Bilişsel Süreç Modeline Göre Hazırlanan Yazma Öğretimi İzlencesinin Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışma ile bilişsel süreci modelinin, yazma yazma becerilerinin gelişmesine bir etkisinin bulundu. Bu deneysel nitel çalışmanın uygulaması, 2007-2008 eğitim öğretim üyesi birinci yarıdaki, Halil Naci Mıhçıoğlu ÖO'da, toplam 27 süreli zaman dilimi içerisinde yapılmıştır. Bu öğrenci yazma becerileri deneme türünde açıklayıcı metin ile sınırlandırılmıştır. Bu tarayıcıda açıklayıcı oluşturma, tutarlılık, sözcük geliştirme, tümce işletim ve mekanik özellikler sözleşmesi. Bu başarıdan elde edilen başarıya göre sıralı öğretim yazılım, üretilebilirlik, metinler üretebilmelerini sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yazma öğretimi, yazma programı, yazma süreci

The Effect of the Writing Programme Prepared In Accordance With Cognitive Process Model on Student Success

Abstract

This study has been carried out to analyze the effect of the students’ developing their writing skills by using the cognitive process approach which includes text-linguistic data. The application of this study was carried out at Halil Naci M;hç;o!lu elementary school in the first term in 2007-2008 at a 27 hour-period. In the study, the development of the writing skills was restricted by only short essay type along an expository text. Hence, the students’ expository text production was analyzed in terms of forming content, coherence, the use of lexical items, word order and mechanical aspects. The findings of this research show that the education program prepared by cognitive process approach proves that the students can produce better written texts than compared to the traditional approach.

Keywords

• teaching writing,writing programme,writing process

Kaynakça

1. Ad;güzel, F. M. (1998). The Effects of the Process Aproach to Teaching Writing on Turkish Students’ Writing Skills and Overall Language Proficiency in EFL. Yay;mlanmam;K Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mersin Üniversitesi. Aksan, Y. ve Çak;r, Ö. (1997). lkokul Ö!rencilerinin Yaz;l; Anlat;mlar;n;n Metinsellik Ölçütleri ve Metin Konusu OluKumu Aç;s;ndan De!erlendirilmesi XI. Dilbilim Kurultay, Hz. Deniz Zeyrek, Xükriye Ruhi, Ankara: ODTÜ E!itim Fakültesi Yabanc; Diller E!itimi Bölümü. Brand, A. G. (1989). The Psychology of Writing: The Affective Experience New York: Greenwood Press. Beaugrande, R. A.; Dressler W. U. (1981). #ntroduction to Text Linguistic. Longman, London and New York. Berkenkotter, C. (1988). Decisions and Revision: The Planning Strategies of a Publishing Writer. In G. T. Edward & P. J. Corbett. The WritingTeachers Sourcebook. Oxford Universty Press. Cho, Y. (2003). Assessing Writing: Are we Bound by Only One Method? Assessing Writing, 8, 165-191. Enginarlar, H. (1994). Ö!renci Kompozisyonlar;nda Ba!daK;kl;k Sorunlar; ve Paragraf Yap;s;. Çada Türk Dili, 77-78, 34- 36. Flower, L. & Hayes J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communitation, 32, 365- 387. Gebrhard, R. C. (1983). Writing Processes, Revision and Rhetorical Problems: A Note on Three Recent Articles. College Composition and Communication, 34, 294-296. Hamilton, A. C. (1992). Performance Assessment of Personal Correspondence on The Development of Written Language Use and Functions in Traditional and Process Writing Second-Grade Classrooms Ph.D., The University of Alabama at Birmingham. Hopkins, C. (2002). Improving Tenth-Grade Students Five Paragraph Essay Writing Skills Using Various Writing Strategies Guided Assignments and Portfolios for Growth. ED 471 633. Huber, E. ve Uzun, L. (2001). Metin Türü ve Yazma Edimi liKkisi: Bilimsel Metin Yazma Edimi. çinde Dilbilim Aratrmalar (haz.) Serkan Xener, BÜ Yay;nevi. Kavcar, C. (1983). Düzgün Yazman;n Önemi ve Yollar;. Eitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 16, Ankara: AÜEBF Yay. La Paz, S. & Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly Teaching Strategies, Skills, and Knowledge: Writing Instruction in Middle School Classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology , 94, 687-698. Özçelik, D. Ali (1998). Eitim Programlar ve Öretim. Ankara: ÖSYM Yay;nlar;. Pressley, M. & Harris R. K. (2006). Cognitive Strategies Instruction: From Basic Research to Classroom Instruction. In Patrica A. A., Philip H. W. (Eds.) Handbook of Educational Psychology. New York: Routledge. Ruhi, X. (1994). lkö!retim Ö!renci Kompozisyonlar;ndaki Ba!daK;kl;k Sorunlar;. Çada Türk Dili, 77-78, 24-26. Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in Teaching Writing. OUP: New York. Scannella, A. M.(1992). A Writing-As-Process Model As A Means for Improving Composition in The High School, Educat. D. Rutgers The State University of New Jersey-New Brunswick. Ün, K. (2004). Aktif Örenme. zmir: E!itim Dünyas; Yay;nlar;. van Dijk, T.A & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: AP. Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge University Press. Witte, P. S. & Cherry, R. D. (1986). Writting Process and Written Products in Composition Research. In C. R. Cooper & S. Greenbaum (Ed.) Studying Writing: Linguistic Approaches Sage Publication. Zamel, V. (1983). The Composing Process of Advanced ESL Students: Six Case Studies. TESOL QUARTERLY, 17, 165-187.