Türkiye'de çocuklara İngilizce öğretimi ile ilgili araştırma makalelerinin içerik analizi

Öz

Son zamanlarda Türk eğitim sistemi, Türkiye'de çocuklara İngilizce öğretimi alanında yapılan çalışmaların artmasını sağlayan bazı yeni düzenlemelere tabi tutulmuştur. Bu çalışma temel olarak ULAKBİM TR Index (Ulusal Dizin) veri tabanı tarafından indekslenen makalelerin doküman analizi yardımıyla bu çalışmaların konularına, yayın yıllarına, yazar sayılarına, örneklemlerine ve araştırma yöntemlerine göre sıklık dağılımlarını belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. 56 makale çocuklara İngilizce öğretimi alanında içeriğe özgü olduğu tespit edildiğinden çalışma dokümanı olarak seçilmiştir. Veri toplama aracı olarak Makale Bilgi Değerlendirme Tablosu hazırlanarak, veriler Microsoft Excel üzerinden işlenmiştir. Çalışmanın ana bulguları şunlardır: (1) İngiliz dili eğitimi araştırmacıları çoğunlukla "İnançlar ve Tutumlar" ve "Yöntemler ve Teknikler" hakkında makaleler yazmakla ilgilenmektedirler; (2) Yayınlanma yılları açısından frekans dağılımında önemli bir değişiklikler vardır; (3) amaçlı örnekleme yöntemiyle örneklem olarak çoğunlukla hizmet içi öğretmenler seçilmiştir; (4) araştırmalar en çok vaka çalışmaları ile nitel araştırmaları izlemiştir, (5) araştırmacılar veri toplama aracı olarak en çok görüşme ve anketleri kullanmışlardır ve (6) bu çalışmalarda en sık gerçekleştirilen veri analizi türü içerik analizidir. Çalışmanın sonunda ileride yapılabilecek araştırmalar için öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İngilizce Öğretimi
• Çocuklar
• İçerik Analizi
• ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Content analysis of research articles on teaching English to young learners in Turkiye

Abstract

Recently, Turkish education system has been subject to some new regulations which have induced an increase in the number of the studies conducted in the field of Teaching English to Young Learners (TEYL) in Turkiye. This study mainly aims to determine the frequency distribution of these studies with regard to their topics, publishing years, the number of their authors, their samples and research methods with the help of a document analysis of the articles indexed by ULAKBIM TR Index (National Index) database. 56 articles were chosen as the sample since they were identified to be content-specific in the field of TEYL. Article Information Rubric was chosen as a data collection instrument and the data was processed through Microsoft Excel. The main findings of the study are: (1) ELT researchers are mostly concerned about writing papers about ‘Beliefs and Attitudes’ and ‘Methods and Techniques’; (2) there is an important change in the frequency distribution in terms of publishing years; (3) mostly in-service teachers have been chosen as the sample with purposive sampling method; (4) the studies mostly followed qualitative research with case studies, (5) researchers used interviews and questionnaires most as data collection tools and (6) the most frequently performed type of data analysis is content analysis in these studies. Suggestions for further research were provided at the end of the study.

Keywords

• Teaching English
• Young Learners
• Content Analysis
• ULAKBIM TR Index

References

1. Anderson, J. (1998). Service-learning and teacher education. ERIC Digest.
2. Arslan, R. Ş. (2012). Bridging the gap between policy and practice in teaching English to young learners: The Turkish context. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 32, 95-100.
3. Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (9th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
4. Birgin, O., & Baki, A. (2007). The use of portfolio to assess student’s performance. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(2), 75-90.
5. Bland, J. (Ed.). (2015). Teaching English to young learners: Critical issues in language teaching with 3–12-year-olds. Bloomsbury Publishing.
6. Bozdoğan, D. (2012). Content analysis of ELT students’ digital stories for young learners. Novitas-Royal (Research on Youth and Language), 6(2), 126-136.
7. Cesur, K., Kök, M., & Aydın, Ç. (2018). Content analysis of abstracts on ELT research available in Turkish journalpark academic platform. ELT Research Journal, 7(2), 58-77.
8. Chaiyasook, W., & Jaroongkhongdach, W. (2014). A content analysis of Thai master’s theses in ELT from 2003 to 2011. In Proceedings of the International Conference: DRAL (Vol. 2, pp. 64-74).

9. Chinh, N.D. (2013). Cultural diversity in English language teaching: Learners’ voices. English Language Teaching, 6(4), 1-7.
10. Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in teaching English to young learners: Global perspectives and local realities. Tesol Quarterly, 48(4), 738-762.
11. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130.
12. De Leeuw, E. D. & Otter, M. E. (1995). The reliability of children’s responses to questionnaire items; Question effects in children’s questionnaire data. In J. J. Hox, B. F. V. D. Meulen, J. M. A. M. Janssens, J. J. F. T. Laak & L. W. C. Tavecchio (Eds.), Advances in Family Research. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.
13. Demir, Y., & Koçyiğit, M. (2018). A systematic review of research on English language teacher education published in three flagship journals (1997-2016). Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 128-138.
14. Dincer, A., & Koç, H. K. (2020). The implementation of an intensive English language program in the fifth grade in Turkey: A qualitative evaluation. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 13(1), 25-43.
15. Dündar, E., & Merç, A. (2017). A critical review of research on curriculum development and evaluation in ELT. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching. 2(1), 136-168.
16. Etikan, İ., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling, American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
17. Gharbavi, A., & Mousavi, S. A. (2012). A content analysis of textbooks: Investigating gender bias as a social prominence in Iranian high school English textbooks. English Linguistics Research, 1(1), 42-49.
18. Göktas, Y., Hasancebi, F., Varisoglu, B., Akcay, A., Bayrak, N., Baran, M., & Sozbilir, M. (2012). Trends in Educational Research in Turkey: A Content Analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 455-460.
19. Gürsoy, E., Korkmaz, S. C., & Damar, E. A. (2017). English Language Teaching within the New Educational Policy of Turkey: Views of Stakeholders. International Education Studies, 10(4), 18-30.
20. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
21. Jenkins, R. A. (1997). Thirty-two years of history: Analysis of five school psychology journals from 1964 to 1995 for content trends and author gender, affiliation, and frequency of publications. Kent State University.
22. Karadağ, E. (2009). Eğitim Bilimleri Alaninda Yapilmiş Doktora Tezlerinin Tematik Açidan İncelemesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 75-87.
23. Karadeniz, A., & Sözler, S. (2016). Open and distance foreign language teaching: A content analysis study. Journal of Educational & Instructional Studies in the World, 6(S1), 1–8.
24. Kırmızı, O. (2012). Research trends in MA ELT programs in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4687-4691.
25. Lin, L. C., & Cheng, C. P. (2010). Research trends in selected MA TESOL programs in Taiwan: A preliminary content analysis of master’s theses from 2003-2007. Asian EFL Journal, 12(4), 126-139.
26. Meyer, D. Z., & Avery, L. M. (2009). Excel as a qualitative data analysis tool. Field Methods, 21(1), 91-112.
27. Ponce, O. A., & Pagán-Maldonado, N. (2015). Mixed methods research in education: Capturing the complexity of the profession. International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(1), 111-135.
28. Saban, A. (2009). Content analysis of Turkish studies about the multiple intelligences theory. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 9(2), 859-876.
29. Sánchez, M. M. M., Morfín, A. P., & Campos, V. E. P. (2007). Interactive games in the teaching-learning process of a foreing language. Teoría y Praxis, 4, 47-66.
30. Savaşkan, İ. (2016). Turkey’s place in the rankings of the English proficiency index. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 5(2), 192-208.
31. Solak, E. (2014). The Content Analysis of the Research Papers on Foreign Language Education in Turkey. Online Submission, 3(3), 167-178.
32. Yağız, O., Aydın, B., & Akdemir, A. S. (2016). ELT research in Turkey: A content analysis of selected features of published articles. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 12(2), 117-134.
33. Yangın-Ekşi, G., & Aşık, A. (2015). Enriching microteaching in teaching English to young learners (TEYL): An action research. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 2(1), 26-41.
34. Yücel, E., Dimici, K., Yıldız, B., & Bümen, N. (2017). Son 15 yılda yayımlanan ilk ve ortaöğretim İngilizce dersi öğretim programları üzerine bir analiz. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 18(2), 702-737.