Bir Metin Yapısı Örneği: Evrensel Dünya Problemlerine İlişkin Problem Çözüm Yapısı/A Text Stucture Pattern: Problem Solution Structure On Universal World Problems

Abstract

Okuyucunun metin yapısı bilgisi okuyucuya metinde sunulan bilgileri hatırlamada ve anlamada, yazara ise metni yazma sürecinde bir çerçeve oluşturur. Bu çalışmada, ilköğretim 4 ve 5. sınıf fen bilgisi ve sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarında ve kaynak kitaplarında yer alan evrensel dünya problemleriyle ilgili bilgi vermek amacıyla problem çözüm yapısı geliştirilmiş ve bu yapıya uygun metin yazılmıştır. Yapının geliştirilmesi amacıyla; a) fen bilgisi ve sosyal bilgiler kitaplarından yararlanarak evrensel dünya problemi içerikleri incelenmiş, b) bu bilgiler konu analizi çerçevesinde sıralanmış, c) her bilgi grubunu temsil edecek şekilde yapı ögesi isimlendirilmiş, d) metin oluşturacak şekilde bu yapı ögeleri bölümlendirilmiştir. Metinler ise yapıya uygun olarak yazılmıştır. Metinde yapıya uygun anlamsal ve yapısal işaretler kullanılmıştır. Geliştirilen yapı ve metin ders kitapları yazarlarına bir çerçeve sunması açısından ve öğrencilerin evrensel dünya problemlerine ilişkin metin yapısı farkındalığının oluşturulması bakımından önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Bilgi veren metin, metin yapısı, metin yapısının geliştirilmesi, problem çözüm yapısı, ilköğretim

Abstract

Text structure knowledge of a reader provides a framework for recalling information from the text and comprehending the text and writer as well throughout the  writing process. In this study, problem solution text strucure was developed and an appropriate text was written as the reflection of this structure in order to inform students about universal world problems which are included in the science and social studies textbooks and reference books used by the fourth and fifth grade elemantary school students. To develop the structure; a) The content of the universal world problem in the science and social studies textbook was examined, b) The information collected from the contents was sequenced by using the framework of theme analysis, c) the structure elements were named in order to represent each group of information,  d) episodes of each element were put into parts to form a text. The texts were written in accordance with the structure. Appropriate semantic and syntactic signals were used in the text. The composed structure and the text were offered to the textbook writers as a framework  for writing their texts and develop students' awareness about the structure of the texts written about the universal world problems.

Key Words: Expository text, text structure, improving the text structure, problem solution structure, elementary school

Keywords

• Bilgi veren metin, metin yapısı, metin yapısının geliştirilmesi, problem çözüm yapısı, ilköğretim

References

1. Armbruster, B. B., Thomas H. A., & Ostertag, J. (1987). “Does Text Structure/Summarization Instruction Faciliate Learning From Text?” Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 331–346.
2. Armbruster, B. B., Thomas H. A., & Ostertag J. (1989). “Teaching Text Structure to Improve Reading and Writing”. The Reading Teacher, 43, 130–137.
3. Bakken, J. P., Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1997). “Reading Comprehension of Expository Science Material and Students with Learning Disabilities: A Comparison of Strategies”. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 300-324.
4. Bartlett, B. J. (1978). Top-level Structure as an Organizational Strategy for Recall of Classroom Text. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Tempe: Arizona State University.
5. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G. Sinatra, G. M., & Loxterman, J. A. (1991).“Revising Social Studies Text From a Text-processing Perspective: Evidence of Improved Comprehensibility”. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 251–276.
6. Britton, B. K., & Graesser, A. C. (1996). Five Metaphors for Text Understanding. In B. K. Britton and A. C. Graesser (Eds.)., Models of Understanding Text (pp. 341-352). Mahwan, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Britton, B. K., Glynn, S. M., Meyer, B. J. F., & Penland, M. J. (1982). “Effects of Text Structure on Use of Cognitive Capacity During Reading”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 51-61.
8. Brooks, L. W., Dansereau, D. F., Spurlin J. E., & Holley, C. D. (1983). “Effects of Headings on Text Processing”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 292-302.

9. Crawford, D. B., & Carnine, D. (2000). “Comparing the Effects of Textbooks in Eighth-grade U.S. History: Does Conceptual Organization Help?” Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 387-422.
10. Çağlayan, Ç, Kozak, İ., Erdem, G. Ertuğrul, E., Eren, N. ve Kalkan, G. (2000). İlköğretim Fen Bilgisi Ders Kitabı 5 İstanbul: MEB.
11. Danner, F. W. (1976). “Children's Understanding of Intersentence Organization in the Recall of Short Descriptive Passages”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 174–183.
12. Dickson, S. V. (1994). An Examination of the Effects of An Integrated Reading and Writing Instructional Approach on the Ability of Middle School Students to Produce and Comprehend Compare/Contrast Text Structure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Eugene: University of Oregon.
13. Dickson, S. (1999). “Integrating Reading and Writing to Teach Compare-Contrast Text Structure: A Research-based Methodology”. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 14, 49–79.
14. Dickson, S. V., Simmons D. C., & Kameenui,E.J. (1995). Text Organization and Its Relation to Reading Comprehension: A Synthesis of the Research. Tecnical report. No16 Ed 386 864.
15. Dickson, S., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1998). “Text Organization: Research Bases”. In D. C. Simmons and E. J. Kameenui (Eds.), What Reading Research Tells Us About Children with Diverse Learning Needs: Bases and Basics (pp. 239–277). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Englert, C. S. (1990). “Unraveling the Mysteries of Writing Through Strategy Instruction.” In T. E. Scruggs and B.Y.L. Wong (Eds.), Intervention research in learning disabilities (pp.186-223). New York: Springer-Verlag.
17. Englert, C. S., & Hiebert, E. H. (1984). “Children's Developing Awareness of Text Structure in Expository Materials”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 65–74.
18. Englert, C. S., Raphael, T. E. Anderson, L. M. Anthony, H. M., & Steven, D.D. (1991). “Making Strategies and Self-talk Visible: Writing Instruction in Regular and Special Education Classrooms”. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 337-372.
19. Gernsbacher, M. A., Varner, K. R., & Faust, M. (1990). “Investigating Differences in Genaral Comprhension Skill.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 439-445.
20. Griems, J. E. (1975). The Thread of Discourse. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
21. Goldman, S. R., & Rakestraw, J. A. (2000). Structural Aspects of Constructing Meaning from Text. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson and R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 3, pp. 311–335). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Gürtan, S. (1994a). Çevre, Sağlık, Trafik, Okuma İlköğretim 4. Sınıf Ders Kitabı Ankara: Tekışık Yayınevi.
23. Gürtan, S. (1994b). Çevre, Sağlık, Trafik, Okuma İlköğretim 5. Sınıf Ders Kitabı Ankara: Tekışık Yayınevi.
24. Güzel-Özmen, R. (2006). “The Effectiveness of Modified Cognitive Strategy Instruction in Writing on Mildly Mentally Retarded Turkish Students”. Exceptional Children, 72, 281-297.
25. Hall, K. M., Sabey, B. L., & Mcclellan, M. (2005). “Expository Text Comprehension: Helping Primary-grade Teachers Use Expository Texts to Full Advantage”. Reading Psychology, 26, 211–234.
26. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing Science: Literacy and DiscursivePower. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
27. Karaca, A. ve Türkmen, C. (1994). Çevre, Sağlık, Trafik, Okuma İlköğretim 4.Sınıf Ders Kitabı. Ankara: Koza Yayın Dağıtım.
28. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. Kintsch, W., & VanDijk, T. A. (1978). “Toward A Model of Text Comprehension and Production”. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394.
30. Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with Learning Difficulties. K. R. Harris and S. Graham (Eds.). The Guilford Press: New York.
31. Lauer, K.D. (2002). The Effect of Text Structure, Content Familiarity, and Reading Ability on Second-graders' Comprehension of Text. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia University.
32. Loman, N. L., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). “Signaling Techniques that Increase the Understandability of Expository Prose”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 402-412.
33. Lorch, R. F., Jr. (1989). “Text Signaling Devices and Their Effects on Reading and Memory Processes”. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 209-234.
34. Lorch, R. F., Jr., & Lorch, E. P. (1985). “Topic Structure Representation and Text Recall”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 137-148.
35. Lorch, R. F. Jr., & Lorch, E. P. (1995). “Effects of Organizational Signals on Text Processing Strategies”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 537-544.
36. Lorch, R. F. Jr., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). “Effects of Headings on Text Recall and Summarization”. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 261-278.
37. Lorch, R. F., Jr., Lorch, E. P., & Inman, E. W. (1993). “Effects of Signaling Topic Structure on Text Recall”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 281-290.
38. Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A. (1986). “Relational Propositions in Discourse”. Discourse Process, 9, 57-90.
39. Mayer, R. E., Dyck, J. L., & Cook, L. K. (1984). “Techniques That Help Readers Build Mental Models from Scientific Text: Definitations Pretraining and Signaling”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1089-1105.
40. McGee, L. M. (1982). “Awareness of Text Structure: Effects on Children's Recall of Expository Text”. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 581–590.
41. Mckeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Sinatra, M. G., & Loxterman, A. J. (1992). “The Contribution of Prior Knowledge and Coherent Text to Comprehension”. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 78-93.
42. Meyer, B. J. F. (1975). The Organization of Prose and Its Effects on Memory. Amsterdam: North Holland Pub. Co.
43. Meyer, B. J. F. (1985). Signaling the Structure of Text. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), The Technology of Text (pp. 64-89). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
44. Meyer, B. J. F. (2003). “Text Coherence and Readability”. Topics in Language Disorders, 23(3), 204-224.
45. Meyer, B. J. F., Brandt, D. M., &. Bluth, G. J. (1980). “Use of Top-level Structure in Text: Key for Reading Comprehension of Ninth Grade Students”. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72-103.
46. Meyer, B. J. F., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). “Effects of Discourse Type on Recall”. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 121–143.
47. Meyer, B. J., & Poon, L. W. (2001). “Effects of Structure Strategy Training and Signaling on Recall of Text”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 141–159.
48. Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, E. G. (1984). The Structure of Text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. I). New York: Longman.
49. Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, E. G. (1989). Prose Processing in Adulthood: The Text, The Reader, and The Task. In L. W. Poon, D. C. Rubin and B. A. Wilson (Eds.), Everyday Cognition in Adulthood and Later Life (pp. 157-194). New York: Cambridge University Press.
50. Meyer, B. J. F., Young, C. J., & Barlett, B. J. (1989) Memory Improved: Enhanced Reading Comprehension and Memory Across the Life Span Through Strategic Text Structure. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
51. Miller, T. L., & Lignugaris-Kraft, B. (2002). “The Effects of Text Structure Discrimination Training on the Writing Performance of Students with Learning Disabilities”. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 203-230.
52. Millis, K. K., & Just, M. A. (1994). “The Influence of Connectives on Sentence Comprehension”. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 128-147.
53. Öztürk, C., Karabacak, Z., Öğrenir, L., Dayi, F., Baştürk, K., Ersoy, K.ve Günday, İ. (2005). İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler 5 Sınıf Ders Kitabı. İstanbul: Uygun Matbacılık.
54. Raphael, T.. E., Englert, C. S., & Kirschner, B. M. W. (1986). The Impact of Text Structure and Social Context on Students' Comprehension and Production of Expository Text (Research Series No. 177). East Lansing : Michigan State University.
55. Rickards, J. P., Fajen, B. R., Sullivan, J. F., & Gillespie, G. (1997). “Signaling, Note Taking, and Field Independence-Dependence in Text Comprehension and Recall.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 408-417.
56. Sanders, T. J. M., Spooren, W. P. M., & Noordman, L. G. M. (1992). “Towards a Taxonomy of Coherence Relations”. Discourse Processes, 15, 1-35.
57. Smith, P. L., & Friend, M. (1986). “Training Learning Disabled Adolescents in a Strategy for Using Text Structure to Aid Recall of Instructional Prose”. Learning Disabilities Research, 2, 38-44.
58. Sökmen, H. T., Ekmekçi, M., & Güler, O. F. (2005). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji 4. Sınıf Ders Kitabı. Ankara: Gün Yayınevi.
59. Spivey, N. N. (1997). The Constructivist Metaphor: Reading, Writing and the Making of Meaning. New York: Academic Press.
60. Taylor, B. M. (1980). “Children's Memory for Expository Text After Reading”. Reading Research Quarterly, 74, 399-411.
61. Taylor, B. M. (1982a). “Text structure and children's comprehension and memory for expository material”. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 323-340
62. Taylor, B. M. (1982b). “A Summarizing Strategy to Improve Middle Grade Students.' Reading and Writing Skills”. The Reading Teacher, 36, 202–205.
63. Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). “The Effects of Text Structure Instruction on Middle Grade Students Comprehension and Production of Expository Text”. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 134–146.
64. Taylor, B. M., & Samuels, S. J. (1983). “Children's Use of Text Structure in the Recall of Expository Material”. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 517-528.
65. Tekerek, M., Kaya, N., Alıç, M. D., Yılbat, B., Yıldırım, T., Koyuncu, M. ve Ulusoy, K. (2005). İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler 4. Sınıf Ders Kitabı. İstanbul:MEB Yayınevi.
66. Tunç, T, Karademir, Z. S., Agalday, M., Merdeşe, H., Talo, H., Koçakoğlu, M. ve Kaya, S. (2009). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji 4. Sınıf Ders Kitabı. İstanbul: MEB Yayınları.
67. Vacca, R..T., & Vacca, J. L. (2006). Content Area Reading: Literacy and Learning Across the Curriculum. New York: Allyn & Bacon/Longman.
68. Vallecorsa, A. L., & deBettencourt, L. U. (1997). “Using a Mapping Procodure to Teach Reading and Writing to Middle”. Education & Treatment of Children, 20, 173-189.
69. Williams, J. P., Hall, K .M., & Lauer, K. (2004). “Teaching Expository Text Structure to Young At-risk Learners: Building the Basics of Comprehension Instruction”. Exceptionality, 12, 129–144.
70. Williams, J. P., Hall, K. M., Lauer, K.D., Stafford, K. B., deSisto, L. A., & deCani, J. S. (2005). “Expository Text Comprehension in the Primary Grade Classroom”. Journal of Educational Psychology 97, 538–550.
71. Williams, J. P., Nubla-Kung, A. M., Pollini, S., Stafford, K. B., Garcia, A., & Snyder, A. E. (2007). “Teaching Cause-Effect Structure Through Social Studies Content to At-risk Second Graders”. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 111-120.
72. Wong, B. Y. L. (1997). “Research on Genre-specific Strategies for Enhancing Writing in Adolescents with Learning Disabilities”. Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 140–159.
73. Wong, B. Y. L., & Wilson, M. (1984). “Investigating Awareness of and Teaching Passage Organizing in Learning Disabled Children”. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 228–238.
74. Wong, B. Y. L., Butler, D. L., Ficzere, S. A., & Kuperis, S. (1997). “Teaching adolescents with learning disabilities and low achievers to plan, write, and revise compare-and contrast essays”. Learning Disabilities Research, 12, 2–15.