in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 505–547). Peter Lang.
• Hamano-Bunce, D. (2011). Talk or chat? Chatroom and spoken interaction in a language classroom. ELT Journal, 65(4), 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq084
• Hardy, J. H. III, Day, E. A., & Steele, L. M. (2019). Interrelationships among self-regulated learning processes: Toward a dynamic process-based model of self-regulated learning. Journal of Management, 45(8), 3146–3177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318780440
• Hunter, J. (2012). ‘Small Talk’: Developing fluency, accuracy, and complexity in speaking. ELT Journal, 66(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq093
• Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR). (2012). Descriptions of proficiency levels. http://www.govtilr.org/Skills/ILRscale1.htm
• Karacan, C. G., Yıldız, M., & Atay, D. (2022). The relationship between self-regulated learning and EFL achievement in synchronous online language education. Mextesol Journal,46 (3).
• Hampson, T., & McKinley, J. (2023). Qualitative and quantitative are data types not paradigms: An MMA framework for mixed research in Applied Linguistics. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 16(2), 1–7.
• Köksal, D. & Dündar, S. (2017). Factors affecting the use of self-regulated l2 learning strategies in Turkish FLE context. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 397-425.
• Larson-Hall, J. (2016). Fluency awareness as a way to increase speaking ability in a first-year college-level English class Shiken, 20(1), 1–11.
• Ma, R., & Oxford, R. L. (2014). A diary study focusing on listening and speaking: The evolving interaction of learning styles and learning strategies in a motivated, advanced ESL learner. System, 43, 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.010
• McIver, N. (2009). Review of teaching unplugged: Dogme in English language teaching. ELT Journal, 63(4), 419–421. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp072
• Meddings, L., & Thornbury, S. (2009). Teaching unplugged. Dogme in English language teaching. Delta Publishing.
• Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Multilingual Matters.
• Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.03.001
• Meşe, E., & Mede, E. (2023). Using digital differentiation to improve EFL achievement and self-regulation of tertiary learners: The Turkish context. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17(2), 340-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2022.2043872
• Nguyen, N. Q., & Phu, H. B. (2020). The Dogme approach: A radical perspective in second language teaching in the post-methods era. Journal of Language and Education, 6(3), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2020.10563
• Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Prentice-Hall.
• Nureldeen, W. A. (2020). EFL teachers' beliefs about language teaching and learning: Implications for Teaching Unplugged. Journal of English Teaching, 6(3), 232-245.
• Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle.
• Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Pearson Longman.
• Oxford, R. L., Lavine, R. Z., Hollaway, M. E., Felkins, G., & Saleh, A. (1996). Telling their stories: language learners use diaries and recollective studies. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 19–34). University of Hawaii Press.
• Randi, J. (2004). Teachers as self-regulated learners. Teachers' College Record, 106(9), 1825–1853.
• Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching listening and speaking. Cambridge University Press.
• Sarani, A. & Malmir, A. (2019). The effect of Dogme language teaching (Dogme ELT) on L2 speaking and willingness to communicate (WTC). Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning Studies, 11(24), 261–288. https://elt.tabrizu.ac.ir/article_9637_1149.html
• Sayed, O. H. (2016). Teaching unplugged: Does it have the potential to improve EFL students’ speaking skills in a writing class? Journal of Research in Curriculum, Instruction and Educational Technology, 2(3), 93–127. https://doi.org/10.21608/jrciet.2016.24505
• Solimani, E., Ameri-Golestan, A., & Lotfi, A. (2019). Flipped vs. unplugged instructions: Sailing EFL learners' oral proficiency through virtual and real learning communities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 459-480. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12328a
• Talandis Jr, G., & Stout, M. (2015). Getting EFL students to speak: An action research approach. ELT Journal, 69(1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu037
• Thornbury, S., & Slade, D. (2006). Conversation: From description to pedagogy. Cambridge University Press.
• Tosun, Ö. Ö., & Cinkara, E. (2019). Coursebook dependency in secondary and tertiary-level EFL teachers. How, 26(1), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.26.1.445
• Tsang, W. K., & Wong, M. (2002). Conversational English: an interactive, collaborative and reflective approach. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 212–224). Cambridge University Press.
• Tsui, A. (2003). Understanding expertise in teaching: Case studies of second language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
• Ushioda, E. (2011). Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.538701
• Uysal, H. H. (2012). Evaluation of an in-service training program for primary-school language teachers in Turkey. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(7), 14–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n7.4
• Uztosun, M. S. (2021). Foreign language speaking competence and self‐regulated speaking motivation. Foreign Language Annals, 54(2), 410–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12559
• Yanar, M. & Tütüniş, B. (2016). The impact of mass media tools on EFL students’ speaking skills case. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 3(1). 2–24. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/105/122
• Yılmaz, G., & Akyıldız, S. T. (2023). EFL teachers’ perspectives towards self-regulation in language learning. Elektronik Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(24), 152-183.
• Young, D. J. (1990). An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944‐9720.1990.tb00424.x
• Willis, J. (1992). Inner and outer: spoken discourse in the language classroom. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in spoken discourse analysis (pp. 162–182). Routledge.
• Worth, A. (2012). A Dogme-based approach from the learners' perspective. The Journal of Kanda University of International Studies.24. 77–99. http://id.nii.ac.jp/1092/00000604/
• Xerri, D. (2012). Experimenting with Dogme in a mainstream ESL context. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 59–65. https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/45952
• Zhang, C. (2023). A review of Dogme approach: Principles and practices. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 6(7), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2023.6.7.6
• Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2