BibTex RIS Cite

İki Dilli Türk Öğrencilerin Ana Dili Türkçeyi Öğrenme Durumlarına İlişkin Öğrenci, Veli ve Öğretmen Görüşleri Fjell İlköğretim Okulu Örneği, Norveç

Year 2009, Issue: 21, 71 - 85, 01.02.2009

Abstract

Ana dili ve toplum dili aynıolmayan çocuklar, hem ana dilde hem de toplum dilinde ayrıayrıdil yeteneklerine sahip olmakla birlikte, okula başlama yaşında ne ana dilde ne de toplum dilinde, tek dilli çocukların eriştikleri konuşma ve düşünme düzeyine ulaşamazlar. Ancak bu durumdaki çocukların ana dili yeteneği ilköğretime başlama çağında daha yüksektir. Bu bakımdan öğrencilerin ana dilini doğru biçimde öğrenmeleri ve kullanmalarıhem toplum dilini öğrenmelerine, hem aile çevresiyle yakın ilişki kurmalarına hem de kişilik gelişimlerine olumlu katkılar sağlamaktadır. Bu araştırmada Norveç’te yaşayan iki dilli Türk öğrencilerin ana dili Türkçeyi öğrenme durumlarının ortaya konulmasıamaçlanmıştır. Bu temel amaç doğrultusunda araştırma nitel araştırma yöntemi benimsenerek gerçekleştirilmiştir. İlköğretim öğrencileri, veliler ve öğretmenlerden açık uçlu anketlerle toplanan araştırma verilerinin çözümlenmesinde betimsel analiz tekniğinden yararlanılmış, araştırma bulgularıfrekans dağılımlarınıgösteren tablolar ve katılımcılarının görüşlerinden doğrudan alıntılarla desteklenerek sunulmuştur. Tanımlanan bulguların açıklanması, ilişkilendirilmesi ve anlamlandırılmasıaşamasında araştırmacıtarafından yapılan yorumun daha nitelikli olmasıamacıyla; bulgular arasındaki neden-sonuç ilişkilerinin ortaya konmasıve başka araştırma bulgularıile araştırma bulgularının karşılaştırılmasıyoluna gidilmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda, öğrencilerin, velilerin ve öğretmenlerin Norveç’te yaşayan Türk çocuklarının Türkçe öğrenme amaçlarına ilişkin; anadiline hakim olmak ve iyi iletişim kurabilmek ve bulunduklarıtoplumun dilini edinmede başarılıolmak gibi amaçlara sahip olduklarınıifade ettikleri görülmektedir. Araştırmanın katılımcıları; Türk öğrencilerin ana dillerini özellikle aile çevresinde kullandıklarını, öğrencilerin anlama ve ifade becerinde sorunlar yaşandığınıdile getirirlerken bu sorunların çözümüne yönelik olarak ana dili Türkçenin öğretimine yönelik, programlara Türkçe derslerinin konulması, kaynakların oranınıartırılması, kitap okuma etkinliklerinin artırılmasıve çeşitli eğitim CD’leri yoluyla öğrenme ortamlarının geliştirilmesi yönünde önerilerde bulunmuşlardır.

References

  • Baker, C. (2000). A parents' and teachers' guide to bilingualism. (3nd Ed.) Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
  • Bezemer J., A.H. Wold, L W. Pastoor, S. Kroon ve E. Ryen (2005). Teaching and learning in multicultural contexts: A comparative analysis of language teaching and learning in a Norwegian and Dutch primary school classroom. Intercultural Education, 16, (5), 453–467.
  • ___.(2004). Language Teaching and Learning in a Multicultural Context Case Studies from Primar Education in the Netherlands and Norway. Oslo: GCS. Paper. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=39369
  • Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
  • Denzin N. K. ve Y. S. Lincoln. (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research. (3rd. Ed.) California: Sage Publication.
  • Dünya Bankası (2005). In their own language, education for all. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://siteresources. worldbank. org/EDUCATION/Resources/ Education- Notes/EdNotes_ Lang_of_Instruct.pdf
  • İleri, E. (2000). Avrupa Topluluğu’nun dil politikası ve Almanya’da okula giden Türk asıllı öğrencilerin dil ve eğitim sorunları. Almanya’da yaşayan Türk çocuklarının ana dili sorunları toplantısı. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları. 734, 7-66.
  • Khan, S. (1983). The mothertonque of linguistic minorities in multicultural England. (Ed: Stubbs, M. ve Miller H.) Readings on language schools and classroom: contemprary sociology of the scholl. UK: Routledge, 94-113.
  • Luchtenberg, S. (2002). Bilingualism and bilingual education and their relationship to citizenship from a comparative German–Australian perspective. Intercultural Education, 13, (1).
  • Martin, D. (1999). Bilingualism and literacy in primary school: implications for professional development. Educational Review, 51, (1)
  • Miles M. ve M. Huberman. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. California: Sage Publications.
  • Schachter, J. ve W. Rutherford (1979). Discourse function and language transfer. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 1-12
  • Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL. 10, 209–231.
  • Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education-or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Tunçel, R. (2006). Türk ve Alman ilköğretim 5. Sınıf öğrencilerinin dilbilgisi ders kitaplarındaki sıfatların nicelik bakımından karşılaştırılması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15, 595-607.
  • Ulutak, N. (2007). Avrupa’da Türkçe ‘İkinci Dil’ Öğretimi Araştırması (Proje No: 050734) Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 1719.
  • UNESCO (2003.) Education in a Multilingual World. UNESCO Education Position Paper. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0012/001297/129728e.pdf
  • Verhoeven, L. (1996) Turkish literacy and its acquisition in the Netherlands. International Journal of the Sociology of Language,119, 87-108.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve H. Şimşek. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (Beşinci basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
  • Zülfikar, H. (2000). Almanya’daki Türklerin durumu ve Türkçe yaptıkları yanlışlar. Almanya’da yaşayan Türk çocuklarının ana dili sorunları toplantısı. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları. 734, 67-72.
  • Zobl, H. (1980a). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquision. Language Learning, 30, 43-57.
  • ____.(1980b). Developmental and transfer errors: their common bases and (possibly) differential effects on subsequent learning. TESOL-Quarterly, 14, 469–479.

Students’, Parents’ And Teachers’ Views On Bilingual Turkish Students’ Learning Of Mothertonque Fjell Primary School Case, Norway

Year 2009, Issue: 21, 71 - 85, 01.02.2009

Abstract

Though children whose mother and society tongue are different have separate languages skills on both languages, they do not reach to have a speaking and thinking skills at mother and society tongue as the children having mono-language at the age of primary school. However, mother tongue skills of those students at the age of primary school are higher than that of their society tongue. Students coming from different social and cultural environment try adapt to school system of host country as a bilingual and multicultural individuals and by so to socialize in completely new value system of society. Turkish primary school students in Norway are also one of the large groups in Norway having multicultural and bilingual background. Effective learning and use of mother tongue by those students enables them to learn of society tongue, improve effectiveness of communication with member of family environment and increase transmission of cultural values and personality development. In this sense, in this study it was aimed to describe the learning of Turkish as a mother tongue by bilingual Turkish students living in Norway. The study was realized with qualitative research techniques. Data was collected from 43 primary schools students, 11 parents and 14 teachers of Fjell Multicultural Primary School in Drammen, in Norway with. In analysis of open ended question in semi-structured interviews descriptive analyze technique was used. Research findings were supported with frequency tables and citations from authentic expressions of respondents. At the stage of identification and explanation of described findings, cause-effect relationships among the research findings and findings of similar researches were also used in order to increase the quality of interpretations realized by researcher Research findings indicate that students mainly connected their willingness to learn Turkish with having more effective communication with their family and Turkish friends, using Turkish effectively in their daily life and being much more successful in the courses they attend. The families of Turkish primary school students reported that learning Turkish as their cultural tongue is critical since they do not want their children to feel alienated when they come to Turkey, define themselves as Turkish origin, do not loose cultural bonds, want their children to learn their own culture better via Turkish. Besides they expressed that learning of Turkish is important for learning Norse better. The teacher expressed that they want to teach Turkish to enable students to express themselves in their mother tongue better, help them to gain their own cultural identity, gain main motives of Turkish culture. Besides, they also reported that they want to teach Turkish in order to facilitate learning of second language. In Norway most of the students do not take Turkish course, learning activities related with Turkish are limited with the use of Turkish on internet communications and speaking with family and Turkish fiends. Findings also indicate that less than half of the Turkish students read Turkish books and prefer Turkish in internet communication. Moreover research findings also underline the fact that more than half of the students use Turkish as a communication language in their daily life on the other hand relatively small group prefers Turkish rarely as a communication language in their daily life. Depending on the research findings, families of the Turkish students reported that in general their children use Turkish in daily life but limitation of use of Turkish language is originated from the Norwegian friends of their children. About the difficulties in learning Turkish, students expressed that they face the problems in speaking and writing and since they do not use what they learn so they forget easily. Another problem they face is inadequacy of Turkish vocabulary. They reported they do not have enough Turkish vocabulary building. More than half of the parents view also supports this fact. They expressed their children have problems reading and listening comprehension and writing. Deficiency in learning of Turkish is explained by teachers with the facts that inadequate course hour in Turkish accompanying inadequate course material and content. For this reason, they expressed that they aren’t able to provide instruction in Turkish language. All of the teachers reported that students have low motivation in learning Turkish, low level of Turkish vocabulary, difficulties in reading and writing, speak Turkish with very limited vocabulary and pronunciation disorder. About the solutions for improving their Turkish learning, students mostly addressed technological tools and sources. Internet based sources, materials and educational materials to be prepared in CD, diversification of extra-curricular activities focusing on Turkish teaching, increase in hours of Turkish course in curriculum were the primary solutions proposed by Turkish primary students for improvement of their Turkish. The parents, on the other hand focused on both solutions providing maximum interaction with Turkish language such as encouragement of reading Turkish books, watching Turkish TV channels and school based solutions such as increase in hours of Turkish course in curriculum structure. About the solutions for the elimination of learning problems in Turkish, teachers proposed increase in learning experience in which students could use Turkish much frequently, in course hours of Turkish, cooperation with school, families and students on mother tongue teaching and designing and realizing researches for finding out the problems and solution about teaching of Turkish as a mother tongue. Depending on the research findings following proposals could be presented: In order to improve mother tongue skills of students living in Norway, improvement of technology based instructional material software for teaching Turkish and use of these materials could be encouraged in elective Turkish courses or extracurricular activities. To enhance the use of Turkish as a mother tongue frequency and quality of school and family cooperation could be increased. In-service training activities could be provided to teachers

References

  • Baker, C. (2000). A parents' and teachers' guide to bilingualism. (3nd Ed.) Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
  • Bezemer J., A.H. Wold, L W. Pastoor, S. Kroon ve E. Ryen (2005). Teaching and learning in multicultural contexts: A comparative analysis of language teaching and learning in a Norwegian and Dutch primary school classroom. Intercultural Education, 16, (5), 453–467.
  • ___.(2004). Language Teaching and Learning in a Multicultural Context Case Studies from Primar Education in the Netherlands and Norway. Oslo: GCS. Paper. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=39369
  • Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
  • Denzin N. K. ve Y. S. Lincoln. (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research. (3rd. Ed.) California: Sage Publication.
  • Dünya Bankası (2005). In their own language, education for all. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://siteresources. worldbank. org/EDUCATION/Resources/ Education- Notes/EdNotes_ Lang_of_Instruct.pdf
  • İleri, E. (2000). Avrupa Topluluğu’nun dil politikası ve Almanya’da okula giden Türk asıllı öğrencilerin dil ve eğitim sorunları. Almanya’da yaşayan Türk çocuklarının ana dili sorunları toplantısı. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları. 734, 7-66.
  • Khan, S. (1983). The mothertonque of linguistic minorities in multicultural England. (Ed: Stubbs, M. ve Miller H.) Readings on language schools and classroom: contemprary sociology of the scholl. UK: Routledge, 94-113.
  • Luchtenberg, S. (2002). Bilingualism and bilingual education and their relationship to citizenship from a comparative German–Australian perspective. Intercultural Education, 13, (1).
  • Martin, D. (1999). Bilingualism and literacy in primary school: implications for professional development. Educational Review, 51, (1)
  • Miles M. ve M. Huberman. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. California: Sage Publications.
  • Schachter, J. ve W. Rutherford (1979). Discourse function and language transfer. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 1-12
  • Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL. 10, 209–231.
  • Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (2000). Linguistic genocide in education-or worldwide diversity and human rights? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Tunçel, R. (2006). Türk ve Alman ilköğretim 5. Sınıf öğrencilerinin dilbilgisi ders kitaplarındaki sıfatların nicelik bakımından karşılaştırılması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15, 595-607.
  • Ulutak, N. (2007). Avrupa’da Türkçe ‘İkinci Dil’ Öğretimi Araştırması (Proje No: 050734) Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 1719.
  • UNESCO (2003.) Education in a Multilingual World. UNESCO Education Position Paper. Erişim Tarihi: 07.03.2009. Erişim Adresi: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0012/001297/129728e.pdf
  • Verhoeven, L. (1996) Turkish literacy and its acquisition in the Netherlands. International Journal of the Sociology of Language,119, 87-108.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve H. Şimşek. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (Beşinci basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
  • Zülfikar, H. (2000). Almanya’daki Türklerin durumu ve Türkçe yaptıkları yanlışlar. Almanya’da yaşayan Türk çocuklarının ana dili sorunları toplantısı. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları. 734, 67-72.
  • Zobl, H. (1980a). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquision. Language Learning, 30, 43-57.
  • ____.(1980b). Developmental and transfer errors: their common bases and (possibly) differential effects on subsequent learning. TESOL-Quarterly, 14, 469–479.
There are 22 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Şerife Dilek BELET This is me

Publication Date February 1, 2009
Published in Issue Year 2009 Issue: 21

Cite

APA BELET, Ş. D. (2009). İki Dilli Türk Öğrencilerin Ana Dili Türkçeyi Öğrenme Durumlarına İlişkin Öğrenci, Veli ve Öğretmen Görüşleri Fjell İlköğretim Okulu Örneği, Norveç. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(21), 71-85.

24108 28027 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License