EFL Ortamında Stratejik Ana Dili Kullanımı: Yeterlik Düzeylerine Göre Öğretmen ve Öğrenci Bakış Açıları

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki bir vakıf üniversitesinin İngilizce hazırlık programında kayıtlı 120 EFL öğrencisi ile bu programda ders veren 15 öğretmenin, birinci dilin (L1) stratejik kullanımına yönelik tutumlarını; dil yeterlik düzeyleri ve öğretim deneyimi değişkenlerine odaklanarak incelemektedir. 120 öğrenci ve 15 öğretmene Likert tipi anket ve açık uçlu metafor istemi uygulanmış; 12 öğrenci ve 5 öğretmenle yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Nicel analizler, özellikle düşük dil yeterlik A1 ve A2 düzeylerinde; dilbilgisi anlatımı, görevlerin netleştirilmesi ve kaygının azaltılması amacıyla seçici L1 kullanımına yönelik olumlu bir tutum olduğunu; yeterlik düzeyleri arasında anlamlı farklılıklar bulunduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Dil yeterlik düzeyi arttıkça L1 kullanımına yönelik desteğin azaldığı ve tutumların yeterlik düzeyine duyarlı bir örüntü sergilediği görülmüştür. Görüşme bulgularıyla desteklendiği üzere, öğretmen anketlerinden elde edilen veriler betimsel olarak yorumlanmıştır. Veriler, öğretmenlerin dil kullanım pratiklerini mesleki deneyim ve kurumsal beklentilere göre farklı şekilde konumlandırdığını göstermektedir. Metafor yanıtları, öğrencilerin L1 kullanımını dil yeterlik düzeylerine bağlı olarak nasıl farklı kavramsallaştırdıklarını vurgulamıştır. Alt düzeydeki öğrenciler sıklıkla duygusal veya bilişsel desteğe atıfta bulunurken, üst düzeydeki öğrenciler daha sınırlı ve stratejik bir kullanımı savunmuştur. Bulgular, L1 kullanımına yönelik tutumların bağlama bağımlı olduğunu ve büyük ölçüde öğrenci yeterliği tarafından şekillendirildiğini; öğretim deneyimi ve kurumsal normların ise bu kullanımın nasıl müzakere edileceğini belirlediğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• stratejik birinci dil kullanımı
• EFL tutumları
• öğretmen deneyimi
• dil yeterliliği
• metafor analizi

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu çalışma herhangi bir kurum tarafından finanse edilmemiştir.

Etik Beyan

Araştırmaya başlanmadan önce, İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi Etik Kurulu'ndan etik onay alınmıştır (Onay No: 2025/13). Veri toplama süreci, ancak kurumsal onayın alınması ve tüm katılımcıların bilgilendirilmiş onamlarının sağlanmasının ardından başlatılmıştır. Katılımcılara gizlilik ve anonimlik güvencesi verilmiş olup, görüşme dökümlerinde takma adlar kullanılmıştır. Nicel ve nitel verilerin analizi sonucunda çeşitli örüntüler ve temalar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu bulgular, izleyen bölümde araştırma sorularına göre sunulmaktadır.

Teşekkür

Bu çalışma herhangi bir kurum tarafından finanse edilmemiştir.

Strategic First Language Use in EFL Across Proficiency Levels: Teacher and Student Perspectives

Öz

The study examines the attitudes of English preparatory program students and instructors toward the strategic use of first language (L1) in a Turkish foundation university, focusing on variation across proficiency levels and teaching experience. A Likert-scale questionnaire including an open-ended metaphor task was administered to 120 students and 15 instructors. Semi-structured interviews were subsequently conducted with 12 students and 5 instructors. Quantitative analyses revealed generally positive support for selective L1 use, particularly at A1 and A2 levels for grammar explanation, task clarification, and anxiety reduction. Significant differences were found across proficiency levels, with support decreasing as proficiency increased. Due to the small teacher sample, teacher questionnaire data were interpreted descriptively and contextualized through qualitative interview findings. The data revealed that the instructors positioned their language use practices differently as a function of professional experience and institutional expectations. Metaphor responses highlighted how differently learners conceptualized L1 use according to proficiency level. Lower-level students often cited emotional or cognitive support while higher-level students suggested a more limited and strategic use. The findings revealed that L1 use attitudes are contextually dependent and largely learner proficiency-driven. Teaching experience and institutional norms shape how L1 use is negotiated in preparatory EFL contexts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• strategic L1 use
• EFL attitudes
• teacher experience
• language proficiency
• metaphor analysis

Destekleyen Kurum

This study was not funded by any institution.

Etik Beyan

Prior to commencing the research, ethical permission was acquired from Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University’s Ethics Committee (Approval No. 2025/13). Only after the institutional approval was obtained and the informed consent of all participants was secured, data collection began. Participants were ensured confidentiality and anonymity and used pseudonyms in the interview transcripts. The analysis of quantitative and qualitative data yielded some patterns and themes. These are displayed in the following section according to the research questions.

Teşekkür

This study was not funded by any institution.

Kaynakça

1. Auerbach, E. R. (1993). Reexamining English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27(1), 9-32. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586949
2. Balabakgil, B., & 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. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.6p.15
3. Cameron, L., & Low, G. (1999). Metaphor. Language Teaching, 32(2), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800014526
4. Carless, D. (2008). Student use of the mother tongue in the task-based classroom. ELT Journal, 62(4), 331-338. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm090
5. Chambers, F. (1991). Promoting use of the target language in the classroom. Language Learning Journal, 4(1), 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571739185200411
6. Codina Camó, A., & Pladevall Ballester, E. (2015). The effects of using L1 translation on young learners' foreign language vocabulary learning. Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada, 15, 109-134. https://doi.org/10.12795/elia.2015.i15.06
7. Cook, V. J. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second Language Research, 7(2), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/026765839100700203
8. Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(3), 402-423. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402

9. Cook, V. (2008). Second language learning and language teaching (4th ed.). Hodder Education.
10. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
11. De la Fuente, M. J., & Goldenberg, C. (2022). Understanding the role of the first language (L1) in instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): Effects of using a principled approach to L1 in the beginner foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 943-962. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820921882
12. García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Palgrave Pivot. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765
13. Hall, G., & Cook, G. (2012). Own language use in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271-308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000067
14. Jiménez, S. P. G. (2024). The use of L1 in a beginner L2 English classroom: A case study in Mexico. Open Journal for Studies in Linguistics, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.32591/coas.ojsl.0702.02059g
15. Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (Eds.). (2013). Researching intercultural learning: Investigations in language and education. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137291646
16. Kayaoğlu, M. N. (2012). The use of mother tongue in foreign language teaching from teachers' practice and perspective. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 32(2), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.9779/PUJE492
17. Kim, S., & Elder, C. (2005). Language choices and pedagogic functions in the foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(4), 365-397. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr176oa
18. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.
19. Levine, G. S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first language use, and anxiety: Report of a questionnaire study. The Modern Language Journal, 87(3), 343-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00194
20. Levine, G. S. (2011). Code choice in the language classroom. Multilingual Matters.
21. Lewis, G., Jones, B., & Baker, C. (2012). Translanguaging: Origins and structure. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(6), 641-654. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.703899
22. Macaro, E. (2001). Analysing student teachers’ codeswitching in foreign language classrooms: Theories and decision making. The Modern Language Journal, 85(4), 531-548. https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00124
23. Macaro, E. (2009). Teacher use of codeswitching in the second language classroom: Exploring “optimal” use. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First language use in second and foreign language learning (pp. 35-49). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691972-005
24. Nation, I. S. P. (2003). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Asian EFL Journal, 5(2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.26686/wgtn.12560333
25. Oxford, R. L., Tomlinson, S., Barcelos, A., Harrington, C., Lavine, R., Saleh, A., & Longhini, A. (1998). Clashing metaphors about classroom teachers. System, 26(1), 3-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00071-7
26. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford University Press.
27. Sali, P. (2014). An analysis of the teachers’ use of L1 in Turkish EFL classrooms. System, 42, 308-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.021
28. Sarıçoban, A. (2010). Should native language be allowed in foreign language classes? Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 10(38), 164-178.
29. Selvi, A. F., & Yazan, B. (2013). Teaching English as an international language. TESOL Publications.
30. Sert, O. (2021). Transforming CA findings into future L2 teaching practices: Challenges and prospects for teacher education. In S. Kunitz, N. Markee, & O. Sert (Eds.), Classroom-based conversation analytic research: Theoretical and applied perspectives on pedagogy (pp. 259-279). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52193-6_13
31. Smagul, A. (2024). L1 and translation use in EFL classrooms: A quantitative survey on teachers’ attitudes in Kazakhstani secondary schools. System, 125, 103443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103443
32. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 190-214. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.2.190
33. Tang, J. (2002). Using L1 in the English classroom. English Teaching Forum, 40(1), 36-43.
34. Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the first language in foreign language teaching. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(4), 531-540. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.4.531
35. Turnbull, M., & Dailey-O’Cain, J. (2009). First language use in second and foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters.
36. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
37. Zhou, X., & Mann, S. (2021). Translanguaging in a Chinese university CLIL classroom: Teacher strategies and student attitudes. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 265-289. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2021.11.2.5