AN ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCES OF HAND-WRITING TEACHING ON READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS OF PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS: A LINGUISTIC APPROACH

Abstract

Topic of this research paper is deficiencies of reading comprehension skills of Turkish students in PISA researches. According to Ministry of Education, the most important part of the problem is handwriting teaching, which has been realized through cursive writing since 2005. Therefore, from next year on, it will be replaced by manuscript writing. This research was carried out to reveal whether reading comprehension deficiencies of Turkish students are resulted from cursive teaching. Quantitative and Qualitative research methods were used together, which is very common in social science researches. 2 experiments and a questionnaire were used to find out whether there is a relation between their cursive writing and reading comprehension skills. Data were processed through SPSS program. We concluded that there is a relation between students’ hand writing skills and their reading comprehension skills. The cursive writing program failed because both students and parents regard cursive unnecessary, and teachers have had no training for teaching cursive and students have to start primary school too early. Therefore, reading comprehension problem of Turkish students did not result from due to the cursive itself but the wrong way of its teaching.

Keywords

• Cursive, manuscript, teaching writing, reading comprehension

YAZMA ÖĞRETİMİNİN İLKOKUL ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN OKUMA-ANLAMA BECERİLERİ ÜZERİNE ETKİLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ: DİLBİLİMSEL BİR YAKLAŞIM

Öz

Bu çalışmanın konusu Türk çocuklarının anadillerinde yazılmış metinleri okuyup anlama becerisi açısından uluslararası PISA araştırmalarında yaşadıkları yetersizliktir. MEB’e göre sorunun en önemli kaynağı, okuma-yazma öğretiminin bir parçası olarak 2005 yılından beri kullanılan bitişik eğik el yazısı öğretimidir. Bu nedenle yazma öğretimi önümüzdeki yıldan itibaren dik düz yazıyla yapılacaktır. Araştırmanın temel amacı bu başarısızlığın kaynağının bitişik eğik el yazısı öğretimi olup olmadığını ortaya çıkarmaktır. Bu amaçla başlanan çalışmada nicel ve nitel araştırma yöntemleri birlikte kullanılmış, iki ek çalışma yardımıyla öğrencilerin yazı yazma becerileriyle okuma-anlama becerileri arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir. Üçüncü bir ek çalışma olarak sormaca yoluyla öğrencilerin bitişik eğik el yazısı öğretimi konusundaki görüşleri alınmıştır. SPSS programı yoluyla elde edilen bulgular ile alan yazınındaki diğer bulgulara göre, öğrencilerin yazı yazma becerileri ile okuma-anlama becerileri arasında koşutluk olduğu, çocukların ve velilerin yazı yazmayı el yazısı ile öğretmenin gerekçesi konusunda bilgi eksikliği bulunduğu, öğretmenlerin ise bitişik eğik el yazısı öğretimi konusunda eğitim eksiği olduğu, bu nedenle Türk çocuklarının okuma-anlama sorunun önemli bir kaynağının bitişik el yazısı öğretiminin kendisi değil yanlış uygulanması olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bitişik eğik el yazısı, dik düz yazı, yazma öğretimi, okuma-anlama

Kaynakça

1. Alber S.R, & Walshe S.E. (2004). When to self-correct spelling words: A systematic replication. Journal of Behavioral Education. Vol. 13, 51–66.
2. Babcock, M.K. & Fredy, J.J.(1988). Perception of dynamic information in static handwritten form. American Journal of Psycology, Vol.101, 1988
3. Beery, K., & Beery, N. (2006). Administration, scoring and teaching manual (5th ed.). Minneapolis, MN: NCS Pearson, Inc.
4. Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Jones, J., Wolf, B.J., Gould, L., Anderson-Youngstrom, M. & Apel, K. (2006). Early development of language by hand: composing, reading, listening, and speaking connections: Three letter-writing modes; and fast mapping in spelling. Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1), 61-92. doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2901_5
5. Berninger V, Chanquoy L. (2012). What writing is and how it changes across early and middle childhood development: A multidisciplinary perspective. Ch. 5. In: Grigorenko E, Mambrino
6. E, Preiss D, editors.Writing: A mosaic of perspectives and views. New York: Psychology Press; 2012. pp. 65–84
7. Bernstein, B. (1971). Class, Codes and Control: Theoretical Studies Towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 125–126, 127, 151, 143, 151–152.
8. Blazer, C. (2010). Should cursive handwriting still be taught in schools? (Vol. 0916). http://files.eric. ed.gov.zeus.tarleton.edu:82/fulltext/ED544702.pdf adresinden 22/2/2017 tarihinde erişildi

9. Bounds, G. (2010). How handwriting trains the brain: Forming letters is key to learning, memory ideas. The Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/ SB100014240 527487 04631504575531932754922518 adresinden 21/8/2017’de erişildi
10. Bowie, L. (2011, November 26). Debate on whether cursive writing should still be taught: Despite technology’s effects, some say it is still necessary. The Baltimore Sun. http://articles. baltimoresun.com/2011-11-26/news/bs-md-cursive-20111126_1_cursive-typing-baltimore-city- schools adresinden 24/4/2017 tarihinde erişildi
11. Breslin, D., & Exner, C. (1999). Construct validity of the in-hand manipulation test: Adiscriminant analysis with children without disability and children with spasticdiplegia. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53(4), 381-386.
12. Bruner, J. (1983). Child's Talk: Learning to Use Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press
13. Canbulat, A. N. (2013). Ses Temelli Cümle Yöntemi ile İlk Okuma Yazma Öğretiminde Anlamlı Okumayı Etkileyen Unsurlar. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities. mjh.akdeniz.edu.tr III/2, 2013, 173-191
14. Cao, F, Perfetti, C. A. (2016). Neural Signatures of the Reading-Writing Connection: Greater Involvement of Writing in Chinese Reading than English Reading. PLoS ONE 11(12):e0168414. doi:10.1371/ journal.phone.[phone]
15. Charles, M., Soppelsa, R. and Albaret, J. M. (2003). The concise assessment method for children's handwriting, Paris: Editions et Applications Psychologiques.
16. Chomsky, N. (1972). (1972). Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
17. Clark, G. J. (2010). The relationship between handwriting, reading, fine motor and visual-motor skills in kindergarteners. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 11399. Iowa State University.
18. Clark, A.& David C. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis 58(1) 7−19 Published by: Oxford University Press
19. Chartrel, E., & Vinter, A. (2008). The impact of spatio-temporal constraints on cursive letter handwriting in children. Learning and Instruction, 18, 537-547. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc. 2007.11.003
20. Cuban, L. (2014, May 18). Cursive writing and coding: Conflict over school goals (part 1). [Web log] http://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/cursive-writing-and-coding-conflicts-over school- goals-part-1/ adresinden 22/7/2017 tarihinde ulaşıldı
21. Dehaene, S. (2013). Inside the Letterbox: How Literacy Transforms the Human Brain. Cerebrum Vol. 2013; May-Jun 2013PMC3704307. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC3704307/
22. Domico, M. (1993). Patterns of development in narrative stories of emergent writers. In C. Kinzer & D. Leu (Eds.), Examining central issues in literacy research, theory, and practice (391-404). Chicago: National Reading Conference
23. Dublle, S. (2012). Teaching Cursive Handwriting First Leads to Fluency in Reading and Writing. Thesis submitted to Elizabeth Seton Loyola University, Maryland, USA
24. Duvall, B. (1985). Evaluating the difficulty of four handwriting styles used for instruction. Spectrum, 3(3), 1320
25. Early, G. H. (1976). Cursive handwriting, reading and spelling achievement. Academic Therapy. 12 (1) 67-74 ISSN 0001-396X
26. Ely, R. (2005). “Language and Literacy in the School Years”. In Gleason, J.B. (2005) The Development of Language. Longman
27. Gentry, R. (2012). Handwriting-the most elegant form of communication: My report from “Handwriting https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/raising-readerswritersandspellers/201201/handwriting- the-most-elegant-form-communication adresinden13/4/2017’de erişildi Summit”.
28. Güneş, F. (2006). Neden Eğik El Yazısı. MEB Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim Dergisi,Ocak 2006, sayı: 71, 17-19
29. Güneş, F. (2007). Bitişik eğik yazının yararları. Eğitim ve Denetim, Tüm Eğitimciler ve Eğitim Müfettişleri Sendikası Yayın Organı (TEM-SEN), 17(5), 9-15
30. Graham, S. (2006). Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham & J.
31. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writingresearch (pp. 187-207). New York: The Guilford Press.
32. Halsan, A. (2014). Girls have better motor skills than boys do. http://sciencenordic.com/girls-have- better-motor-skills-boys-do. adresinden 6/10/2017 tarihinde erişildi Hanover Research (2012). Should Schools Teach Cursive Writing? http://www.hanoverresearch.com/2012/02/13/should-schools-teach-cursive-writing/ adresinden 9/9/2017 tarihinde erişildi.
33. Hudson, R. (2003). Why education needs lingistics? Language, (6th ed.) Boston:Allyn & Bacon Bkz. D. M.Barone & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Literacy and young children: research-based practices. 23-44.
34. James, K. H., Gauthier I. (2006). Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory-motor brain network. Neuropsychologia. Vol. 44 2937–2949
35. James, K.H. & Engelhardt, L. (2012). The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1(1), 32-42.
36. Johnson, M.M. (2013). The relationship between spelling ability and reading fluency and comprehension in elementary students. Thesis submitted for the degree of masters of arts in education at Northern Michigan University. http://docplayer.net/24476619-The-relationship- between-spelling- ability-and-reading-fluency-and-comprehension-in-elementary-students-by- mandi-m-johnson.htlm adresinden 27/7/2017 ‘de erişildi
37. Karlsdottir, R. (1996). Print-script as initial handwriting style: I. Effects on the development of handwriting. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/ 0031383960400204 40(2), 161–174.
38. Kiefer, M & Trumpp, N. (2012). Embodiment theory and education: The foundations of cognition in perception and action, Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1 (2012), 15-20
39. Kleiman, J. (2013). Why E-Mail Will Never Replace the Handwritten Note. Forbes. Forbes.comLLC, 9 January 2013.
40. Klemm, W. (2013). What learning cursive does for your brain? In Psychology today March, 2013, http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/memory-medic/201303/what-learning-cursivedoesyour- brain adresinden 30/8/2017 tarihinde erişildi.
41. Konnikova, M. (2014). Being a better online reader. The New Yorker. http.//www.newyorker.com/ science/maria-konnikova/being-a-better-online-reader adresinden 10/10/ 2017 tarihinde erişildi
42. Kuczaj, S.A. (1979). Evidence for a language learning strategy: On the relative ease of acquisition of prefixes and suffixes. Child Development Vol 50 1-13
43. Kuhl, D. & Dewitz, P. (1994). The effect of handwriting style on alphabet recognition. New Orleans: Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Meeting
44. Lublin, J. (2008). Notes to interviewers should go beyond a simple thank you. The Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB120215930971242053 12/9/2017’de erişildi
45. Longcamp M, Anton JL, Roth M, Velay JL (2005). Premotor activations in response to visually presented single letters depend on the hand used to write: a study on left-handers. Neuropsychologia, 43: 1801– 1809 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.01.020 PMID: 16154456
46. Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J., & Velay, J. (2006). Remembering the orientation of newly learned characters depends on the associated writing knowledge: A comparison between handwriting doi:10.1016/j.humov.2006.07.007 typing. Human Movement Science, 25, 646-656.
47. Longcamp, M., Velay, J., Berninger, V. W.& Richards, T. (2016). Neuroanatomy of Handwriting and Related Reading and Writing Skills in Adults and Children with and without Learning Disabilities: https://pratiques.revues.org/3175#quotation adresinden 8/11/2017 de erişildi Connections. Pratiques. 171-172 2016.
48. McHale, K., & Cermak, S. (1992). Fine motor activities in elementary school: Preliminary findings and provisional implications for children with fine motor problems. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, Vol. 46, 898-903
49. Menary, R. (2006). Attacking The Bounds of Cognition. Philosophical Psychology. 19(3): 329−344
50. MEB (2006). İkögretim Türkçe Öğretim Programı ve Kılavuzu (1-5. Sınıflar). Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü Basım Evi
51. Moats, L. C. (2006). How spelling supports reading: And why it is more regular and predictable than you think. American Educator, 29(4)
52. Montgomery, D. (2012). The Contribution of Handwriting and Spelling Remediation to Overcoming Dyslexia. In T. N. Fern-Pollak, Dyslexia – A Comprehensive and International Approach.
53. Owens Jr., R.E. (2008). Language Development: An Introduction. (7th Edition). Boston, MA: Allyn& Bacon. ISBN 0-205-52556-3
54. Özsoy, A.S. (1996). Kitle İletişim Araçları, Dil ve Anadil Öğretimi Üçlemi. Dilbilim Araştırmaları.1996. Ankara. 192-216
55. Polikoff, M. (2013, May 1). Let cursive handwriting die. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/04/30/should-schools-require-children-to-learn cursive/let-cursive-handwriting-die adresinden 22/5/2017 tarihinde erişildi.
56. Pressler, M. W. (2006). The handwriting is on the wall: Researchers see a downside as keyboards replace pens in schools. The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/ AR2006101001475 _pf.html adresinden 11/4/2017 tarihinde erişildi
57. Qiao, E., Vinckier, F., Szwed, M., Nacccache, L., Valabrègue, R., Dehaene, S., ve diğ. (2010). Unconsciously deciphering handwriting: subliminal invariance for handwritten words in the Visual word form area. Neuroimage 49, 1786–1799. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.034
58. Ravitch, D. (2013). Handwriting expert to NC and SC: Don’t mandate cursive writing. Diane Ravitch’s Blog. http://dianeravitch.net/2013 /04/19/ handwriting-expert-to-nc-and-sc-dont- mandate-cursive-writing/ adresinden 23/4/2017 tarihinde erişildi
59. Ritchey, K. D. (2008). The building blocks of writing: Learning to write letters and spell words. Reading and Writing, 21(1-2), 27-47.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9063-0
60. Ritty, M., Solan, H., & Cool, S. (1993). Visual and sensory-motor functioning in the classroom: A preliminary report of ergonomic demands. Journal of the American Optometric Association, 64, 238-244
61. Richgels, D.J. (1995). Invented spelling ability and printed word learning in kindergarten. Reading Research Quarterly 30: 96109.
62. Roebers, M. C., Marianne, R, Neuenschwander, R., Michel, E. (2013). The relation between cognitive and motor performance and their relevance for children’s transition to school: A latent variable approach. Human Movement Science (33) 1, November, 2013. Elsevier
63. Ross, S. M. & Morrison. G. R. (2004). Experimental research methods, In D. J. Jonassen (Ed).Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2nd Ed., (pp. 1021- 1043). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
64. Shadmir, R. & Holcomb, H. (1997). Neural Corrolates of Motor memory Consolidation. Science Magazine, Vol. 277
65. Teulings, H., & Romero, D. H. (2003). Submovement analysis in learning cursive handwriting or block print. Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the International Graphonomics Society, 107-110. adresinden 12/2/2017 tarihinde erişildi
66. Tosunoğlu, M. (2010). Farklı yazı stillerinin okuduğunu anlama sürecine etkisi. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, 27(27), 679-690
67. Trond, E.T. (2011). Better learning through handwriting. Writing by hand strengthens thelearning process. When typing on a keyboard, this process may be impaired. http://www.uis.no/research- and-phd-studies/research-areas/school-and-learning/learning-environment/better-learning- through-handwriting-article29782-8869.htmlAdresinden 22/9/2017 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
68. Vinter, A.,& Chartrel, E. (2010). Effects of different types of learning on handwritingmovements in young children. Learning and Instruction, 20, 476-486.doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.07.001
69. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press