BibTex RIS Cite

Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process

Year 2016, Volume: 13 Issue: 33, 1 - 17, 14.04.2016

Hakan Ülper Gökhan Çetinkaya

Abstract

Yazma sürecinde geri bildirim vermek çok önemlidir. Çünkü öğrenciler sunulan geri bildirimlerden yararlanarak metinlerini geliştirebilirler. Ancak sunulan geri bildirimlerin öğrencilerin beklentileriyle uyumlu olması gerekir. Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretimi alanında bu konuda yapılan çalışma sayısı çok azdır. O nedenle bu araştırmada Türkçe öğrenirken yabancı öğrencilerin ürettikleri metinlere ilişkin geri bildirim alma beklentilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu çalışmaya Türkçeyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen 181 öğrenci katılmıştır. Veriler araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen sormaca yoluyla toplanmıştır. Araştırmadan elde edilen bulgulara göre öğrenciler taslak metinlerine yazma bittikten sonra öğretmen tarafından yazılı geri bildirim sunulmasını beklemektedirler.

Keywords

Yazma eğitimi yazma süreci geribildirim

References

  • Agudo, J. D. M. (2012). Investigating Spanish EFL students’ beliefs and preferences regarding the effectiveness of corrective feedback. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(19), 121-131.
  • Berg, B. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241.
  • Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–296.
  • Chaudron, C. (1984).The effects of feedback on students' composition revisions. RELC Journal,15 (2), 1-14.
  • Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classess: how much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (3), 257-276.
  • Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 257–276.
  • Coşkun, E. ve Tamer, M. (2015). Yazma eğitiminde geri bildirim türleri ve kullanımı. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12 (32), 337-372
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2015a). Examining characteristics of teacher feedback in organizing written texts. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 5(2), 322-331.
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2015b). Yanlış çözümlemesi: Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğrenen B2 düzeyindeki öğrencilerin yazılı metinlerine ilişkin görünümler. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 3(1), 164-178.
  • Çetinkaya, G. ve Hamzadayı, E. (2015). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretim sürecinde sözel düzeltme geribildirimleri: Öğretmen ve öğrenci yeğleyişleri. Turkish Studies -International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 10/3 Winter 2015, p. 285-302, ISSN: 1308-2140, www.turkishstudies.net, DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.7906, ANKARA-TURKEY
  • Çetinkaya, G., Bayat, N. ve Alaca, S. (2015). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretim sürecinde öğretmenlerin sundukları yazılı düzeltme geribildirimleri ve öğrencilerin edimsel çıkarımlarının incelenmesi. [Özet]. International Conference on New Horizons in Education, 10-12 Haziran 2015, Barselona, ISPANYA, ss.143-152.
  • Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter 38, (1), 27-51.
  • Diab, R. L. (2005). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal, 23(1), 28–42.
  • Fathman, A. K. & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights fort he Classroom (pp. 178-190). Cambridge Univ. Press
  • Fazio, L., L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority-and majority- language students, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235-249.
  • Ferris, D. & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10 (3), 161-184.
  • Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J., & McKee, S. (2000). Perspectives, problems, and practices in treating written error. In Colloquium presented at International TESOL Convention, Vancouver, B.C., March 14–18.
  • Ferris, D.R., & Helt, M. (2000). Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes. Paper presented at Proceedings of the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Vancouver, B.C., March 11–14, 2000.
  • Hamzadayı, E. ve Çetinkaya, G. (2011). Yazılı anlatımı düzenlemede akran
  • dönütleri: Dönüt türleri, öğrenci algıları. AİBU Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 11 (1) 147-
  • -
  • Hamzadayı, E. (2015). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde C1 düzeyinde yazılı akran geribildirimlerine ilişkin görünümler. Journal of World of Turks, 7(2), 287-298.
  • Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language studnets’ writing. Language Teaching. State of the art review article, 39 (2), 83-101.
  • Kırmızı, Ö. & Kırmızı, G. D. (2015). An investigation of L2 learners’ writing self-efficacy, writing anxiety and its causes at higher education in Turkey. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 57-66.
  • Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17 (3), 144-164.
  • Leki, I. (1991), The Preferences of ESL Students for Error Correction in College-Level Writing Classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203–218.
  • Maarof, N., Yamat, H., & Lili, K. (2011). Role of teacher, peer and teacher-peer feedback enhancing ESL students' writing. World Applied Science Journal, 15 (Innovation and Pedagogy for Life Long Learning), 29-35.
  • Mendoca, C. O. & Johnson, K.E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly 28 (4), 745-769.
  • Miao, Y., Badger, R.& Zhe, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200
  • Min, H., T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing 15, 118–141.
  • Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265–289.
  • Polio, C., Fleck,C. &Leder, N. (1998). “If only I had more time”: ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43–68.
  • Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-95.
  • Ruegg, R. (2014). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 1-18, DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2014.958190.
  • Saito, H. (1994) Teachers' Practices and Students' Preferences for Feedback on Second Language Writing: A Case Study of Adult ESL Learners TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46-70.
  • Semke, H. (1984). The effect of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195–202.
  • Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103–110.
  • Straub, R. (1997). Students’ reactions to teacher comments: an exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 91-119
  • Temizkan, M. (2008). Türkçe ve Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Yazılı Anlatım
  • Çalışmalarını Düzeltme ve Değerlendirme Durumları. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir
  • Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD). 9 (3), 49-61.
  • Tsui, A. B. M. & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (2), 147-170.
  • Ülper, H. & Cetinkaya, G. (2014). Identifying the Students’ Corrective Textual Actions towards Teachers Feedback. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 227-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.198
  • Ülper, H. (2011). Students’ preferences to receive feedback on the draft texts they produced. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 11(22), 280-300.
  • Ülper, H. (2012). Properties of the feedback provided by teachers to draft texts. Education and Science, 37 (165), 121-136.
  • Villamil, O., S. & deGuerrero, M., C., M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities mediating strategies and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 51-76.
  • Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.
  • Yastıbaş, G. Ç. & Yastıbaş, A. E. (2015). The effect of peer feedback on writing anxiety in Turkish EFL students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199(2015), 530-538.
  • Zhang, S. (1995). Re-examining the affective advantages of peer feedback in the ESL writing classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 209–222.
  • Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing 15, 3–17.

Year 2016, Volume: 13 Issue: 33, 1 - 17, 14.04.2016

Hakan Ülper Gökhan Çetinkaya

Abstract

References

  • Agudo, J. D. M. (2012). Investigating Spanish EFL students’ beliefs and preferences regarding the effectiveness of corrective feedback. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(19), 121-131.
  • Berg, B. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241.
  • Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 267–296.
  • Chaudron, C. (1984).The effects of feedback on students' composition revisions. RELC Journal,15 (2), 1-14.
  • Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classess: how much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (3), 257-276.
  • Connor, U., & Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 257–276.
  • Coşkun, E. ve Tamer, M. (2015). Yazma eğitiminde geri bildirim türleri ve kullanımı. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12 (32), 337-372
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2015a). Examining characteristics of teacher feedback in organizing written texts. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 5(2), 322-331.
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2015b). Yanlış çözümlemesi: Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğrenen B2 düzeyindeki öğrencilerin yazılı metinlerine ilişkin görünümler. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 3(1), 164-178.
  • Çetinkaya, G. ve Hamzadayı, E. (2015). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretim sürecinde sözel düzeltme geribildirimleri: Öğretmen ve öğrenci yeğleyişleri. Turkish Studies -International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 10/3 Winter 2015, p. 285-302, ISSN: 1308-2140, www.turkishstudies.net, DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.7906, ANKARA-TURKEY
  • Çetinkaya, G., Bayat, N. ve Alaca, S. (2015). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretim sürecinde öğretmenlerin sundukları yazılı düzeltme geribildirimleri ve öğrencilerin edimsel çıkarımlarının incelenmesi. [Özet]. International Conference on New Horizons in Education, 10-12 Haziran 2015, Barselona, ISPANYA, ss.143-152.
  • Diab, R. L. (2005). EFL university students’ preferences for error correction and teacher feedback on writing. TESL Reporter 38, (1), 27-51.
  • Diab, R. L. (2005). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs about responding to ESL writing: A case study. TESL Canada Journal, 23(1), 28–42.
  • Fathman, A. K. & Whalley, E. (1990). Teacher response to student writing: focus on form versus content. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights fort he Classroom (pp. 178-190). Cambridge Univ. Press
  • Fazio, L., L. (2001). The effect of corrections and commentaries on the journal writing accuracy of minority-and majority- language students, Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 235-249.
  • Ferris, D. & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10 (3), 161-184.
  • Ferris, D. R., Chaney, S. J., Komura, K., Roberts, B. J., & McKee, S. (2000). Perspectives, problems, and practices in treating written error. In Colloquium presented at International TESOL Convention, Vancouver, B.C., March 14–18.
  • Ferris, D.R., & Helt, M. (2000). Was Truscott right? New evidence on the effects of error correction in L2 writing classes. Paper presented at Proceedings of the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Vancouver, B.C., March 11–14, 2000.
  • Hamzadayı, E. ve Çetinkaya, G. (2011). Yazılı anlatımı düzenlemede akran
  • dönütleri: Dönüt türleri, öğrenci algıları. AİBU Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 11 (1) 147-
  • -
  • Hamzadayı, E. (2015). Yabancılara Türkçe öğretiminde C1 düzeyinde yazılı akran geribildirimlerine ilişkin görünümler. Journal of World of Turks, 7(2), 287-298.
  • Hyland, K. & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language studnets’ writing. Language Teaching. State of the art review article, 39 (2), 83-101.
  • Kırmızı, Ö. & Kırmızı, G. D. (2015). An investigation of L2 learners’ writing self-efficacy, writing anxiety and its causes at higher education in Turkey. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 57-66.
  • Lee, I. (2008). Student reactions to teacher feedback in two Hong Kong secondary classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17 (3), 144-164.
  • Leki, I. (1991), The Preferences of ESL Students for Error Correction in College-Level Writing Classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 203–218.
  • Maarof, N., Yamat, H., & Lili, K. (2011). Role of teacher, peer and teacher-peer feedback enhancing ESL students' writing. World Applied Science Journal, 15 (Innovation and Pedagogy for Life Long Learning), 29-35.
  • Mendoca, C. O. & Johnson, K.E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly 28 (4), 745-769.
  • Miao, Y., Badger, R.& Zhe, Y. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200
  • Min, H., T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing 15, 118–141.
  • Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265–289.
  • Polio, C., Fleck,C. &Leder, N. (1998). “If only I had more time”: ESL learners' changes in linguistic accuracy on essay revisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 43–68.
  • Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83-95.
  • Ruegg, R. (2014). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on changes in EFL students’ writing self-efficacy. The Language Learning Journal, 1-18, DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2014.958190.
  • Saito, H. (1994) Teachers' Practices and Students' Preferences for Feedback on Second Language Writing: A Case Study of Adult ESL Learners TESL Canada Journal, 11(2), 46-70.
  • Semke, H. (1984). The effect of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195–202.
  • Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103–110.
  • Straub, R. (1997). Students’ reactions to teacher comments: an exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 91-119
  • Temizkan, M. (2008). Türkçe ve Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Yazılı Anlatım
  • Çalışmalarını Düzeltme ve Değerlendirme Durumları. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir
  • Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD). 9 (3), 49-61.
  • Tsui, A. B. M. & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (2), 147-170.
  • Ülper, H. & Cetinkaya, G. (2014). Identifying the Students’ Corrective Textual Actions towards Teachers Feedback. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 227-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.198
  • Ülper, H. (2011). Students’ preferences to receive feedback on the draft texts they produced. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 11(22), 280-300.
  • Ülper, H. (2012). Properties of the feedback provided by teachers to draft texts. Education and Science, 37 (165), 121-136.
  • Villamil, O., S. & deGuerrero, M., C., M. (1996). Peer revision in the L2 classroom: Social-cognitive activities mediating strategies and aspects of social behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 51-76.
  • Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 179–200.
  • Yastıbaş, G. Ç. & Yastıbaş, A. E. (2015). The effect of peer feedback on writing anxiety in Turkish EFL students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199(2015), 530-538.
  • Zhang, S. (1995). Re-examining the affective advantages of peer feedback in the ESL writing classroom. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 209–222.
  • Zhao, H. (2010). Investigating learners’ use and understanding of peer and teacher feedback on writing: A comparative study in a Chinese English writing classroom. Assessing Writing 15, 3–17.
There are 50 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Araştırma Makaleleri
Authors

Hakan Ülper

Gökhan Çetinkaya

Publication Date April 14, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2016 Volume: 13 Issue: 33

Cite

APA Ülper, H., & Çetinkaya, G. (2016). Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 13(33), 1-17.
AMA Ülper H, Çetinkaya G. Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. April 2016;13(33):1-17.
Chicago Ülper, Hakan, and Gökhan Çetinkaya. “Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process”. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 13, no. 33 (April 2016): 1-17.
EndNote Ülper H, Çetinkaya G (April 1, 2016) Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 13 33 1–17.
IEEE H. Ülper and G. Çetinkaya, “Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process”, Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, vol. 13, no. 33, pp. 1–17, 2016.
ISNAD Ülper, Hakan - Çetinkaya, Gökhan. “Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process”. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 13/33 (April 2016), 1-17.
JAMA Ülper H, Çetinkaya G. Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2016;13:1–17.
MLA Ülper, Hakan and Gökhan Çetinkaya. “Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process”. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, vol. 13, no. 33, 2016, pp. 1-17.
Vancouver Ülper H, Çetinkaya G. Türkçe Öğrenen Yabancı Öğrencilerin Yazılı Taslak Metinlerine Yönelik Geribildirim Almaya İlişkin Beklentileri / Foreign Students’ Expectations in Relation to Receıve Feedback Towards Their Written Draft Texts in Turkish Learning Process. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2016;13(33):1-17.

.