Sosyal Bilgilerde Kelime Hazinesinin Geliştirilmesinde Frayer Modelinin Etkisinin İncelenmesi

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 1107 - 1129, 26.02.2015

İlhan Ilter

https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2015.55440

Cited By: 2

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, metin tabanlı örgütsel bir yapı olan Frayer modelinin sosyal bilgilerde kelime hazinesi gelişimi üzerinde etkilerini ortaya çıkarmaktır. Araştırmada yarı-deneme modellerinden eşitlenmemiş kontrol gruplu desen kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada deneysel uygulama için bir deney bir de kontrol grubu belirlenmiştir. Kelime öğretiminde deney grubunda grafik düzenleyicilerden Frayer modeli diyagramı kullanılırken, kontrol grubunda tanımsal ve içerik yaklaşımlarının bütünleştirilmesi yoluyla kelime öğretimi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma, 2013-2014 öğretim yılında Bayburt ilinde orta-sosyo ekonomik düzeyde olduğu kabul edilen bir devlet okulunda öğrenim gören 4. sınıf öğrencileriyle yürütülmüştür. Çalışmada öğrencilerin kelime bilgisi düzeylerini belirlemek amacıyla Paribakht ve Wesche (1996) tarafından geliştirilen kelime bilgisi ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlarda, deney grubunun kontrol grubuna göre kelime bilgisini daha büyük derinlikte genişleterek hedeflenen kavramların anlamlarını güçlendirdiği dolayısıyla, kelime hazinesini daha fazla geliştirdiği saptanmıştır. Bu çalışmadan ulaşılan veriler göstermektedir ki, Frayer modeli ön bilgilerin aktivasyonuyla, kavramların ilgili, ilgisiz özellikleri, örnekleri/örnek olmayanları ve kavramlar arası ilişkileri ve hiyerarşik yapıları açığa kavuşturarak öğrencilerin davranışlarını kavramları yeniden tanımlamaya yönlendiren bir süreç, kavram gelişimi ve kavram kazanımını daha fazla kolaylaştırmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Frayer modeli, kelime hazinesi, sosyal bilgiler, sosyal bilgilerde kelime bilgisi gelişimi, tanımsal ve içerik yaklaşımları

Kaynakça

• Adams E. A. (2009). Teacher use of literacy strategies in secondary mathematics class. Doctor of Philosophy University of Idaho.
• Akyol, H.(2005). Türkçe ilk okuma-yazma öğretimi. Ankara Pegem A yay.
• Allen, J. (1999). Word, word, words: Teaching vocabulary in grades (4-12). Stenhouse Publishers
• Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. E. (1993). The vocabulary conundrum (Tech. Rep. No. 570). Urbana, IL: Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED354489)
• Anderson, R. C.,& Freebody,P.(1981). Vocabulary Knowledge:In comprehension and Teaching: Research Reviews, ed. J. Guthrie, 77-117. Newark,Del.: International Reading Association.
• 1983. Reading Comprehension and the Assessment and Acquisitionof Word Knowledge. In Advances in Reading /Language Research, ed. B.Hutson, 231-56. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.
• Anderson, R.C. & Freebody, P.(1981). Effects of vocabulary difficulty, text cohesion, and schema availability on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 18 (3): 277-294.
• Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in learning and retention of meaningful material. Journal of Education Psychology, 51, pp.267-272. Doi: 10.1037/h0046669
• Barth, J. (1993). Social studies: there is a history, there is a body, but is it worth saving? Social Education, 57(2): 56-57
• Baumann J. F. & Kame'enui, E. J. (Eds.). (2004). Vocabulary instruction: research to practice. New York: Guilford.
• Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Font, G., Tereshinski, C. A., Kame’enui, E. J., & Olejnik, S. (2002). Teaching morphemic and contextual analysis to fifth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 37, 150-176
• Baumann, J. F., Kame'enui, E. J. & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on Vocabulary Instruction: Voltaire Redux. In J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp & Squire, J.R. (Eds.), Handbook of research in teaching the English Language Arts (2nd Ed., 752-785). New York.
• Beck, I. L., Mckeown, M. G. & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: robust vocabulary instruction. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Becker, K. A. (2013). Pre-service special education teachers in urban school settings to teach content literacy strategies. Doctor of Education. The George Washington University
• Berry, G. (2013). Literacy for Learning: A handbook of content area strategies for middle and high school teachers. Library of Congress Cataloging In Publication Data, United Kingdom
• Billmeyer, R., & Barton, M. L. (2002). Teaching reading in the content areas: if not me, then who? Aurora, Co: ASCD.
• Blachowicz, C, Fisher, P., Ogle, D. & Watts-Taffe, S. (2006). Vocabulary: questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, Pp.524-539
• Blachowıcz, C. & Fisher, P.J. (2010). Teaching Vocabulary In All Classrooms. Allyn Bacon. 4 Th Edition.
• Blachowicz, C.L.Z. (1986). Making connection alternatives to the vocabulary notebook. Journal of Reading, 29. Pp.539-543
• Boote, C. (2006). Vocabulary: Reasons to teach it, an effective teaching method, and words worth teaching. New England Reading Association Journal
• Brewer, W. F., & Treyens, J. C. (1981). Role of schemata in memory for places. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 207-230
• Bruton, A. (2009). The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale: A Critical Analysis, Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(4), pp.288-297, DOI: 10.1080/15434300902801909
• Buehl, D. (2001). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (2nd Ed.). Newark, De: International Reading Association
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Carney, J., Anderson, D., Blackburn, C., & Blessing, D. (1984). Preteaching vocabulary and the comprehension of social studies materials by elementary school children. Social Education, 48(3), 195-196.
• Carss, W.D.(2007). The effects of using thınk-pair-share durıng guided reading lessons. Degree of Master of Education, The University Of Waikato
• Centrone, (1996). Teachıng reading strategies through scıence to middle school below-level readers and its implications for staff development. Doctor of Education. Florida Atlantic University
• Checkley, K. (2008). The essential of social studies grades k-8. Priorities in practice. Effective curriculum instruction and assessment. Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development Alexandra Virginia USA
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik. SPSS ve Lisarel uygulamaları. Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. (2th Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Ed.Inc.
• Cronan, C. (2010). Determining best practice for vocabulary instruction in a middle school setting. Doctor of Philosophy, University of Kansas
• Curtis, C. Y. (2008). Socially mediated vs. contextually driven vocabulary strategies: which are most effective? A Dissertation Doctor of Education, University of Oregon
• Deshler, D. D., Palıncsar, A. S., Bıancarosa, G., & Naır, M. (Eds.). (2008). Informed choices for struggling adolescent readers: a research-based guide to instructional programs and practices. Ny, International Reading Association, New York
• Ehsanzadeh, S.J. (2012). Depth versus breadth of lexical repertoire: assessing their roles in EFL students’ Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition. TESL Canada Journal 25, 29 (2)
• Enge, S. (2005). The impact of the Frayer model on vocabulary. Unpublished Action Research, Shawnee Mission Board of Education, Shawnee Mission
• Frayer, D. A., Fredrick, W. C., & Klausmeier, H. J. (1969). A Schema for Testing the Level of Concept Mastery. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning
• Graves, M. (2004). Teaching Prefixes: As Good As, It Gets. In J. F. Baumann & E. J. Edwards (Eds.), Vocabulary Instruction: Research to Practice, (Pp.81-99). The Guilford Press, New York
•  (2006). The vocabulary book: learning and instruction. Language and Literacy Series. New York
•  (2003). The Vocabulary Book. New York, NY: Teachers College Press
• Graves, M. F., & Penn, M. C. (1986). Costs and benefits of various
• methods of teaching vocabulary. Journal of Reading, 29 (7). Pp. 596-602
• Gülersoy E. (2013). İdeal ders kitabı arayışında sosyal bilgiler ders kitaplarının bazı özellikler açısından incelenmesi. International Journal of New Trends İn Arts, Sports & Science Education 2(1)
• Harmon, J. M., & Hedrick, W. B. (2000). Zooming In And Zooming Out: Enhancing vocabulary and conceptual learning in social studies. The Reading Teacher, 54 (2): 155-159.
• Harmon, J. M., Hedrick, W. B. & Fox, E. A. (2000). A content analysis of vocabulary instruction in social studies textbooks for grades 4-8. The Elementary School Journal, 100(3):.253-272.
• Hedrick, Wanda B.; Harmon, Janis M.; & Linerode, Philip M. (2004) "Teachers' beliefs and practices of vocabulary instruction with social studies textbooks in grades 4-8," Reading Horizons: Vol. 45:
• Host, M. (2005). Learning vocabulary through extensive reading: A measurement study. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 61(3):355–382
• İlter, İ. (2013). Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretiminde 5E Öğrenme Döngüsü Modeline Dayalı Etkinliklerin Öğrenme Sürecine Etkisi: Bir Eylem Araştırması. TSA / YIL: 18 S: 1, 2014
• İlter, İ. (2014). Kelime öğretiminde grafik düzenleyicileri (Frayer modeli örneği). Turkish Studies 9(3),755-770
• Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayıncılık.
• Karjala, L. (2010). Math vocabulary instruction in an inclusive classroom 1 direct instruction and the Frayer model: effects on mathematics achievement in an inclusive classroom. Master of Science in Education. Southwest State University Marshall, Minnesota
• King, M. (2011). Effects of teaching vocabulary using various forms of rich instruction in thematically versus randomly grouped sets. A Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama
• Kweon, S.O. & Kim, H.R. (2008). Beyond raw frequency: incidental vocabulary acquisition in extensive reading. Reading in A Foreign Language 20 (2)
• Labrosse. P. (2007). Analysis of the effect of specific vocabulary instruction on high school chemistry students’ knowledge and understanding. Doctor of Education University of Massachusetts Lowell
• Laflamme, J.G. (1997). The effect of multiple exposure vocabulary method and the target reading/writing strategy on test scores.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(5), 372-384
• Latham, K. K. (2011). The effects of an interactıve vocabulary strategy on teachers and students’ perceptions of word learning. A Dissertation Work, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte
• Manzo, U., Manzo, U., & Thomas, M. (2006). Rationale for systematic vocabulary development: antidote for state mandates. Journal for Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49, 610-619.
• Marzano, R. J. (2004). What works in schools: translating research into action? Alexandria, VA: ASCD
• Mccall A.L. Janssen B. & Riderer K.(2008).More time for powerful social studies: when university social studies methods faculty and classroom teachers collaborate. Social Studies, 99(3), 135-141,
• Meara, P. (1996). The vocabulary knowledge framework. 10 Şubat 2015 tarihinde Http://Www.Lognostics.Ac.Uk/Vlibrary sayfasından erişilmiştir
• Mezynski, K. (1983). Issues concerning the acquisition of knowledge: Effects of vocabulary training on reading comprehension. Review of Educational Research, 53, 253-279.
• Milligan, J. L., & Ruff, T. P. (1990). A linguistic approach to social studies vocabulary development. The Social Studies 81 (5), 218–220.
• Monroe, E.E. (1998). Using graphic organizers to teach vocabulary: does available research inform mathematics instruction? Education (118), 538-572
• Monroe, E.E., & Pendergrass, M. (1997). Effects of mathematical vocabulary on fourth grade students. Reading İmprovement, 34(3), 120-132.
• Nagy, W.E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English; Newark, DE: International Reading Associatio
• Nagy,W. E., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge. In M. McKeown & M. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 19– 36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
• Nation, I.S.P. (2008). Teaching Vocabulary: Strategies and Techniques. Boston: Heinle Cengage
• National Center for Education Statistics. (N.D.A). National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): Frequently Asked Questions. Http://Nces.Ed.Gov/Nationsreportcard/Faq.Asp
• National Reading Panel (NRP). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based asessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Report of the subgroups. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. 11 Şubat 2015 tarihinde http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org sayfasından erişilmiştir.
• Ogle, D., & Blachowicz, C.L.Z. (2002). Beyond literature circles. In C.C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 259–274). New York: Guilford.
• Overturf, B. J. (1999). Developıng Teachers' Knowledge of Mıddle Level Readıng Wıthın a Socıal Constructıvıst Professıonal Development Perspectıve. Doctor of Education University of Louisville
• Overturf, B. J. , Montgomery, L.H & Smith, M.H. (2013). Words nerds: teaching all students to learn and love vocabulary. Library of Congress Cataloging In Publication Data
• Owen-Tittsworth, M.D. (2013). Measurıng teacher self-effıcacy usıng English language learner shadowıng as a catalyst for implementatıon of two instructıonal strategıes to support the academıc language development of long-term English language learners. Doctor of Education. Pepperdine University
• Papadopoulou, E. (2007). The impact of vocabulary instructıon on the vocabulary knowledge and wrıtıng performance of third grade students. Doctor of Philosophy University of Maryland
• Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. B. (1993). Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada Journal, 11(1), pp.9–29.
• Paribakht, T.S. & Wesche, M. (1996). Enhancing vocabulary acquisition through reading: a hierarchy of text-related exercise types. Canadian Modern Language Review, 52, Pp.155-178
• Peters, C.W. (1974). A comparison between the Frayer model of concept attainment and the textbook approach to concept attainment. Reading Research Quarterly, 10(2) Pp. 252-254
• Pulido, D. (2004). The effect of cultural familiarity on incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. The Reading Matrix, 4(2), Pp.20–53.
• Punch, M., & Robinson, M. (1992). Social studies vocabulary mnemonics. Social Education 56 (7): 402-403
• Rice, G. E. (1994). Need for explanations in graphic organizer research. Reading Psychology, 15, 39–67
• Rott, S., & Williams, J. (2003). Making form-meaning connections while reading: A qualitative analysis of word processing. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(1),45-75.
• Rott, S., Williams, J., & Cameron, R. (2002). The effect of multiple-choice l1 glosses and input–output cycles on lexical acquisition and retention. Language Teaching Research, 6, 183–222.
• Schatz, E. K., and R. S. Baldwin. (1986). Context Clues Are Unreliable Predictors of Word Meanings. Reading Research Quarterly 21: 429-53
• Se´ne´chal, M., & Cornell, E. H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 360–374.
• Sharma, S.A.(2006). Transfer of professıonal development ınto classroom practıce: a case study of a readıng specıalıst/learnıng coach and two elementary socıal studıes teachers. Doctor of Phılosophy. Oakland University
• Shea, A. A.(2011). Redefining vocabulary: the new learning strategy for social studies. The Social Studies 102, 95-103; Taylor & Francis Group, Llc ISSN: 0037-7996 Doı:10.1080/00377996.2010.509371
• Simpson, M. L., Stahl, N. A., & Francis, M. A. (2004). Reading and Learning Strategies: Recommendations for the 21st Century. Journal of Developmental Education, 28(2), 2-15, 32
• Stall, S., & Fairbanks, I. (1986). The Effects of Vocabulary Instruction: A Model-Based Meta Analyze. Review of Educational Research 56: 72-110
• Stewart, J. Batty, A.O.B., & Bovee, N. (2012). Comparing multidimensional and continuum models of vocabulary acquisition: an empirical examination of the vocabulary knowledge scale. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 695–721
• Suarez, K. (2002).Graphic organizers and higher order thinking skills with nonfiction Text. Doctor of Education. Lesley University,
• Sunal, C. S. & Haas, M. E. (2005). Social studies for elementary and middle grades a constructivist approach (2th Edition). Pearson Education
• Terry, B. H.(2011). Use of tactual materıals on the achıevement of content specıfıc vocabulary and termınology acquısıtıon wıthın an intermedıate level scıence currıculum. Doctor of Educatıon. St. John's Unıversıty
• Vacca, R. T. & Vacca, J. L. (2002). Content area reading: Literacy and learning across the curriculum. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon
• Vacca, R. T., Vacca, J. A. L. & Mraz, M.E. (2011). Content Area Reading. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
• Wixson, K.K. (1986). Vocabulary instruction and children’s comprehension of basal stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(3), 317-329
• Yazıcı, H. & Samancı, O. (2003). Ilköğretim öğrenci¬lerinin sosyal bilgiler ders konuları ile ilgili bazı kavramları anlama düzeyleri, Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 158, S.83-90
• Yearta, L.S. (2012). The effect of dıgıtal word study on fıfth graders’ vocabulary acquısıtıon, retentıon, and motıvatıon: a mıxed methods approach. Doctor of Philosophy. The University Of North Carolina