Using Humor in Language Classrooms: Greasing the Wheels or Putting a Spanner in the Works? A Study on Humor Styles of Turkish EFL Instructors

Yıl 2019, , 23 - 39, 24.03.2019

Mehdi Solhi Andarab , Aynur Kesen Mutlu

https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.543776

Cited By: 3

Öz

Humor has often been seen as an
important element in the learning process, facilitating both teaching and
learning. Nevertheless, the utilization of humor in the educational setting has
had its opponents. In recent years, many attempts have been made to
conceptualize the various forms of humor implemented in the practice of
education. Despite a myriad of studies aimed at linking humor with personality
traits, there seem a dearth number of research studies addressing the multifaceted
humor styles of EFL instructors while interacting with the students in the classroom.
There have been a number
of scales thought-up in order to best assess the humor styles of the
individual. However, the one identified by Martin et al.
(2003) attempts to deal
with the functions of humor, rather than particular personalities it may or may
not represent. The four specific humor styles identified in this
scale encompass two benign (affiliative and
self-enhancing), and two injurious (aggressive and self-defeating) humor
styles. The present study seeks to examine the humor styles adopted by English
language instructors in Turkey by investigating (1) whether there is a
difference between male and female instructors with regard to employing humor,
(2) whether the educational level of the participants influences their tendency
to use humor while interacting with the students in the classroom, and (3)
whether the age of the instructors is an influential factor in adopting various
styles of humor. A total
of 64 English language instructors working at private and state universities in
Turkey completed a standardized form of the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) online.
Results indicated no significant difference between
male and female instructors with regard to adopting humor styles in the
classroom. Nor were there any differences between instructors of varying
educational level in terms of the use of humor styles. In addition, no
differences were seen according to age.

Anahtar Kelimeler

EFL classroom, Humor styles, the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ)

Kaynakça

• Abraham, R. R., Hande, V., Sharma, M. E. J., Wohlrath, S. K., Keet, C. C., & Ravi, S. (2014). Use of humour in classroom teaching: Students’ perspectives. Thrita, 3(2), 1–4.
• Agcam, R. (2017). Investigating instructors’ perceptions on the use of humour in higher education. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(2), 238–248.
• Altinkurt, Y., & Yilmaz, K. (2011). Humor styles of primary school teachers. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 1(2), 1–8.
• Askildson, L. (2005). Effects of humor in the language classroom: Humor as a pedagogical tool in theory and practice. Arizona Working Papers in SLAT, 12, 45–61.
• Aydin, A. (2015). Identifying the relationship of teacher candidates’ humor styles with anxiety and self-compassion levels. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 59, 1–16.
• Berk, R. (1998). Professors are from mars, students are from snickers: How to write and deliver humor in the classroom and in professional presentations. Madison, WI: Magna Publications.
• Bilge, F., & Saltuk, S. (2007). Humor Styles, Subjective Well-beings, Trait Anger and Anxiety among University Students in Turkey. World Applied Sciences Journal, 2(5), 464–469.
• Cecen, R. (2007). Humor styles in predicting loneliness among Turkish university students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(6), 835–844.
• Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Dyck, K. T., & Holtzman, S. (2013). Understanding humor styles and well-being: The importance of social relationships and gender. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 53–58.
• Ford, T. E., McCreight, K. A., & Richardson, K. (2014). Affective style, humor styles, and happiness. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 10, 451–463.
• Garner, R. (2003). Which came first, the chicken or the egg? A foul metaphor for teaching. Radical Pedagogy, 5(2), 205–212.
• Garner, R. (2005). Humor, Analogy, and Metaphor: H.A.M. it up in Teaching. Radical Pedagogy, 6(2). Retrieved from http://www.radicalpedagogy.org/radicalpedagogy /Humor,_ Analogy,_and_Metaphor__H.A.M._it_up_in_Teaching.html
• Garner, R. (2006). Humor in pedagogy: How ha-ha can lead to aha! College Teaching, 54(1), 177–180.
• Gonzalez, G. (2014). Ten ways to sabotage your classroom management. Retrieved from https://www.middleweb.com /19037/10-ways-sabotage-classroom-management/
• Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. (4th ed.). Essex: Longman.
• Huy Hoang, P., & Petraki, E. (2016). Do Asian EFL teachers use humour in the classroom? A case study of Vietnamese EFL university teachers. System, 61, 98–109.
• Janes, L. M., & Olson, J. M. (2000). Jeer pressure: The behavioral effects of observing ridicule of others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 474–485.
• Kilic, Y. (2016). The views of Turkish teachers on the use of humor in secondary schools. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(9), 945–956.
• Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Dance, K. (1992). Sense of humor and enhanced quality of life. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(12), 1273–1283.
• Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Olinger, L. J. (1993). Coping humour, stress, and cognitive appraisals. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 25, 81–96.
• Martin, R. A., Lastuk, J. M., Jeffery, J., Vernon, P. A., & Veselka, L. (2012). Relationships between the dark triad and humor styles: A replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 178–182.
• Martin, R. A., & Lefcourt, H. M. (1984). The situational humor response questionnaire: Quantitative measure of sense of humor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 145–155.
• Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in the uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humor styles questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 48–75.
• Martin, R. A. (1996). The situational humor response questionnaire (SHRQ) and coping humor scale (CHS): A decade of research findings. Humor, 9, 251–272.
• McNamara, T. (2004). Language Testing. In A. Davies, & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (p. 763–783). Blackwell.
• Overholser, J. S. (1992). Sense of humor when coping with life stress. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(7), 799–804.
• Oxford, R. L. (1999). Anxiety and the language learner: new insights. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 58–67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Ozyesil, Z. (2012). The prediction level of self-esteem on humor style and positive-negative affection. Psychology, 3(8), 638–641.
• Schermer, J.A., Martin, R. A., Martin, N. G., Lynskey, M., & Vernon, P. A. (2013). The general factor of personality and humor styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 890–893.
• Steele, K. E. (1998). The positive and negative effects of the use of humor in the classroom setting (Unpublished MA thesis). Salem, Teikyo University.
• Sudol, D. (1981). Dangers of classroom humour. English Journal, 70(6), 26–28.
• Thorson, J. A., & Powell, F. C. (1993). Development and validation of a multidimensional sense of humor scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 13–23.
• Thorson, J. A., Powell, F. C., Sarmany-Schuller, I., & Hampes, W. P. (1997). Psychological health and sense of humor. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53, 605–619.
• Traş, Z., Arslan, C., & Mentiş Taş, A. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarında mizah tarzları, problem çözme ve benlik saygısının incelenmesi [Analysis of humor styles, problem solving and self- esteem of prospective teachers]. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8(2), 716–732.
• Tucker, R. P., Wingate, L. R., O’Keefe, V. M., Slish, M. L., Judah, M. R., & Rhoades-Kerswill, S. (2013). The moderating effect of humor style on the relationship between interpersonal predictors of suicide and suicidal ideation. Personality and Individual Differences, 54,610–615.
• Tumkaya, S. (2011). Humor styles and socio-demographic variables as predictors of subjective well-being of Turkish university students. Education and Science, 36(160), 158–170.
• Veselka, L., Schermer, J. A., Martin, R. A., & Vernon, P. A. (2010). Relations between humor styles and the dark triad traits of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 772–774.
• Vrabel, J. K., Zeigler-Hill, V., & Shango, R. (2016). Spitefulness and humor styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 105, 238–243.
• Yerlikaya, E. (2003). A study on the adaptation of humor styles questionnaire (Unpublished master dissertation). Institute of Social Sciences, Adana: Cukurova University.
• Ziv, A. (1988). Teaching and learning with humor: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57(1), 5–15.