DİL ÖĞRENMEDE ÖZERKLİK: ÖĞRENCİLER KENDİ ÖĞRENME SORUMLULUKLARINI ÜSTLENEBİLİYORLAR MI?

Öz

Bu çalışma, üniversite öğrencilerinin ve öğretmenlerinin  özerk öğrenmeye ilişkin yeterlilik ve 

sorumlulukları ile sınıf içi ve dışı özerk etkinliklere özgü algılarını araştırmak amacıyla 

yürütülmüştür. Çalışma, sorumluluk, yeterlilik ve etkinlik boyutlarının motivasyon ve cinsiyete göre 

önemli derecede  değişip değişmediğini de araştırmıştır. Nicel veriler 320 üniversite öğrencisi ve 24 

öğretmenden toplanmış ve nitel verilerle desteklenmiştir. Sonuçlar öğrencilerin kendilerini yeterli 

algılamalarına rağmen sorumluluk alamadıklarını, öğrenmelerin ise öğrencilerin sorumluluklarını 

yerine getiremeyeceğini düşünerek pek çok sorumluluğu kendilerinin üstlendiğini göstermiştir. 

Çalışmada öğretmen ve öğrencilerin ”öğrenci özerkliği” kavramını  yeterince anlamaları ve özerk 

öğrenme ile ilgili bir eğitim programının dil öğrenme programlarına alınması gerektiği 

önerilmektedir.   

Anahtar Kelimeler: Sorumluluk,Yeterlilik,Etkinlik,Dil öğrenimi

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sorumluluk,Yeterlilik,Etkinlik,Dil öğrenimi

Kaynakça

1. Aoki, N. (2000). Aspects of teacher autonomy: Capacity, freedom and responsibility. Paper presented at 2000 Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Language Centre Conference.
2. Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. S. (1989). The construct validation of self-ratings of communicative language ability. Language Testing, 6(1), 14-29.
3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
4. Benson, P. (2000). Autonomy as a learners’ and teachers’ right. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath and T. Lamb (eds.) Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions. London: Longman. 111-117.
5. Blanche, P. (1990). Using standardized achievement and oral proficiency tests for self- assessment purposes: The DLIFC study. Language Testing. 7(2), 202-229.
6. Brindley, G. (1990). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL programme design. In R. K. Johnson (Ed.) The second language curriculum (pp. 63- 78). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Büyüköztürk, S. (1999). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin arastırma yeterlikleri. Eğitim Yonetimi Dergisi, 18, 257-69.
8. Chan, V. Spratt, M., & Humphreys, G. (2002). Autonomous language learning: Hong Kong tertiary students’ attitudes and behaviours. Evaluation and Research in Education. Vol.16, No.1.

9. Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Council of Europe (2002). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Case studies. from www.culture2.coe.int-portfolio//documents/case-studies-CEF.doc
11. Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self- Determination in Human behavior. New York: Plenum.
12. Deci, E.L. (1995). Why we do what we do: The dynamics of personal autonomy. New York. Putnam’s Sons.
13. Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation. System, 23 (2), 165.
14. Erdoğan, S. (2003). Learner training via course books and teacher autonomy:
15. A case of need. Retrieved March, 7, 2007, from
16. http://lc.ust.hk/~ailasc/newsletters/onlinepaper/sultan.htm
17. Ehrman, M. E., & Oxford, R. L. (1995). Cognition plus: correlates of language learning success. Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 67-89.
18. Evans, S. (1996). The context of English language education: The case of Hong Kong. RELC 27(2), 30-55.
19. Fazey, D., & Fazey, J. (2001). The potential for autonomy in learning. Studies in Higher Education, 26 (3), 345.
20. Gardner, D. (1999). Self-assessment for autonomous language learners. Retrieved January, 24, 2007, from http://www.bib.uab.es/pub/linksandletters/11337397n7p49.pdf
21. Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (1994). Directions in Self-Access language Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
22. Ho, J., & Crookall, D. (1995). Breaking with Chinese cultural traditions: Learner autonomy in English language teaching. System, 23(2), 235- 243.
23. Holden B., & Usuki, M. (1999). Learner autonomy in language learning: A Preliminary Investigation. Bulletin of Hokuriku University. 23; 191-203.
24. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
25. Holec, H. (1985). On autonomy: Some elementary concepts. In P. Riley (Ed.)
26. Discourse and learning (pp. 173-190). London: Longman.
27. Iskenderoglu, Z. (1992). The relation between Turkish university students' educational and social background and their attitude towards self- directed learning and attendance at self-access centres. Unpublished MA thesis, Bilkent University, Ankara.
28. Jones, J. (1995). Self-access and culture. ELT Journal 49(3), 228-234.
29. Karagul, T. (1996). Yüksek öğretim programları için gerekli öğrenci yeterlilikleri ve yükseköğretime geçis süreci. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ankara University, Ankara.
30. Karasar, N. (1984). Türk üniversitelerinde arastirma eğitimi. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ankara University, Ankara.
31. Kasworm, C. E., & Bing, Y. (1992). The development of adult learner autonomy and self-directedness in distance education. Retrieved January 6, 2006 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0 000000b/80/25/ 7b/ae.pdf
32. Keskekci, S. (1995). A case study of an intermediate EFL class following a self-direction program. Unpublished master’s thesis, Bilkent University, Ankara.
33. Koestner, R., & McClelland, D. (1990). Perspectives on competence motivation. In. L. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 527-548). New York: Guilford.
34. Little, D. (2000). We’re all in it together: Exploring the interdependence of teacher and learner autonomy. In Newsletter of the IATEFL PL Autonomous Learning SIG 4. Retrieved December, 24, 2006 from http://www.iatefl.org.pl/sig/al/al1.html
35. Little, D. (2003). Learner autonomy and second/foreign language learning. Retrieved September, 15, 2006 from http://www.lang.ltsn.ac.uk/resources/goodpractice.aspx?resourceid=140 9.
36. Littlewood, W. (2000). Do Asian students really want to listen and obey? ELT Journal, 54(1), 31-36.
37. Mariani, L. (1997) Teacher Support and Teacher Challenge in promoting Learner Autonomy. Perspective, TESOL. Vol.XXIII. No.2.
38. Munby, J. (1991). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Oxford, R. L., Nyikos, M., & Ehrman, M. E. (1988). Vive la différence? Reflections on sex differences in use of language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 21, 321.
40. Pennycook, A. (1997). Cultural alternatives and autonomy. In P. Benson and P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in Language Learning (pp.35-53). London: Longman.
41. Rivers, Wilga M. (1992). Communicating Naturally in a Second Language, Theory and Practice in Language Teaching. CUP
42. Salem, Nada. M. (2006). The role of motivation, gender and language learning strategies in EFL. Unpublished master’s dissertation, American University of Beirut.
43. Sert, N. (2006). EFL Student Teachers’ Learning Autonomy. Asian EFL Journal, 8(2). Article 8. 180-201.
44. Sullivan, K., & Lindgren, E. (2002). Self-assessment in autonomous computer-aided second language writing. ELT Journal, 56(3), 258-266.
45. Utman, C. H. (1997). Performance effects of motivational state: A meta- analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 170-182.
46. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47. Zimmerman, B.J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D.H. Schunk., & B.J. Zimmerman. (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: from teaching to self-reflective practice (pp.1-19). New York: Guilford Press.