Üniversitede İngiliz Dili Bölümü Öğrencilerinin Acil Uzaktan Öğrenme, Öğrenen Özerkliği ve Asenkron Video Derslerindeki Ana Dil Kullanımına İlişkin Görüş ve Algılarının Araştırılması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, üniversite öğrencilerinin acil uzaktan öğrenme, özbildirim yoluyla belirlenmiş öğrenen özerkliği ve ana dilin (L1) asenkron sınıflarda (önceden kaydedilmiş video derslerinde) kullanımları konusundaki görüş ve algıları incelenmiştir. Katılımcılar ağırlıklı olarak Türkiye'de bir devlet üniversitesinde İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı (ELL) okuyan birinci sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşmaktadır. Veriler, kolayda örneklem yöntemi (n = 86) kullanılarak çapraz kesişimli, beş bölümden oluşan web tabanlı bir anket aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Çalışma, (a) öğrencilerin acil uzaktan öğrenme hakkındaki görüşlerini, (b) onların özbildirimi yoluyla belirlenmiş öğrenen özerkliği düzeylerini, (c) öğrencilerin asenkron video derslerinde öğretim üyelerinin ana dil kullanımına ilişkin görüşlerini, ve (d) bu değişkenlerin birbiriyle nasıl ilişkili olduğunu ve bunun diğer özgeçmiş değişkenleri ile tahmin edilebileceğine dair ilginç bulgular ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca nitel sonuçlara göre, öğrencilerin yeni öğrenme deneyimleriyle ilgili görüşleri farklılık gösterdiği görülmüş olup teknik konular, etkileşim eksikliği ve psikolojik problemler çözülmesi gereken en acil konular olarak belirlenmiştir. Öğrencilerin de oldukça özerk olduğu tespit edilmiş ve bunun acil uzaktan öğrenmeye verdikleri puanlarla ilişkili olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı öğrencilerinin büyük bir kısmı video derslerinde ana dil kullanımının sınırlı olması koşuluyla kabul edilebilir olduğunu düşünmektedir. Bulguların, yükseköğretim kurumlarında İngilizce anadal eğitimi veren akademisyenlerin yanı sıra öğrenme yönetim sistemi tasarımcılarına da ilgili konularda ışık tutacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Asenkron Öğrenme
• Koronavirüs hastalığı
• İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Öğrencileri
• Öğrenme Yönetim Sistemi
• Kaydedilmiş video dersleri
• Türk öğrenciler

Exploring English Majors’ Views and Perceptions of Emergency Remote Learning, Learner Autonomy, and L1 Use in Asynchronous Video Lectures

Öz

The purpose of the present study was to explore university students’ views and perceptions of emergency remote learning (ERL), their self-reported degree of learner autonomy, and the use of the first language (L1) in asynchronous classes (i.e., pre-recorded video lectures) during their transition to ERL in Spring 2020. The participants were predominantly freshmen students studying English Language and Literature (ELL) at a public university in Turkey. The data was collected via a cross-sectional five-part web-based questionnaire using convenience sampling (n = 86). The study reveals interesting findings regarding (a) students’ views about ERL, (b) their self-reported degree of learner autonomy, (c) their views about lecturers’ L1 use in asynchronous video lectures, and (d) whether and how these variables are interrelated and can be predicted by background variables. The qualitative findings further suggest that students hold mixed opinions regarding their new learning experience and mention the technical issues, lack of contact, and psychological problems as the most urgent issues to be addressed. Students were also found to be quite autonomous, and this was correlated with ERL ratings. Additionally, a majority of the ELL students considered the use of L1 in video lectures acceptable as long as it was limited. The findings are likely to inform the academicians who teach English majors at higher education institutions as well as learning management system designers by providing them with various insights.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Asynchronous Learning
• COVID-19
• ELL Students
• Learning Management System
• Pre-recorded video lectures
• Turkish students

Kaynakça

1. Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology 2(1), 45-51. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.2020261309
2. Adu, P. (2019). A step-by-step guide to qualitative data coding. Routledge.
3. Alan, Y., Biçer, N., & Can, F. (2020). Perspectives of pre-service teachers on distance education: Covid-19 process. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica, 29(5), 1972-1984. https://doi.org/10.24205/03276716.2020.1193
4. Almohaimeed, M. S., & Almurshed, H. M. (2018). Foreign language learners’ attitudes and perceptions of L1 use in L2 classroom. Arab World English Journal, 9(4), 433-446. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no4.32
5. Altunay, D. (2013). Language learning activities of distance EFL learners in the Turkish open education system as the indicator of their learner autonomy. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 14(4), 296-307. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.30083
6. Andrade, M. S., & Bunker, E. L. (2009). A model for self‐regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30(1), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910902845956
7. Arık, S. (2021). Distance education learning environments during COVID-19 pandemic from student perspectives: A study in Turkish higher education. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(2), 103-118. http://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2021269494
8. Ataş, U., & Sağın-Şimşek, Ç. (2021). Discourse and educational functions of students’ and teachers’ code-switching in EFL classrooms in Turkey. Linguistics and Education, 65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2021.100981

9. Bagriacik Yilmaz, A., & Banyard, P. (2020). Engagement in Distance Education Settings: A Trend Analysis. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 101-120. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.690362
10. Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Pearson Education.
11. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., Wallet, P. A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074003379
12. Bolliger, D. U., & Wasilik, O. (2009). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with online teaching and learning in higher education. Distance Education, 30(1), 103-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910902845949
13. Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., . . .Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 Pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1-126. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3878572
14. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
15. Breeze, R., & Roothooft, H. (2021). Using the L1 in university-level EMI: Attitudes among lecturers in Spain. Language Awareness, 30(2), 195-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1903911
16. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
17. Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 147-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428103251541
18. Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 402-423. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
19. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109-134.
20. Dinçer, P. (2021). Emergency remote teaching and learning behind the screen: A case study on the perspectives of freshman ELT students and their instructors. [Master’s Thesis]. Anadolu University. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/giris.jsp
21. Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype. E-learning, 1(4), 1-4.
22. Durak, G., & Çankaya, S. (2020). Undergraduate students’ views about emergency distance education during the Covid-19 pandemic. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(1), 122-147. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i1.3441
23. Erarslan, A. (2021). English language teaching and learning during Covid-19: A global perspective on the first year. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 4(2), 349-367. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.907757
24. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272-299.
25. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160.
26. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
27. Firat, M. (2016). Measuring the e-Learning Autonomy of Distance Education Students. Open Praxis, 8(3), 191-201. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.3.310
28. Ford, J. K., MacCallum, R. C., & Tait, M. (1986). The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: A critical review and analysis. Personnel Psychology, 39(2), 291-314.
29. Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148
30. Gorsuch, R. L. (2003). Factor analysis. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 2. Research methods in psychology (pp. 143-64). Wiley.
31. Grim, F. (2010). L1 in the L2 classroom at the secondary and college levels: A comparison of functions and use by teachers. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(2), 193-209.
32. Güler, A. T., & Esen, M. (2021). EFL Teachers’ Perceptions on Learner Autonomy in Online Instruction during the Lockdown Period. English as a Foreign Language International Journal, 25(6), 6-25.
33. Güneş, S. (2018). Asynchronous distance learning and blended learning in terms of learner autonomy, motivation and academic success in teaching english. [Master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University. http://www.openaccess.hacettepe.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/handle/11655/5292
34. Henson, K. R., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282485
35. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning.
36. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Pergamon.
37. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
38. Hussein, E., Daoud, S., Alrabaiah, H., & Badawi, R. (2020). Exploring undergraduate students’ attitudes towards emergency online learning during COVID-19: A case from the UAE. Children and Youth Services Review, 119, 105699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105699
39. IBM Corp. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. IBM Corp.
40. Istifci, I. (2019). Code-switching in tertiary-level EFL classrooms: Perceptions of teachers. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(4), 1287-2019. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.668428
41. The jamovi project. (2021). jamovi. (Version 1.6) [Computer Software]. https://www.jamovi.org.
42. Jolliffe, I. T. (1972). Discarding variables in a principal component analysis. I: Artificial data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C (Applied Statistics), 21(2), 160-173. https://doi.org/10.2307/2346488
43. Karakas, A. (2016). Turkish lecturers’ views on the place of mother tongue in the teaching of content courses through English medium. Asian Englishes, 18(3), 242-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2016.1229831
44. Karakuş, N., Ucuzsatar, N., Karacaoğlu, M. Ö., Esendemir, N., & Bayraktar, D. (2020). Turkish teacher candidates’ views on distance education. RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 19, 220-241. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.752297
45. Karim, M. R., & Hasan, M. (2020). Virtual classes during COVID-19 pandemic in tertiary level in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and prospects from the students’ perspective. Asian EFL journal, 27(51), 205-219.
46. Kirmizi, Ö. (2015). The influence of learner readiness on student satisfaction and academic achievement in an online program at higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(1), 133-142.
47. Köylü, 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.
48. Lapitan, L., Jr., Tiangco, C. E., Sumalinog, D., Sabarillo, N. S., & Diaz, J. M. (2021). An effective blended online teaching and learning strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education for Chemical Engineers, 35, 116-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.01.012
49. LaPointe, L., & Reisetter, M. (2008). Belonging online: Students’ perceptions of the value and efficacy of an online learning community. International Journal on E-learning, 7(4), 641-665.
50. Lasagabaster, D. (2013). The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: The teachers’ perspective. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 6(2), 1-21.
51. Lischer, S., Safi, N., & Dickson, C. (2021). Remote learning and students’ mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic: A mixed-method enquiry. Prospects. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09530-w
52. Loewen, S., & Gonulal, T. (2015). Exploratory factor analysis and principal components analysis. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 182-212). Routledge.
53. Macaro, E. (2017). Students’ strategies in response to teachers’ second language explanations of lexical items. The Language Learning Journal, 45, 352-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.905971
54. Macaro, E., Tian, L., & Chu, L. (2018). First and second language use in English medium instruction contexts. Language Teaching Research, 24(3), 382-402. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818783231
55. Macaskill, A., & Taylor, E. (2010). The development of a brief measure of learner autonomy in university students. Studies in higher education, 35(3), 351-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903502703
56. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84
57. McMillan, B., & Turnbull, M. (2009). Teachers’ use of the first language in french immersion: Revisiting a core principle. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First Language Use in Second and Foreign Language Learning (pp. 15-34). Multilingual Matters.
58. Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129-135.
59. Moore, M. G. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning. Convergence, 5(2), 76-88.
60. Moore, M. G. (2019). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 32-46). Routledge.
61. Niemiec, C., & Ryan, R. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom. Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878509104318
62. Ozer, O., & Yukselir, C. (2021). ‘Am I aware of my roles as a learner?’ the relationships of learner autonomy, self-direction and goal commitment to academic achievement among Turkish EFL learners. Language Awareness, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1936539
63. Öz, H., & Karaazmak, F. (2019). L2 Learners’ Perceptions of Using L1 in EFL Classrooms. Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, (42), 213-222. https://doi.org/10.21497/sefad.675180
64. Öztürk Karataş, T., & Tuncer, H. (2020). Sustaining Language Skills Development of Pre-Service EFL Teachers despite the COVID-19 Interruption: A Case of Emergency Distance Education. Sustainability, 12(19), 8188. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198188
65. Özüdoğru, F., & Hişmanoğlu, M. (2016). Views of freshmen students on foreign language courses delivered via e-learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 31-47. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.18660
66. Perveen, A. (2016). Synchronous and Asynchronous E-Language Learning: A Case Study of Virtual University of Pakistan. Open Praxis, 8(1), 21-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.1.212
67. Peters, O. (1998). Learning and teaching in distance education: Analyses and interpretations from an international perspective. Kogan Page.
68. Plonsky, L., & Gonulal, T. (2015). Methodological synthesis in quantitative L2 research: A review of reviews and a case study of exploratory factor analysis. Language Learning, 65(S1), 9-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12111
69. Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878-912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079
70. Provalis Research. (2018). QDA Miner Lite (Version 2.0.9) [Computer Software]. https://provalisresearch.com/products/qualitative-data-analysis-software/freeware/
71. Rahiem, M. D. H. (2020). The Emergency Remote Learning Experience of University Students in Indonesia amidst the COVID-19 Crisis. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(6), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.6.1
72. Raman, Y., & Yigitoglu, N. (2015). Friend or foe?: English as the medium of instruction policy versus code switching practices. The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 6(3), 1-23.
73. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
74. Sahin, I., & Shelley, M. (2008). Considering students’ perceptions: The distance education student satisfaction model. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 216-223.
75. Scott, W., McCracken, L. M., & Norton, S. (2016). A confirmatory factor analysis of facets of psychological flexibility in a sample of people seeking treatment for chronic pain. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 50(2), 285-296.
76. Shin, J. Y., Dixon, L. Q., & Choi, Y. (2020). An updated review on use of L1 in foreign language classrooms. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 41(5), 406-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2019.1684928
77. Smith, R. (2008). Learner autonomy. Key concepts in ELT. ELT journal, 62(4), 395-397. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccno38
78. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
79. Taplin, M. (2000). Problem-based learning in distance education: Practitioners’ beliefs about an action learning project. Distance Education, 21(2), 284-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791000210206
80. Taşçı, S. (2021). Evaluation of Emergency Distance Language Education: Perspectives of ELT Students. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(1), 286-300. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.877657
81. Tekinarslan, E. (2008). Attitudes of Turkish distance learners toward internet based learning: An investigation depending on demographical characteristics. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), 67-84.
82. Therisa Beena, K. K., & Sony, M. (2022). Student workload assessment for online learning: An empirical analysis during covid-19. Cogent Engineering, 9(1), 2010509. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2021.2010509
83. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. American Psychological Association.
84. Timuçin, M., & Baytar, İ. (2015). The functions of the use of L1: Insights from an EFL classroom. Kastamonu Education Journal, 23(1), 241-252.
85. Traxler, J. (2018). Distance learning-predictions and possibilities. Education Sciences, 8(35), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010035
86. Tulaskar, R., & Turunen, M. (2022). What students want? Experiences, challenges, and engagement during Emergency Remote Learning amidst COVID-19 crisis. Education and Information Technologies, 27(1), 551-587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10747-1
87. Turnbull, M. (2001). There is a role for the L1 in second and foreign language teaching, but…. La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes [The Canadian Modern Language Review], 57(4), 531-540. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.4.531
88. Volery, T., & Lord, D. (2000). Critical success factors in online education. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(5), 216-223. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540010344731
89. Xu, W. (2013). A New Interactive Method to Distance English Learning in Conceptual Age. Open Praxis, 5(4), 335-344. http://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.5.4.94
90. Yen, C. J., & Liu, S. (2009). Learner autonomy as a predictor of course success and final grades in community college online courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 41(3), 347-367. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.41.3.e