PDF Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

YÜKSEKÖĞRETİM DÜZEYİNDEKİ ÖZEL AMAÇLI İNGİLİZCE DERSLERİNDE İÇERİK TABANLI YABANCI DİL ÖĞRETİM YAKLAŞIMININ ÖĞRENCİLERİN AKADEMİK BAŞARILARINA ETKİSİ

Year 2014, Volume 12, Issue 1, 35 - 55, 01.03.2014

Abstract

Eğitimin küreselleşmesi, öğrencilerin gereksinimleri ve iş dünyasının beklentileri yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğretiminin kuramsal ve uygulama boyutlarında değişikliklere sebep olmuştur. Bu değişikliklerin yabancı dil öğretim programlarına yansıtılması ise Özel Amaçlı İngilizce derslerinin ortaya çıkmasını sağlamıştır. Ancak yabancı dil öğretiminin özellikle öğretim programlarının geliştirilmesinden kaynaklanan sorunları başarısızlıkları beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu araştırmanın amacı İçerik Tabanlı Dil Öğretim Yaklaşımı (İTDÖY) Konu Temelli Modele (KTM) göre geliştirilen Özel Amaçlı İngilizce Dersi Öğretim Programı’nın içerik bilgisi ile yabancı dil becerileri boyutlarında öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisini belirlemektir. Bu araştırma deneysel modeldedir. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu 2012-2013 eğitim öğretim yılında Ahi Evran Üniversitesi MYO Bilgisayar Programcılığı Programı ikinci sınıf öğrencileridir. Araştırmanın veri toplama aracı Özel Amaçlı İngilizce Dersi Erişi Testi’dir. Veriler, bağımsız gruplar t-testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırmanın en önemli bulgularından biri İTDÖY KTM’nin, içerik bilgisi ile yabancı dil becerileri boyutlarında deney grubundaki öğrencilerin akademik başarılarını artırmış olması; diğeri ise İTDÖY KTM’nin, okuduğunu anlama becerisi hariç içerik (konu alanı) bilgisi ve yazma becerilerinde deney grubundaki öğrencilerin lehine erişi puanlarında önemli farklılıklara sebep olmasıdır. Bu sonuçlara göre Özel Amaçlı İngilizce Dersi Öğretim Programları, içerik tabanlı dil öğretim yaklaşımı ve konu temelli modele göre tasarlanabilir.

References

  • Aktaş, T. (2005).Yabanci dil öğretiminde iletişimsel yeti. Journal of Language and
  • Linguistic Studies, 1(1), 89.
  • Andrade, M. S. & Makaafi, J. H. (2001). Guidelines for establishing adjunct courses at
  • the university level. TESOL Journal, 10(2/3), 33-39.
  • Arıkan, A. (2008). Computers and the internet. Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
  • Arslan, R. Ş. & Saka, C. K. (2010). Teaching English to science students via theme
  • based model of content- based instruction. Journal of Turkish Science Education:7(4), 26-36.
  • Avrupa Yaşam Kalitesi Araştırması (2012). İnternetten 01.03.2015’te elde edilmiştir: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/eqls.
  • Balcı, A. (2004). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler (4.Baskı).
  • Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
  • Beckett, G., Gonzalez, V. & Schwartz, H. (2004). Content-based ESL writing curiculum: A language socialization model. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2, 161-175.
  • Beckett, G. & Li, F. (2012). Content- based English education in China: Students’
  • experiences and perspectives. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education,7 (1),47-63.
  • Berry, C.F. & Mindes, G. (1993). Planning a theme-based curriculum: Goals, themes,
  • activities, and planning guides for 4s and 5s. Glenview, IL: Good Year Books.
  • Brinton, D. M. (2003). Content-based Instruction. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Brinton, D., Snow, M.A., & Wesche, M.B. (1989). Content-based second language
  • instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
  • Brinton, D. (2007). Two for one? Language enhanced instruction. Paper presented at
  • TESOL ESP Symposium, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel
  • araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: PegemA Yayınları.
  • Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Canbay, M. O. (2006). Strengthening a content-based instruction curriculum by a needs analysis. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Coleman, J. A. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education,
  • Language Teaching, 39, 1-14.
  • Crandall, J. (1993). Content-centered language learning. İnternetten 02.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http:/www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/cranda01.html.
  • Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cummins, interdependence, the optimum age
  • Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic
  • question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121- 129.
  • Çelebi, M. D. (2006). Türkiye’de anadil eğitimi ve yabancı dil öğretimi. Sosyal Bilimler
  • Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2).
  • Çelik, S. (2003). Niğde Üniversitesi meslek yüksekokullarındaki büro yönetimi ve
  • sekreterlik bölümü öğrencilerinin akademik ve mesleki İngilizce gereksinimlerine yönelik bir araştırma. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Daryl, M. R. (2006). Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian
  • content-based instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 373-386.
  • Davies, S. (2003). “Content-based instruction in EFL contexts”. The Internet TESL
  • Journal,4 (2). İnternetten 03.10.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://iteslj.org.
  • Demircan, Ö. (1990). Yabancı dil öğretim yöntemleri. İstanbul: Ekin Yayıncılık.
  • Demirdirek, N., Özgirin, N. & Salatacı, R. (2010). E-documentaries in content-based
  • instruction (CBI) in an academic EFL setting. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 203-209.
  • Demirel, Ö. (1990). Yabancı dil öğretimi ilkeler yöntemler teknikler. Ankara: Usem Yayınları.
  • Diken, Ü. (2006). Gereksinim çözümlemesi kullanılarak uygulanan özel amaçlı dil
  • öğretimi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Isparta.
  • Doğan, E. B. (2003). Integrating language and content learning objectives: The BU adjunct model. Unpublished M. A. Thesis. Bilkent University, Ankara.
  • Dudley-Evans, T. & St John, M. (1998). Developments in ESP: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dupuy, B.C. (2000). Content-based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from
  • beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annuals, 33(2), 203-223.
  • Ekici, N. (2003). A needs assessment study on English language needs of the tour
  • guidance students of Faculty of Applied Sciences at Baskent University, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans
  • Tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Enginarlar, H. (2003). İlköğretim çağında yabancı dil öğretimi, Türk eğitim sisteminde
  • yabancı dil eğitimi ve kalite arayışları. İstanbul: Özel Okullar Derneği.
  • Er, İ. (2011). Türkiye’deki bir üniversitede çalışan yabancı dil öğretmenlerinin içerik
  • temelli öğretim hakkındaki görüşleri ve uygulamaları üzerine bir çalışma. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Ersanlı, C. Y. & Kızıltan, N. ( 2007). The contributions of theme-based CBI to Turkish
  • young learners’ language development in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3 (1).
  • Finch, C. R. & Crunkilton, J. R. (1989). Curriculum development in vocational and
  • technical education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
  • Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y. & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for
  • effective l2 pedagogy and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 603–624.
  • Grabe,W. & Stoller, E.L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In
  • M.A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (s. 5-21). White Plains, NY: Longman.
  • Heo, Y. ( 2006). Content-based instruction. TESL Working Paper Series, 4(2), 25- 32.
  • Hellekjær, G. (2001). From the CLIL classroom to teacher education: New skills, new
  • education needed?, In Piet van de Craen (ed.), The Multilingual Challenge. Printulibro Intergrup, S.A. Barcelona. ISBN 84-607-2274-0. s 125 – 137.
  • Hill, D. & Olejniczak, M. (2010). English for information technology. NY: Pearson ELT.
  • Horn, B. (2011).The future is now: Preparing a new generation of CBI teachers. English
  • Teaching Forum. 49(3).
  • Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning centered
  • approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Işık, A. (2008). Yabancı dil eğitimimizdeki yanlışlar nereden kaynaklanıyor? Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(2), 15-26.
  • İKMEP (2010). İnsan kaynaklarının mesleki eğitim yoluyla geliştirilmesi projesi.
  • İnternetten 01.08. 2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://ikmep.yok.gov.tr/
  • Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kasper, L. F. (1994). Improved reading performance for ESL students through
  • academic course pairing. Journal of Reading, 37(5), 376-384.
  • Kasper, L. F. (1997). The impact of content-based instructional programs on the
  • academic progress of ESL students. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4).
  • Kavaliauskiene, G. (2004). Students reflections on learning English for specific
  • purposes. ESP World. 2(15). İnternetten
  • info/Articles_15/issue_15.htm.
  • Kocaman, A. (1983). Orta öğretim kurumlarında yabancı dil öğretimi ve sorunları.
  • TED Bilimsel Toplantısı. 01.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://www.espworld. Ankara: Şafak Matbaası.
  • Korosidou, E. & Griva, E. (2013). ‘My country in Europe’: A content-based project for
  • teaching English as a foreign language to young learners. Journal of Languge Teaching and
  • Research,. 4(2), 229-243.
  • Koru, S. & Akesson, J. (2011). Turkey's English deficit. Economic policy research
  • foundation of Turkey. Policy Note.
  • Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching.
  • Englewood, NJ: PrenticeHall.
  • Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language
  • integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42.
  • Loranc-Paszylk, B. (2009). Integrating reading and writing into the context of CLIL
  • classroom: Some practical solutions. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 47-53.
  • McDonald, B. (1997). The impact of content based instruction: Three studies. Focus on Basics, 1(D).
  • Mehisto, P., Marsh, D. & Frigols, M. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language
  • integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Oxford: Macmillan.
  • Met, M. (1999). Content-based instruction: Defining terms, making decisions. NFLC
  • Reports. Washington, DC: The National Foreign Language Center.
  • Nunan, D. (2003).Practical English language teaching.(1st Ed.).New York. MacGraw Hill.
  • Nunn, M. (1996). What is the role of CBI for high school students who learn Japanese
  • as a heritage language (JHL) İnternetten 02.08.2012’de elde edilmiştir:
  • www.clas.pdx.edu/media/nunn.ppt.
  • Oğuz, E. (1999). İlköğretimde yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğretimi sorunları (The Problems
  • of foreign language (English) teaching in elementary schools). Unpublished Master Thesis. Kocaeli University: Kocaeli.
  • Paker, T. (2007). Problems of teaching English in schools in Çal Region and suggested
  • solutions. 21. Yüzyıla Girerken Geçmişten Günümüze Çal Yöresi: Baklan, Çal, Bekilli. Çal Yöresi Yardımlaşma ve Dayanışma Derneği Yayını, 3, 684-690.
  • Pally, M. (2002). What is learned in sustained-content writing classes along with
  • writing? Journal of Basic Writing. 21 (1), 90-115.
  • Papai, N. D. (2000). Literacy development through content based instruction: A case
  • study. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 16(2), 81-95.
  • Qi-xuan, Z. (2010). Content-based instruction in the English for music education
  • classroom. US-China Foreign Language. 8(3), 40-46.
  • Richard-Amato, P. & Snow, M.A. (Eds.) (2005). Academic success for English
  • language learners: Strategies for K-12 mainstream teachers. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
  • Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Rodgers, D. (2006). Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian
  • content-based instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 373-386.
  • Ruiz-Garrido, M., & Fortanet Gómez, I. (2009). Needs analysis in a CLIL context: A
  • transfer from ESP. In D.
  • Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. Frigols-Martin, S. Hughes, &
  • G. Langé (Eds.). CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the field (pp. 179-188). University of Jyväskylä.
  • Sabuncuoğlu, A. (2010). Meslek liselerinde özel amaçlı İngilizce öğretimine yönelik
  • gereksinim çözümlemesi uygulaması. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Short, D. J. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL
  • Quarterly, 27(4), 627-656.
  • Song, B. (2006). Content-based ESL instruction: Long-term effects and outcomes.
  • English for Specific Purposes, 25(4), 420-437.
  • Snow, A. M. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign
  • language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia, (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 303-318). Boston: Heinle ve Heinle.
  • Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1997). A six-T’s approach to content-based instruction. In
  • M.A. Snow ve D.M. Brinton (Eds.). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (s. 78-94). İnternetten 02.09.2012’deelde edilmiştir: http://uregina.ca/~laplantb/CBI/index.htm.
  • Stryker, S., & Leaver, B. (Eds.). (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language
  • education: Models and methods. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
  • Tsai, Y. & Shang, H (2010). The Impact of Content Based Language Instruction on
  • EFL Students’ Reading Performance. Asian Social Science. 6 (3), 77-85.
  • TEPAV (2011). Türkiye’deki devlet okullarında İngilizce dilinin öğretimine ilişkin
  • ulusal ihtiyaç analizi. İnternetten 03.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: www.tepav.org.tr.
  • Tilfarlioglu, F. Y. & Öztürk, A. R. (2007). An analysis of ELT teachers’ perceptions of some problems concerning the implementation of English language teaching curricula in elementary schools. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), 202- 217.
  • Tsai, Y. & Shang, H (2010). The impact of content based language instruction on EFL
  • students’ reading performance. Asian Social Science. 6 (3), 77-85.
  • Tütüniş, B. (2000). Content- based academic writing, The Internet TESL Journal, 2000.
  • Van de Craen, P, Mondt, K , Allain, L. & Gao, Y (2008). Why and how CLIL works,
  • Vienna English Working Papers, 16, 70-79.
  • Winter, W. E. (2004). The performance of ESL students in a content-linked psychology
  • course. Community Review, 18,76-82.
  • Witkin, B. R. & Altschuld, J. W. (1995). Planning and conducting needs assessments:
  • A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Wolff, D. (2003). Integrating language and content in the language classroom: Are
  • transfer of knowledge and of language ensured? ASp, 41(42), 35-46.
  • Zarobe, Y. (2008). CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the
  • Basque country. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 60-73.
  • YÖK (2007). Türkiye’nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. İnternetten 02.08.2012’de elde
  • edilmiştir:http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/10279/30217/yok_strateji_kitabi/27077070
  • cb13-4870-aba1-6742db37696

The Effects of Content Based Instruction on Academic Success of Students in the English for Specific Purposes Courses in Tertiary Level

Year 2014, Volume 12, Issue 1, 35 - 55, 01.03.2014

Abstract

Educational globalization, students’ needs and business expectations have led to various changes in theory and implementations of foreign language teaching. These changes have given rise to English for Specific Purposes in the field of foreign language teaching. However the problems about teaching foreign language caused by especially developing syllabuses have brought about failures. This study aims to determine the extent of the effects of English for specific purposes syllabus based on Theme-based teaching model of Content Based Instruction on the students' academic success in their foreign language skills and knowledge in the related subject area. In this study, pre-test – post-test control group design of experimental model was conducted. The sample of this research is constituted of the second grade students in the Computer Programming Department in Ahi Evran University Vocational Schools. An achievement test for English for specific purposes course was used as the data collection instrument of this research. In order to analyse the data, independent samples t-test was applied. One of the most important findings of the study is that the theme-based teaching model of the content-based teaching approach resulted in increasing the students' academic success of the experiment group in the dimensions of foreign language skills and content knowledge and another one is that it caused important differences in the achievement points of students in terms of content knowledge and writing skills except for reading comprehension skills. In the light of all of the findings, the theme-based model and the content-based teaching approach should be taken advantage during curriculum development studies of English for Specific Purposes courses.

References

  • Aktaş, T. (2005).Yabanci dil öğretiminde iletişimsel yeti. Journal of Language and
  • Linguistic Studies, 1(1), 89.
  • Andrade, M. S. & Makaafi, J. H. (2001). Guidelines for establishing adjunct courses at
  • the university level. TESOL Journal, 10(2/3), 33-39.
  • Arıkan, A. (2008). Computers and the internet. Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık.
  • Arslan, R. Ş. & Saka, C. K. (2010). Teaching English to science students via theme
  • based model of content- based instruction. Journal of Turkish Science Education:7(4), 26-36.
  • Avrupa Yaşam Kalitesi Araştırması (2012). İnternetten 01.03.2015’te elde edilmiştir: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/eqls.
  • Balcı, A. (2004). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler (4.Baskı).
  • Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
  • Beckett, G., Gonzalez, V. & Schwartz, H. (2004). Content-based ESL writing curiculum: A language socialization model. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2, 161-175.
  • Beckett, G. & Li, F. (2012). Content- based English education in China: Students’
  • experiences and perspectives. Journal of Contemporary Issues in Education,7 (1),47-63.
  • Berry, C.F. & Mindes, G. (1993). Planning a theme-based curriculum: Goals, themes,
  • activities, and planning guides for 4s and 5s. Glenview, IL: Good Year Books.
  • Brinton, D. M. (2003). Content-based Instruction. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Brinton, D., Snow, M.A., & Wesche, M.B. (1989). Content-based second language
  • instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
  • Brinton, D. (2007). Two for one? Language enhanced instruction. Paper presented at
  • TESOL ESP Symposium, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel
  • araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: PegemA Yayınları.
  • Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Canbay, M. O. (2006). Strengthening a content-based instruction curriculum by a needs analysis. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Coleman, J. A. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education,
  • Language Teaching, 39, 1-14.
  • Crandall, J. (1993). Content-centered language learning. İnternetten 02.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http:/www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/cranda01.html.
  • Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cummins, interdependence, the optimum age
  • Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic
  • question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121- 129.
  • Çelebi, M. D. (2006). Türkiye’de anadil eğitimi ve yabancı dil öğretimi. Sosyal Bilimler
  • Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2).
  • Çelik, S. (2003). Niğde Üniversitesi meslek yüksekokullarındaki büro yönetimi ve
  • sekreterlik bölümü öğrencilerinin akademik ve mesleki İngilizce gereksinimlerine yönelik bir araştırma. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Daryl, M. R. (2006). Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian
  • content-based instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 373-386.
  • Davies, S. (2003). “Content-based instruction in EFL contexts”. The Internet TESL
  • Journal,4 (2). İnternetten 03.10.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://iteslj.org.
  • Demircan, Ö. (1990). Yabancı dil öğretim yöntemleri. İstanbul: Ekin Yayıncılık.
  • Demirdirek, N., Özgirin, N. & Salatacı, R. (2010). E-documentaries in content-based
  • instruction (CBI) in an academic EFL setting. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 203-209.
  • Demirel, Ö. (1990). Yabancı dil öğretimi ilkeler yöntemler teknikler. Ankara: Usem Yayınları.
  • Diken, Ü. (2006). Gereksinim çözümlemesi kullanılarak uygulanan özel amaçlı dil
  • öğretimi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Isparta.
  • Doğan, E. B. (2003). Integrating language and content learning objectives: The BU adjunct model. Unpublished M. A. Thesis. Bilkent University, Ankara.
  • Dudley-Evans, T. & St John, M. (1998). Developments in ESP: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dupuy, B.C. (2000). Content-based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from
  • beginning to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annuals, 33(2), 203-223.
  • Ekici, N. (2003). A needs assessment study on English language needs of the tour
  • guidance students of Faculty of Applied Sciences at Baskent University, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans
  • Tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Enginarlar, H. (2003). İlköğretim çağında yabancı dil öğretimi, Türk eğitim sisteminde
  • yabancı dil eğitimi ve kalite arayışları. İstanbul: Özel Okullar Derneği.
  • Er, İ. (2011). Türkiye’deki bir üniversitede çalışan yabancı dil öğretmenlerinin içerik
  • temelli öğretim hakkındaki görüşleri ve uygulamaları üzerine bir çalışma. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Ersanlı, C. Y. & Kızıltan, N. ( 2007). The contributions of theme-based CBI to Turkish
  • young learners’ language development in English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3 (1).
  • Finch, C. R. & Crunkilton, J. R. (1989). Curriculum development in vocational and
  • technical education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
  • Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y. & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for
  • effective l2 pedagogy and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 603–624.
  • Grabe,W. & Stoller, E.L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In
  • M.A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (s. 5-21). White Plains, NY: Longman.
  • Heo, Y. ( 2006). Content-based instruction. TESL Working Paper Series, 4(2), 25- 32.
  • Hellekjær, G. (2001). From the CLIL classroom to teacher education: New skills, new
  • education needed?, In Piet van de Craen (ed.), The Multilingual Challenge. Printulibro Intergrup, S.A. Barcelona. ISBN 84-607-2274-0. s 125 – 137.
  • Hill, D. & Olejniczak, M. (2010). English for information technology. NY: Pearson ELT.
  • Horn, B. (2011).The future is now: Preparing a new generation of CBI teachers. English
  • Teaching Forum. 49(3).
  • Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning centered
  • approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Işık, A. (2008). Yabancı dil eğitimimizdeki yanlışlar nereden kaynaklanıyor? Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(2), 15-26.
  • İKMEP (2010). İnsan kaynaklarının mesleki eğitim yoluyla geliştirilmesi projesi.
  • İnternetten 01.08. 2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://ikmep.yok.gov.tr/
  • Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kasper, L. F. (1994). Improved reading performance for ESL students through
  • academic course pairing. Journal of Reading, 37(5), 376-384.
  • Kasper, L. F. (1997). The impact of content-based instructional programs on the
  • academic progress of ESL students. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4).
  • Kavaliauskiene, G. (2004). Students reflections on learning English for specific
  • purposes. ESP World. 2(15). İnternetten
  • info/Articles_15/issue_15.htm.
  • Kocaman, A. (1983). Orta öğretim kurumlarında yabancı dil öğretimi ve sorunları.
  • TED Bilimsel Toplantısı. 01.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: http://www.espworld. Ankara: Şafak Matbaası.
  • Korosidou, E. & Griva, E. (2013). ‘My country in Europe’: A content-based project for
  • teaching English as a foreign language to young learners. Journal of Languge Teaching and
  • Research,. 4(2), 229-243.
  • Koru, S. & Akesson, J. (2011). Turkey's English deficit. Economic policy research
  • foundation of Turkey. Policy Note.
  • Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching.
  • Englewood, NJ: PrenticeHall.
  • Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language
  • integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42.
  • Loranc-Paszylk, B. (2009). Integrating reading and writing into the context of CLIL
  • classroom: Some practical solutions. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 47-53.
  • McDonald, B. (1997). The impact of content based instruction: Three studies. Focus on Basics, 1(D).
  • Mehisto, P., Marsh, D. & Frigols, M. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language
  • integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Oxford: Macmillan.
  • Met, M. (1999). Content-based instruction: Defining terms, making decisions. NFLC
  • Reports. Washington, DC: The National Foreign Language Center.
  • Nunan, D. (2003).Practical English language teaching.(1st Ed.).New York. MacGraw Hill.
  • Nunn, M. (1996). What is the role of CBI for high school students who learn Japanese
  • as a heritage language (JHL) İnternetten 02.08.2012’de elde edilmiştir:
  • www.clas.pdx.edu/media/nunn.ppt.
  • Oğuz, E. (1999). İlköğretimde yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğretimi sorunları (The Problems
  • of foreign language (English) teaching in elementary schools). Unpublished Master Thesis. Kocaeli University: Kocaeli.
  • Paker, T. (2007). Problems of teaching English in schools in Çal Region and suggested
  • solutions. 21. Yüzyıla Girerken Geçmişten Günümüze Çal Yöresi: Baklan, Çal, Bekilli. Çal Yöresi Yardımlaşma ve Dayanışma Derneği Yayını, 3, 684-690.
  • Pally, M. (2002). What is learned in sustained-content writing classes along with
  • writing? Journal of Basic Writing. 21 (1), 90-115.
  • Papai, N. D. (2000). Literacy development through content based instruction: A case
  • study. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 16(2), 81-95.
  • Qi-xuan, Z. (2010). Content-based instruction in the English for music education
  • classroom. US-China Foreign Language. 8(3), 40-46.
  • Richard-Amato, P. & Snow, M.A. (Eds.) (2005). Academic success for English
  • language learners: Strategies for K-12 mainstream teachers. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
  • Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Rodgers, D. (2006). Developing content and form: Encouraging evidence from Italian
  • content-based instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 373-386.
  • Ruiz-Garrido, M., & Fortanet Gómez, I. (2009). Needs analysis in a CLIL context: A
  • transfer from ESP. In D.
  • Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. Frigols-Martin, S. Hughes, &
  • G. Langé (Eds.). CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the field (pp. 179-188). University of Jyväskylä.
  • Sabuncuoğlu, A. (2010). Meslek liselerinde özel amaçlı İngilizce öğretimine yönelik
  • gereksinim çözümlemesi uygulaması. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Short, D. J. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL
  • Quarterly, 27(4), 627-656.
  • Song, B. (2006). Content-based ESL instruction: Long-term effects and outcomes.
  • English for Specific Purposes, 25(4), 420-437.
  • Snow, A. M. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign
  • language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia, (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 303-318). Boston: Heinle ve Heinle.
  • Stoller, F. & Grabe, W. (1997). A six-T’s approach to content-based instruction. In
  • M.A. Snow ve D.M. Brinton (Eds.). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (s. 78-94). İnternetten 02.09.2012’deelde edilmiştir: http://uregina.ca/~laplantb/CBI/index.htm.
  • Stryker, S., & Leaver, B. (Eds.). (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language
  • education: Models and methods. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
  • Tsai, Y. & Shang, H (2010). The Impact of Content Based Language Instruction on
  • EFL Students’ Reading Performance. Asian Social Science. 6 (3), 77-85.
  • TEPAV (2011). Türkiye’deki devlet okullarında İngilizce dilinin öğretimine ilişkin
  • ulusal ihtiyaç analizi. İnternetten 03.09.2012’de elde edilmiştir: www.tepav.org.tr.
  • Tilfarlioglu, F. Y. & Öztürk, A. R. (2007). An analysis of ELT teachers’ perceptions of some problems concerning the implementation of English language teaching curricula in elementary schools. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), 202- 217.
  • Tsai, Y. & Shang, H (2010). The impact of content based language instruction on EFL
  • students’ reading performance. Asian Social Science. 6 (3), 77-85.
  • Tütüniş, B. (2000). Content- based academic writing, The Internet TESL Journal, 2000.
  • Van de Craen, P, Mondt, K , Allain, L. & Gao, Y (2008). Why and how CLIL works,
  • Vienna English Working Papers, 16, 70-79.
  • Winter, W. E. (2004). The performance of ESL students in a content-linked psychology
  • course. Community Review, 18,76-82.
  • Witkin, B. R. & Altschuld, J. W. (1995). Planning and conducting needs assessments:
  • A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Wolff, D. (2003). Integrating language and content in the language classroom: Are
  • transfer of knowledge and of language ensured? ASp, 41(42), 35-46.
  • Zarobe, Y. (2008). CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the
  • Basque country. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 60-73.
  • YÖK (2007). Türkiye’nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. İnternetten 02.08.2012’de elde
  • edilmiştir:http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/10279/30217/yok_strateji_kitabi/27077070
  • cb13-4870-aba1-6742db37696

Details

Other ID JA64BH79NU
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Elif İLHAN This is me


Yücel KAYABAŞI This is me

Publication Date March 1, 2014
Application Date March 1, 2014
Acceptance Date
Published in Issue Year 2014, Volume 12, Issue 1

Cite

APA İlhan, E. & Kayabaşı, Y. (2014). YÜKSEKÖĞRETİM DÜZEYİNDEKİ ÖZEL AMAÇLI İNGİLİZCE DERSLERİNDE İÇERİK TABANLI YABANCI DİL ÖĞRETİM YAKLAŞIMININ ÖĞRENCİLERİN AKADEMİK BAŞARILARINA ETKİSİ . Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi , 12 (1) , 35-55 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tebd/issue/26089/274932

The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences is published by Gazi University.