Çoklu okuryazarlık sistemini benimseyen İngilizce öğretmenlerinin başarı ve mücadeleleri

Abstract

Geleneksel matbaa basımı kalıbından çıkarak gelişen okuryazarlık; yeni anlayışların, alıştırmaların ve pedagojilerin gelişmesine yol açmıştır. New LondonGroup (1996) bu alıştırmalara “çoklu okuryazarlık” adını vermiştir. Çoklu okuryazarlık, yerel, kültürel ve dilsel farklılıkları dünya bütünlüğünü savunarak çeşitli iletişim teknolojilerinin kullanımıyla öğretmektir. Sosyal, kültürel ve tarihsel farkındalığa sahip öğrenciler yetiştirmek amacıyla, teknolojik okuryazarlık ve çoklu modluluk ile gerçek iletişim zenginleştirilmektedir. İngilizce öğretimi bu sebeple önem kazanmaktadır çünkü İngilizce artık ne bir azınlık tarafından konuşulmaktadır ne de sadece bir topluma aittir. Buna ilişkin olarak, İngilizce öğretmenleri teknoloji kullanımının yanı sıra kültürel ve dilsel farklılıkları öğretmek için gereken beceriler açısından uygun imkânlara sahip olmalıdırlar. Bu makale çoklu okuryazarlık sistemini sınıflarında kullanan Türk öğretmenlerin deneyimlerini daha iyi çözümlemenin yollarını araştırmaktadır. Katılımcılardan güvenilir sonuçlar almak için nitel araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. İlk olarak, öğretmenlerin teknoloji kullanımlarıyla ilgili yedi açık uçlu sorudan oluşan bir anket (Boche, 2014) 14 öğretmene uygulanmıştır. Daha sonra öğretmenler cevapları doğrultusunda iki gruba ayrılmıştır. İkinci aşamada, çoklu okuryazarlık sistemini sınıflarında kullanan öğretmenlerle, kültürel ve dilsel farklılıkları sınıflarında öğretip öğretmedikleri hakkında görüşmeler yapılmıştır. İngilizce öğretmenlerinin yaşadığı mücadelelere ve elde ettiği başarılara değinilerek, sonuçlar İngilizce öğretmenlerini sınıftaki aktiviteleri konusunda daha iyi aydınlatmak için detaylı bir şekilde incelenmiştir

Keywords

• literacy pedagogy
• multiliteracy pedagogy
• multimodality
• English language teaching
• English teachers
• multilingualism

Successes and struggles of EFL teachers adopting multiliteracies framework in the classroom

Abstract

The literacy growing beyond the traditional print medium has led to the new understandings, practices and pedagogies. New London Group (1996) called these practices ‘‘multiliteracies’’ which refers to the way of combining local diversity and global connectedness together to teach through multiple forms of communicative technologies. By using technoliteracies and multimodalities, the genuine interaction is boosted for the purpose of raising socially, culturally and historically aware students. Teaching English, henceforth, is gaining importance at an unprecedented speed as it is neither spoken by only a minority nor does it belong to a single community. With respect to this, English teachers must have the necessary skills in terms of teaching cultural and linguistic diversities besides the ability to benefit from and utilize technology adequately. This research article investigates the ways to better understand the experiences of Turkish teachers who adopt multiliteracies framework in their classrooms implementing its goals. Qualitative research design was implemented to get credible results from practices of the participants. First, an open ended-questionnaire (Boche, 2014) was applied to 14 English teachers regarding their use of technology in their classrooms. The teachers were then categorized based on their answers into two groups. Secondly, the teachers who used multiliteracies framework in their classrooms were interviewed in depth about whether they teach cultural and linguistic diversities in their classrooms. The results were analyzed in a detailed way pointing to the successes and struggles with the integration of multiliteracies into the classroom in order to better inform English teachers with their practices

Keywords

• literacy pedagogy
• multiliteracy pedagogy
• multimodality
• multilingualism
• English language teaching
• English teachers

References

1. Boche, B. (2014). Multiliteracies in the classroom: Emerging conceptions of first-year teachers. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 10(1), 114-135.
2. Briere, J. L., & Wilson, J. R. (2018). Reading ability and multiliteracy among rural Saskatchewan high school students. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 19(2), 99-127.
3. Cope, B., &Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: literacy learning and the design of social futures. Londres: Rountledge.
4. Corkett, J. K., &Benevides, B. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of technology and multiliteracy within the inclusive classroom. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 2(2), 35-46.
5. Dickson, R., Smagorinsky, P., Bush, J., Christenbury, L., Cummings, B., George, M.,Graham, P., Hartman, P., Kynard, C., Roskelly, H., Steffel, S., Vinz, R., & Weinstein, S. (2006). Are methods enough? Situating English education programs within the multiple settings of learning to teach. English Education, 38(4), 312-328.
6. Duncum, P. (2004). Visual culture isn't just visual: Multiliteracy, multimodality and meaning. Studies in Art Education, 45(3), 252-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2004.11651771
7. Dupuy, B. (2011). CLIL: Achieving its goals through a multiliteracies framework. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.3
8. Giampapa, F. (2010). Multiliteracies, pedagogy and ıdentities: Teacher and student voices from a Toronto elementary school. Canadian Journal of Education, 33(2), 407 ‐ 431.

9. Gu, Z. (2018, November). Study of Multiliteracy Pedagogy in College English Teaching.International Conference on Contemporary Education, Social Sciences and Ecological Studies (CESSES), China.
10. Hanauer, D. I. (2006). The multiliteracy of scientific knowledge development. Scientific discourse: Multiliteracy in the classroom. (pp. 175- 187). London: Continuum.
11. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
12. Lasagabaster, D., Doiz, A., & Sierra, J. M. (2014). Motivation and foreign language learning: from theory to practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
13. Leino, K., Linnakyla, P., &Malin, A. (2004). Finnish students' multiliteracy profiles. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 48(3), 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830410001695727
14. National Council of Teachers of English. (2013). The NCTE definition of 21st century literacies. Urbana, IL: Author. http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/21stcentdefinition
15. New London Group (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60-92.
16. Palilonis, J., & Watt, T. (2019). “Professor Garfield’s 21st Century Digital Literacy Project: Supporting K-5 Teachers in their Digital Literacy Instructional Efforts.” International Journal on E-Learning, 18(4), 395-412.
17. Pegrum, M. (2009). From blogs to bombs: The future of digital technologies in education. Perth, Australia: University of Western Australia Press.
18. Räsänen, M. (2012). Cultural identity and visual multiliteracy. Congress Proceedings for the 11th European InSEA Regional Congress. Lemesos: Cyprus.
19. Rowsell, J., Kosnik, C., & Beck, C. (2008). Fostering multiliteracies pedagogy through preservice teacher education. Teaching Education, 19(2), 109-122.
20. Schwarzer, D., Haywood, A., & Lorenzen, C. (2003). Fostering multiliteracy in a linguistically diverse classroom. Language Arts, 80(6), 453-460.
21. Swenson, J., Young, C.A., McGrail, E., Rozema, R., & Whitin P. (2006). Extending the conversation: New technologies, new literacies, and English education. English Education, 38(4), 349-367.