Yükseköğrenim İngilizce Sınıflarında Göndergesel Sorulara Karşılık Öğrencilerin Ana Dil Kullanımı

Abstract

Öğretmen soruları İngilizce sınıflarında etkileşimi başlatmaları ve sözlü üretimi geliştirmeleri nedeniyle önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Öğretmen soruları arasında yanıtları öğretmen tarafından bilinmeyen ve öğrencilerin kişisel bilgileri, duygu ve düşüncelerini almak için sorulan göndergesel sorular özellikle önemlidir zira bu türden sorular kişinin kendini ifade etmesini, derin düşünmeyi ve karmaşık dil kullanımı gerektirmektedir. Yabancı dil olarak İngilizce sınıflarında öğrencilerin göndergesel sorulara karşılık ana dil kullanması bu soruların karmaşık ve çok yönlü yanıtlar gerektirmesi ve yeterlilik ve/veya motivasyon eksikliği gibi başka faktörler nedeniyle muhtemeldir ancak bu konu henüz araştırılmamıştır. Bu çalışma İngilizce öğretmenlerinin göndergesel sorulara karşılık öğrencilerin ana dil kullanımıyla ilgili betimlemelerini ve görüşlerini analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmaya Türkiye’de yükseköğrenim düzeyinde öğretim yapan 31 öğretim görevlisi katılmıştır. Veriler açık uçlu anketler, odak grup mülakatları ve öğretmen günlükleri aracılığıyla toplanmış ve tematik analiz ile incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar katılımcıların öğrencilerin göndergesel sorulara karşılık ana dil kullandıkları bağlamlara ilişkin betimlemelerini, ana dil kullanımının nedenleri ile ilgili görüşlerini ve bu konuya ilişkin tutumlarını ortaya koymaktadır. Türünün ilk örneği olan çalışmanın İngilizce dili öğretilen bağlamlara yönelik kayda değer sonuçları ve çıkarımları vardır.

Keywords

• Göndergesel sorular
• ana dil kullanımı
• düzenek değiştirme
• İngilizce dili öğretimi
• yabancı dil olarak İngilizce

Students’ Use of L1 in Response to Referential Questions in Tertiary English Classes

Abstract

Teacher questions play a significant role in English classrooms since they trigger interaction and promote oral production. Among teacher questions, referential questions that seek information not known by the teacher and are asked to elicit students’ personal data, feelings, and ideas are particularly important because they require self-expression, in-depth thinking and complex use of language. It is likely for students in English classrooms to use L1 in response to referential questions due to the sophisticated responses they require and other factors such as lack of proficiency and/or motivation, yet the issue has not yet been investigated. This study aims to analyse English teachers’ descriptions and views about the students’ use of L1 in response to referential questions. Thirty-one instructors teaching at the tertiary level in Turkey participated in the study. The data were collected via open-ended questionnaires, focus group interviews, and teacher journals, and analysed via thematic analysis. The findings display the participants’ descriptions of the contexts of students’ L1 use in response to referential questions, their views on the reasons for the use of L1 and their attitudes about the issue. The study, as the first of its kind, has noteworthy conclusions and implications for English language teaching contexts.

Keywords

• Referential questions
• use of L1
• code-switching
• English language teaching
• English as a foreign language

References

1. Atkinson, D. (1993). Teaching Monolingual Classes. London: Longman.
2. Balabakgil, M. and Mede, E. (2016). The Use of L1 as a Teaching Strategy by Native and Non-Native EFL Instructors at a Language Preparatory Program in Turkey. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(6), 15-35.
3. Bozorgian, H. and Fallah, S. (2017). EFL Learner’s Speaking Development: Asking Referential Questions. Malaysian Journal of Education, 42(2), 27-36.
4. Brock, C. A. (1986). The Effects of Referential Questions on ESL Classroom Discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 77-59.
5. Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Pearson Longman. Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
6. David, F. O. (2007). Teachers’ Questioning Behavior and ESL Classroom Interaction Pattern. Humanity and Social Science Journal, 2(2), 127-131.
7. Duff, P. A. and Polio, C. G. (1990). How Much Foreign Language Is There in the Foreign Language Classroom? Modern Language Journal, 74, 154-166.
8. Erlinda, R. and Dewi, S.R. (2014). Teacher’s Questions in EFL Classroom. Ta’dib, 12(2), 177-188.

9. Farahian, M. and Rezaee, M. (2012). A Case Study of an EFL Teacher's Type of Questions: An Investigation into Classroom Interaction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 161-167.
10. Fitriani, S.S. and Amilia, K. (2017). Frequency of Questions in an EFL Conversation Class. English Education Journal (EEJ), 8(4), 457-468.
11. Galloway, N. and Rose, H. (2018). Incorporating Global Englishes into the English classroom. ELT Journal, 72(1), 3–14.
12. Harmer, J. (1983). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
13. Kayaoglu, N. (2012). The Use of Mother Tongue in Foreign Language Teaching from Teachers’ Practice and Perspectives. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 25-35.
14. Kemaloglu-Er, E. and Bayyurt, Y. (2018). ELF-Aware Pre-Service Teacher Education: Teaching Practices and Reflections from Turkey. In L. Cavalheiro (Ed.), Preparing English Language Teachers for Today’s Globalized World (47-63). Lisbon: Húmus and University of Lisbon Centre for English Studies.
15. Kemaloglu-Er, E. and Bayyurt, Y. (2019a). ELF-Awareness in Teaching and Teacher Education: Explicit and Implicit Ways of Integrating ELF into the English Language Classroom. In N. C. Sifakis and N. Tsantila (Eds.), English as a Lingua Franca for EFL Contexts (147-163). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
16. Kemaloglu-Er, E. and Bayyurt, Y. (2019b). Project-Based and ELF-Aware Pre-Service Teacher Education in Turkey: Sample Cases of Discovery, Creativity, Interaction and Multicultural Diversity. In A. Gras-Velazquez (Ed.), Project-Based Learning in Second Language Acquisition: Building Communities of Practice in Higher Education (82-97). London: Routledge.
17. Koylu, Z. (2018). The Use of L1 in the Tertiary L2 Classroom: Code-switching Factors, Functions, and Attitudes in Turkey. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 15(2), 271–289.
18. Lally, C. G. (2000). First Language Influences in Second Language Composition: The Effect of Pre- writing. Foreign Language Annals, 33(4), 428-432.
19. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Lin, A. M. Y. (2008). Codeswitching in the Classroom: Research Paradigms And Approaches. In K. A.King, and N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia Of Language And Education - Volume 10: Research Methods in Language and Education (pp. 273-286). New York: Springer Science.
21. Lindenmeyer, S. (1990). Study of Referential And Display Questions and Their Responses in Adult ESL Reading Classes (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Portland State University, Portland, USA.
22. Long, M. H. and Sato, C. J. (1983). Classroom Foreigner Talk Discourse: Forms and Functions of Teachers’ Questions. In H. W. Seliger and M. H. Long (Eds.), Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 3-34). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
23. Macaro, E. (2009). Teacher Use of Code Switching in the Second Language Classroom: Exploring “Optimal” Use. In M. Turnbull and J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First Language Use in Second and Foreign Language Learning (pp. 35-49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Macaro, E. and Lee, J. H. (2013). Teacher Language Background, Codeswitching, and English-Only Instruction: Does Age Make a Difference to Learners' Attitudes? TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 717- 742.
25. Martin-Jones, M. (1995). Codeswitching in the Classroom: Two Decades of Research. In L. Milroy and P.Muysken (Eds.), One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Codeswitching (pp. 90–111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Miles, R. (2004). Evaluating the Use of L1 in the English Language Classroom. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
27. Morell, T. (2007). What Enhances EFL Students' Participation in Lecture Discourse? Student, Lecturer and Discourse Perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 222-237.
28. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Nunan, D. and Lamb, C. (1996). The Self-Directed Teacher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Ozcan, S. (2010). The Effects of Asking Referential Questions on the Participation and Oral Production of Lower Level Language Learners in Reading Classes (Unpublished MA Thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
31. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research And Evaluation Methods (3rd Edition). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Qashoa, S. H. (2012). Effects of Teacher Question Types and Syntactic Structures on EFL Classroom Interaction. The International Journal of Social Sciences, 7(1), 52-62.
33. Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Sali, P. (2014). An Analysis of the Teachers' Use Of L1 In Turkish EFL Classrooms. System, 42, 308– 318.
35. Sampson, A. (2012). Learner Codeswitching versus English Only. ELT Journal, 66(3), 293-303.
36. Shomoossi, N. (2004). The effect of teachers’ questioning behavior on EFL classroom interaction: A classroom research study. The Reading Matrix, 4(2), 96-104.
37. Sutherland, S. (2012). Native and Non-Native English Teachers in the Classroom: A Reexamination. Arab World English Journal, 3(4), 58-71.
38. Tasci, S., and Aksu Atac, B. (2020). L1 Use in L2 Teaching: The Amount, Functions, and Perception towards the Use of L1 in Turkish Primary School Context. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 7(2), 655-667.
39. Thompson, G. (1991). Training Teachers To Ask Questions. ELT Journal, 51, 99-105.
40. Thornbury, S. (1996). Teachers Research Teacher Talk. ELT Journal, 50, 279-289.
41. Timucin, M. and Baytar, I. (2015). The functions of the use of L1: Insights from an EFL classroom. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 23(1), 241-252.
42. Turnbull, M. (2001). There is A Role For the L1 in Second and Foreign Language Teaching. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(4), 531–540.
43. Üstünel, E. and Seedhouse, P. (2005). Why That, in that Language, Right Now? Codeswitching and Pedagogical Focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15(3), 302–324.
44. Vaezi, S. and M. Mirzaei (2007). The Effect of Using Translation from L1 To L2 as a Teaching Techniqueon the Improvement of EFL Learners’ Linguistic Accuracy – Focus on Form. Humanising Language Teaching, 9(5), Retrieved from http://old.hltmag.co.uk/sep07/mart03.htm
45. Walsh, S. and Li, L. (2013). Conversations as Space for Learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 247-266.
46. Weschler, R. (1997). Uses of Japanese in the English Classroom: Introducing the Functional-Translation Method. Kyoritsu Women's University Department of International Studies Journal, 12, 87-110.
47. Xu, Q. (2012). A Tentative Analysis of Code-Switching in College Bilingual Education. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8(4), 30–33.
48. Yang, C. C. R. (2010). Teacher Questions in Second Language Classrooms: An Investigation of Three Case Studies. Asian EFL Journal, 12(1), 181- 201.
49. Yıldız, M. and Yeşilyurt, S. (2017). Use or Avoid? The Perceptions of Prospective English Teachers in Turkey about L1 Use in English Classes. English Language Teaching, 10(1), 84-97.
50. Yilmaz, S.D. (2016). The Effect of Syntactically Different Display and Referential Questions on Students’ Responses in EFL Classes. International Journal of Language Academy, 4(1), 315-330.
51. Zabrodskaja, A. (2007). Russian-Estonian Codeswitching in the University. Arizona Working Papers in SLA and Teaching, 14, 123-139.
52. Zohrabi, M., Yaghoubi-Notash, M. and Khiahani, S.Y. (2014). Teachers’ Use of Display vs. Referential Questions Across Different Proficiency Levels. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(2), 96-100.