Examining the Reading Habits, Interests, Tendencies of the Students Studying at the Faculty of Education and Analyzing the Underlying Reason behind Their Preferences

Abstract

Acquiring the reading skills and using this skill effectively throughout life is possible by a qualified education hence qualified teachers. Therefore; teachers and candidate teachers are suggested to be; acquired the reading skills, focused on information and learning, trained well as individuals having knowledge of their fields and pedagogics. By the context; the aim of the study is suggested as examining the reading habits, interests, tendencies of the students studying at the Faculty of Education and analyzing the underlying reason behind their preferences. The descriptive phenomenology method; one of the qualitative research methods is used in the study. The studying group within the research is occurred by the 10 students from 5 different fields of Education Faculty, who read books constantly. The data acquired is collected by semi-structured interview questions and content analysis method is benefited to analyze the data. According to the results of the study; 140 discourses are observed to be expressed within the 6 themes, due to the reading habits, interests and tendencies of the students studying at the Faculty of Education. The mentioned themes herein, are formed as the following: “book type interested”, “content interested”, “topic interested”, “acquiring the reading habits”, “criteria for preferring books”, “the effect of social environment to prefer books”. While the most expressed theme is revealed as “criteria for preferring books”, the least one is about the reading habits, within the research

Keywords

• Reading habits, reading interests, reading tendencies, pre-service teachers, reasons

Kaynakça

1. Alvermann, D. E. (2005). Literacy on the edge: How close are we to closing the literacy achievement gap? Voices from the Middle, 13(1), 8-14.
2. Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scoth, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. A. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the commission on reading. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.
3. Ari, E., & Demir, M. K. (2013). Ilkogretim bolumu ogretmen adaylarinin kitap okuma aliskanliklarinin degerlendirilmesi. [Assessing reading habits of student teachers' at department of elementary education]. Ana Dili Egitimi Dergisi, 1(1), 116-128.
4. Arici, A. F. (2015). What Turkish Teachers/Preservice Teachers Should Read? - A Suggested Book List. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi-Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(3), 1-15.
5. Arici, A. F. (2008). Okumayi niye sevmiyoruz? Universite ogrencileri ile mulakatlar. [Why don't we lıke readıng? Intervıews wıth undergraduates] Mustafa Kemal Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 5(10), 91-100.
6. Aslanturk, E., & Saracaloglu, A. S. (2010). Sinif ogretmenlerinin ve sinif ogretmeni adaylarinin okuma ilgi ve aliskanliklarinin karsilastirilmasi. [Comparison of the classroom teachers and the candidate classroom teachers’ reading interests and reading habits]. Anadolu Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 155-176.
7. Barton, P. E., & Jenkins, L. (1995). Literacy and dependency: The literacy skills of welfare recipients in the united states. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
8. Benvides, Tina De L. (2006). Personal reading habits and literacy instruction in preservice teacher. (Unpublished master thesis). Nipissing Universty Faculty of Education, Ontario.

9. Barry, Arlene L. (2002). Reading strategies teachers say they use. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 46 (2), 132-141.
10. Bozkurt, N., & Serin, O. (2003). Universite ogrencilerinin okuma ilgileri ve okuma aliskanliklarini etkileyen faktorler [Factors affecting reading attitudes and reading habits of university students]. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 4(12), 149-157.,
11. Cavanagh, S. (1997). “Content Analysis: Concept, Methods and Applications”, Nurse Researcher, 4(3), s. 45-59.
12. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Arastirma Yontemleri: Desen ve Analiz. [Research methods design and analysis]. (Cev. Ed: Ahmet Aypay), Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
13. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research, Boston: Pearson.
14. Cepni, S. (2012). Arastirma ve Proje Calismalarina Giris, [Introduction to research and project work], Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacilik.
15. Cocuk Vakfi. (2006). Turkiye’nin okuma aliskanligi karnesi[Reading habits of Turkey]. Istanbul: Cocuk Vakfi Yayinlari.
16. Ehri, L. C., & Roberts, T. (2006). The roots of learning to read and write: Acquisition of letters and phonemic awareness. In D. K. Dickinson & S. B. Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (Vol. 2, pp. 113–131). New York: Guilford Press.
17. Elkatmis, M. (2015). Sinif ogretmeni adaylarinin okuma ilgi ve aliskanliklari. [Reading interest and habits of classroom teachers]. Kastamonu Universitesi Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi, 23(3), 1223-1240.
18. Erginer, A. (2012). Avrupa Birligi Egitim Sistemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
19. Ersoy, A. F. (2016). Fenomenoloji. Ahmet Saban ve Ali Ersoy (Ed.), Egitimde Nitel Arastirma Desenleri, Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
20. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Nelson, J. (2012). Literecy achievement through sustained professional development. Reading Teacher, 65(8), 551-563. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01082
21. Hill, Margaret H. ve Beers, G. Kylene. (1993). Teacher as readers: Survey of teacher personal reading habits and literacy activities in the classroom. Annual Meeting of National Reading Conference.
22. Gomleksiz, M. N. (2004). Gelecegin ogretmenlerinin kitap okumaya iliskin goruslerinin degerlendirilmesi. [Assessing the affectionate views of future teachers to read books]. (Firat Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Ornegi). Yuzuncu Yil Universitesi, Elektronik Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi. Cilt:1, Sayi:1.
23. Gunes, F. (2007). Turkce Ogretimi ve Zihinsel Yapilandirma. Ankara: Nobel.
24. Gur, T. (2014). Ogretmen adaylarinin okuma ve bos zaman degerlendirme aliskanliklari. [Reading and leisure times activity habits of preservice teachers]. Zeitschrift fur die Welt der Turken, 6(1), 161-180.
25. Kiziltepe, Z. (2015). Icerik Analizi. Nitel Arastirma Yontem, Teknik, Analiz ve Yaklasimlar. (Ed: Fatma Nevra Seggie ve Yasemin Bayyurt), Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
26. Korkmaz, I. (2007). Universite birinci sinifta okuyan ogrencilerin lise doneminde kitap okuma durumlarinin incelenmesi. [Investigation of the reading status of the students reading in university high school during the high school period]. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 27, 127-138.
27. Kus, Z., & Turkyilmaz, M. (2010). Sosyal bilgiler ve Turkce ogretmeni adaylarinin okuma durumlari: (Ilgi, aliskanlik ve okuma stratejilerini kullanim duzeyleri. [Social studies and reading positions of Turkce teacher candidates: (levels of use of intelligence, habits and reading strategies]. Turk Kutuphaneciligi, 24(1), 11-32.
28. McMahon, W. W. (2000). Externalities, non-market effects, and trends in returns to educational invesments. OECD icinde, The appraisal of ivesments in educational facilities (s. 51-71). Paris: OECD Publications Service.
29. MEB. (2006). Ilkogretim Turkce dersi (6-8. siniflar) ogretim programi[Turkish lesson primary school (grades 6-8) curriculum. Ankara: Milli Egitim Bakanligi Talim Terbiye Kurulu Baskanligi.
30. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
31. Palani, K. K. (2012). Promising Reading Habits and Creating Literate Social. International Reference Research Journal, 3(2), 1.
32. Palaz, S., Senergin, O., & Oksuzler, O. (2013). Egitim duzeyi farkliliklarinin gelir dagilimina etkisi: Turkiye ornegi. [The effect of dıfferences ın educatıonal level on ıncome dıstrıbutıon: the case of turkey]. Girisimcilik ve Kalkinma Dergisi, 8(2), 119-131.
33. Reed, D. K., Petscher, Y., & Truckenmiller, A. J. (2016). The contribution of general reading ability to science achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 1-14. doi:10.1002/rrq.158
34. Reiners, G. M. (2012). “Understanding the differences between husserl’s (descriptive) and Heidegger’s (Interpretive) phenomenological research”, Journal of Nursing & Care, 1 (119).
35. Samuels, S. J., & Farstrup, A. E. (2011). What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
36. Saracho, O. N. (1997). Using the home environment to support emergent literacy. Early Child Development and Care, 201–216.
37. Sart, G. (2015). Fenomenoloji ve Yorumlayici Fenomenolojik Analiz [Phenomenology and ınterpretation phenomenological analysis]. Nitel arastirma yontem, teknik, analiz ve yaklasimlar [Qualitative research method, technique, analysis and approaches] . (Ed: Fatma Nevra Seggie ve Yasemin Bayyurt), Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
38. Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290-322. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.43.3.4
39. Srommen, L. T., & Mates, F. M. (2004). Learning to love reading: Interviews with olders children and teens. Journal of Adolescent ve Adult Literacy, 48, 188-200.
40. TUIK. (2017, 1 17). Turkiye IstatistiK Kurumu. Turkiye Istatistik Kurumu okuryazarliga gore nufus verileri [Turkey Statistics Institution population by literacy]: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1068 adresinden alindi
41. Turkiye Cumhuriyeti Kultur Bakanligi. (2011). Turkiye okuma kulturu haritasi [Turkey reading culture map]. Ankara: Turkiye Cumhuriyeti Kultur Bakanligi. http://www.kygm.gov.tr/Eklenti/55,yonetici-ozetipdf.pdf?0 adresinden alindi
42. Yildirim, A. ve Simsek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastirma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences], Ankara: Seckin Yayincilik.
43. Yildiz, N. (2008). Neoliberal kuresellesme ve egitim. [Neoliberal Globalization and Education]. D.U Ziya Gokalp Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 11, 13-32.