Çevrimiçi Görev-Temelli Etkileşimde Ortaklaşa Bilgi Yapılandırmasının Konuşma Çözümlemesiyle İncelenmesi

Year 2015, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, - 1, 07.12.2015

Olcay Sert Ufuk Balaman

Abstract

Yabancı dil öğreniminde görev temelli etkileşim uzun yıllardır uygulamalı dilbilim araştırmalarının odağı olmuştur. Bilgisayar-destekli dil öğrenimi ve görev-temelli dil öğreniminin kesiştiği, özellikle anlam söyleşmesi (negotiation of meaning) bakımından zengin ortamların, yabancı dil gelişimine önemli faydaları bulunacağı iddia edilmiştir. Bu makalede, çevrimiçi görev-temelli yabancı dil olarak İngilizce etkileşimini sağlamak için tasarlanmış bir oyun çerçevesinde katılımcıların ortaklaşa bilgi yapılandırma süreçleri incelenmiştir. Geleneksel ikinci dil edinimi çalışmalarının kuram, araştırmacı ve kodlama temelli çözümlemelerinin aksine, çalışmamızda Konuşma Çözümlemesi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Ekran kayıtlarından oluşan 20 saatlik bir video veri tabanından faydalanılan çalışmamızın odak noktasını, katılımcıların, çevrimiçi görevde doğru yanıtları buldukları anlardan sonraki yönelimleri ve bunu takiben oluşan epistemik ilerlemeler oluşturmaktadır. Çözümlememiz, incelediğimiz çevrimiçi görev-temelli çoklu video etkileşiminde katılımcıların kullandığı çokkipli etkileşimsel kaynaklar ve görev-temelli etkileşimin normlarının iç içe geçmiş dizisel eylemler oluşturduğunu ve epistemik ilerlemenin dinamiklerinin bu eylemlere katılımcıların eşzamanlı yönelimleri ile açığa çıktığını göstermektedir. Çalışmamızın uygulamalı dilbilim çerçevesindeki epistemik durum ve duruş çalışmalarına, yabancı dil öğrenimine, ve bilgisayar destekli görev temelli etkileşim tasarımına önemli katkılar sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

 

Anahtar Sözcükler: Konuşma Çözümlemesi, Epistemik İlerleme, Çevrimiçi Görev Temelli Etkileşim, Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce

Keywords

-

References

• Balaman, U. (2015a). Collaborative construction of online L2 task accomplishment through epistemic progression. Proceedings of the 1st GlobELT Conference on Teaching and Learning English as an Additional Language. Procedia, 199(3). 604-612.
• Balaman, U. (2015b). A conversation analytic investigation into the impact of task design on the emergence of information gaps. Proceedings of 17th International CALL Conference, Task Design and CALL, Tarragona, Spain, 6-8 July, 2015.
• Balaman, U. ve Sert, O. (yakında çıkacak yayın). Orientations to negotiated task and language rules in online L2 interactions.
• Bayyurt, Y. ve Karataş, N. (2011). Needs-analysis: the first step in content development for mobile learning. Boğaziçi Journal of Education, 28(1). 13-21.
• Belz, J. A. (2002). Social dimensions of telecollaborative foreign language study. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1). 60–81.
• Belz, J. A. ve Thorne, S. L. (2006). Internet-mediated inter-cultural foreign language education. Boston: Thomson Heinle.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing, and research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing, and research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English language learning and technology: Lectures on applied linguistics in the age of information and communication technology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer-assisted language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93, Focus Issue. 741-753.
• Doughty, C. J. ve Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3). 50-80.
• Drew, P. ve Heritage, J. (1992). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Fernández-Garcı́a, M. and Martı́nez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in nonnative speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussions. CALICO Journal, 19(2). 279-294.
• Fox Tree, J.E. ve Schrock, J.C. (2002). Basic meanings of you know and I mean. Journal of Pragmatics, 34. 727–47.
• Gonzalez-Lloret, M. (2003). Designing task-based CALL to promote interaction: En Busca de Esmeraldas. Language Learning & Technology, 7(1),.86-104.
• Gonzalez-Lloret, M. (2014). The need for needs analysis in technology-mediated TBLT. M. Gonzalez-Lloret & L. Ortega (Ed.). Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks (s. 23-50). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Gonzalez-Lloret, M. & Ortega, L. (2014). Towards technology-mediated TBLT: An introduction. M. Gonzalez-Lloret & L. Ortega (Ed.). Technology-mediated TBLT: Researching technology and tasks (s. 1-22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition. E. Hatch (ed). Second language acquisition: A book of readings, (s. 401-435). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
• Hauck. M. & Youngs, B. L. (2008). Telecollaboration in multimodal environments: the impact on task design and learner interaction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2). 87-124.
• He, A. W., & Lindsey, B. (1998). "You know" as an information status enhancing device: Arguments from grammar and interaction. Functions of language, 5(2), 133-155.
• Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1). 30-52.
• Heritage, J. (2013). Epistemics in conversation. J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Ed.) The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 370-394). West Sussex: Blackwell.
• Jakonen, T. & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics 36(1). 73-94.
• Jauregi, K., Canto, S., de Graaff, R., Koenraad T., & Moonen, M. (2011). Verbal interaction in Second Life: towards a pedagogic framework for task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(1). 77-101.
• Kääntä, L. (2014). From noticing to initiating correction: students’ epistemic displays in instructional interaction. Journal of Pragmaticsi 66. 86-105.
• Kärkkäinen, E. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation: A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on I think. John Benjamins Publishing.
• Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3). 50-80.
• Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers. Modern Language Journal, 79. 457–473.
• Krashen, S. D. (1980). The theoretical and practical relevance of simple codes. T. Scarcella ve S. Krashen (Ed.). Research on Second Language Acquisition, (s. 7-18). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
• Leyland, C. (2014). Enabling language help: epistemic maneuvering in extended information request sequences between EFL teachers. Novitas ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 8(2). 136-152 http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_8_2/leyland.pdf
• O’Dowd, R. (2005). Negotiating sociocultural and institutional contexts: The case of Spanish-American telecollaboration. Language and Intercultural Communication, 5(1). 40–56.
• O’Dowd, R. & Waire, P. (2009). Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(2). 173-188. Sert, O. (2011). A micro-analytic investigation of claims of insufficient knowledge in EAL classrooms. PhD dissertation, Newcastle University, UK.
• Sert, O. (2013). ‘Epistemic status check’ as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13-28.
• Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Sert, O. ve Seedhouse, P. (2011). Conversation analysis in applied linguistics. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language), 5(1), 1-14. http://www.novitasroyal.org/Vol_5_1/sert_seedhouse.pdf
• Sert, O. ve Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27(6). 542-565.
• Sert, O. ve Jacknick, C. (2015). Student smiles and the negotiation of epistemics in L2 classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics. 77, 97-112.
• Sert, O., Balaman, U., Can Daşkın, N., Büyükgüzel, S., & Ergül, H. (2015). Konuşma Çözümlemesi Yöntemi. Mers,n Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, 12 (2). 1-43.
• Siegel, A. (2015). Social epistemics for analyzing longitudinal language learner development. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 25(1). 83-104.
• Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1). 38-57.
• Tudini, V. (2007). Negotiation and intercultural learning in Italian native speaker chat rooms. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4). 577-601.
• Van der Zwaard, R. & Bannink, A. (2014). Video call or chat? Negotiation of meaning and issues of face in telecollaboration. System 44. 137-138.
• Yanguas, İ. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It’s about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14(3). 72-93.