OKUMA YAZMA EĞİTİMİNDE GÜNCEL KONULAR: NE ÇALIŞMALI, NASIL ÇALIŞMALI?

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’de “Okuma Yazma Eğitimi” alanında yapılan güncel akademik çalışmaların hangi konulara yoğunlaştığını tespit etmek ve alanda önemli görüldüğü halde yeterince çalışılmamış olan konuları ortaya çıkarmak amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada temel nitel araştırma yöntemi benimsenmiş ve amaçlı örneklem kullanılarak Türkiye’deki üniversitelerin Sınıf Eğitimi Anabilim Dalında görev yapan ve İlk Okuma Yazma ve Türkçe Eğitimi alanında çalışmaları bulunan Profesör unvanına sahip 18 akademisyene ulaşılmıştır. Veriler, yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılarak Google Meet platformu üzerinden gerçekleştirilen görüntülü görüşmeler ile toplanmıştır. İlgili alan yazın taranarak tespit edilen 26 konu başlığı katılımcılara birer birer okunmuş ve bu konuların alanda yoğun olarak çalışılıp çalışılmadığı ve bundan sonra yoğun olarak çalışılmasına gerek olup olmadığı sorulmuştur. Katılımcılar istekleri doğrultusunda cevaplarını gerekçelendirerek açıklamışlardır. Alınan ekran kaydı analiz edilerek sorulara verilen cevapların önce yüzde-frekans değerleri belirlenmiş daha sonra yine ekran kaydı üzerinde gerçekleştirilen içerik analizi neticesinde verilen cevapların gerekçeleri çözümlenmiştir. Çalışma neticesinde, Okuma Yazma Eğitimi alanında belirlenen 26 konudan 15’inin hâlihazırda yoğun olarak çalışılmadığı ancak yoğun olarak çalışılması gerektiği, 11 konunun da yoğun olarak çalışıldığı hâlde konunun önemli olması ve küresel salgın sürecinde eğitim öğretim şartlarındaki değişimler sebebiyle çalışılmaya devam edilmesi gerektiği bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• sınıf eğitimi
• Okuma Yazma Eğitimi
• Türkçe Eğitimi
• Güncel Konular

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to determine what topics the recent "Literacy Education" studies in Turkey focus on, and to reveal the topics that are deemed important in the field, but not sufficiently studied. The basic qualitative research method has been adopted in the study, and by using purposeful sampling method, 18 Literacy Education scholars with professor title were reached, that are the professors, who work in the Elementary Education department of the universities in Turkey. The data were collected through structured interview technique, through the online meetings conducted on Google Meet platform. 26 topics on Literacy Education that were determined by scanning the relevant literature were read to the participants one by one and the participants were asked whether these subjects were studied intensively in the field and whether it was necessary to work intensively from now on. The participants justified their answers on their will. The screen recordings were analyzed and the percentage-frequency values of the answers to the questions were determined first, and then the justifications for the answers were examined as a result of the content analysis performed on the screen recordings. As a result of the study, it was found that 15 of the 26 topics in the field of Literacy Education are not studied, but should be studied intensively. Although 11 topics are intensively studied in the field of Literacy Education, these topics should continue to be studied either because these are still hot topics, or because the dramatic changes in education conditions in the global epidemic, which is currently experienced.

Keywords

• Elementary Education
• Literacy Education
• Turkish Education
• hot topics.

References

1. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (1999). What’s hot, what’s not for 2000. Reading Today, 17(3), 1 - 28.
2. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2000). What’s hot, what’s not for 2001. Reading Today, 18(3), 1 - 18.
3. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2001). What’s hot, what’s not for 2002. Reading Today, 19(3), 1 - 18.
4. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2002). What’s hot, what’s not for 2003. Reading Today, 20(3), 1 - 18.
5. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2003). What’s hot, what’s not for 2004. Reading Today, 21(3), 3 - 4.
6. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2004). What’s hot, what’s not for 2005. Reading Today, 22(3), 1- 8.
7. Cassidy, J., & Cassidy, D. (2005). What’s hot, what’s not for 2006. Reading Today, 23(3), 1 - 8.
8. Cassidy, J., & Wenrich, J. K. (1997). What’s hot, what’s not for 1997. Reading Today, 14(4), 34.

9. Cassidy, J., & Wenrich, J. K. (1998). What’s hot, what’s not for 1998. Reading Today, 15(4), 1 - 28.
10. Cassidy, J., Grote-Garcia, S. , Ortlieb, E., & Loveless, D. J. (2017). What’s hot in literacy for 2017: Topics garnering attention in 2017. Literacy Research and Instruction, 56(4), 311–321. doi:10.1080/19388071.2017.1339544
11. Cassidy, J., Grote-Garcia, S., & Ortlieb, E. (2019). What’s hot in 2019: Expanded and interconnected notions of literacy. Literacy Research and Instruction, 58(1), 1–11.
12. Cassidy, J., Ortlieb, E., & Grote-Garcia, S. (2020). What’s hot in literacy: New topics and new frontiers are abuzz. Literacy Research and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2020.1800202
13. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage.
14. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Speaking and listening in content area learning. The Reading Teacher, 68(1), 64– 69
15. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2016). Designing quality content area instruction. The Reading Teacher, 69(5), 525– 529.
16. Gillen, J. (2014). Digital literacies. New York: Routledge.
17. Hobbs, R. (2018). The Routledge companion on media education, copyright and fair use. New York: Routledge.
18. Hobbs, R., & Moore, D. C. (2013). Discovering media literacy: Teaching digital media and popular cultures in elementary schools. London: Corwin.
19. International Literacy Association. (2018). What’s hot in literacy report. Newark, DE
20. International Literacy Association. (2020). What’s hot in literacy report. Newark, DE
21. Janks, H., & Dixon, K. (2014). Doing critical literacy: Texts and activities for students and teachers. New York: Routledge.
22. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New York: Routledge.
23. Lewison, M., Leland, C., & Harste, J. C. (2015). Creating critical classrooms: Reading and writing with an edge (Second Edition). New York: Routledge.
24. Marsh, J. (2005). Popular culture, new media and digital literacy in early childhood. New York: Routledge-Falmer.
25. Marsh, J., Hannon, P., Lewis, M., & Ritchie, L. (2017). Young children’s initiation into family literacy practices in the digital age. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(1), 47-60.
26. Merchant, G. (2021). Reading with technology: The new normal. Education 3-13, 49(1), 96-106.
27. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28. Moss, B. (2005). Making a case and a place for effective content area literacy ınstruction in the elementary grades. The Reading Teacher, 59(1): 46-55.
29. Rowsell, J. (2013). Working with multimodality: Rethinking literacy in a digital age. New York: Routledge.
30. Rowsell, J., Burke, A., Flewitt, R., Liao, H‐T., Lin, A., Marsh, J., Mills, K., Prinsloo, M., Rowe, D., & Wohlwend, K. (2016). Humanizing digital literacies: A road trip in search of wisdom and insight. The Reading Teacher, 70(1), 121– 129.
31. UNHCR. (2021). Syria Regional Refugee Response: Turkey. http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/country.php?id=224.
32. Vasquez, V. M. (2004). Negotiating critical literacies with young children. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
33. Wohlwend, K. E. (2015). One screen, many fingers: Young children's collaborative literacy play with digital puppetry apps and touchscreen technologies. Theory into Practice, 54(2), 154-162.
34. Wohlwend, K. E., & Rowsell, J. (2017). App maps: Evaluating children’s iPad software for 21st century literacy learning. N. Kucirkova & G. Falloon (Ed.), Apps, technology, and younger learners: International evidence for teaching. London: Routledge.