A Model that Improves Students' Reading Comprehension and Speaking Skills: RDRWP

Öz

This study examined the effects of the RDRWP model on students’ reading comprehension and speaking skills across middle and high school classrooms in Türkiye. Grounded in constructivist theory, the model integrates book reading, discussion, collaboration, and project-based production, conceptualizing literacy learning as a socially mediated and interactive process. The study employed a mixed-methods design combining quantitative and qualitative data to provide a comprehensive understanding of the implementation and outcomes of the model. The quantitative strand adopted an experimental design to examine changes in students’ reading comprehension and speaking performance, while the qualitative strand drew on semi-structured interviews with participating students and practicing teachers. The 20-week implementation process involved 10 teachers, 72 middle school students, and 66 high school students from different grade levels. Quantitative findings demonstrated that participation in the RDRWP model contributed positively to the development of students’ reading comprehension and speaking skills. Qualitative findings further revealed that the model promoted active participation, collaborative interaction, and the development of a stronger reading culture within classrooms. Overall, the findings suggest that the RDRWP model provides a promising pedagogical framework for integrating reading, discussion, and collaborative meaning-making practices in literacy education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reading skills
• Speaking skills
• Book reading model
• Book clubs

Öğrencilerin Okuduğunu Anlama ve Konuşma Becerilerini Geliştiren Bir Model: RDRWP

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki ortaokul ve lise sınıflarında RDRWP modelinin öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama ve konuşma becerileri üzerindeki etkilerini incelemiştir. Yapılandırmacı kurama dayanan model, okuryazarlık öğrenmesini sosyal olarak aracılanmış ve etkileşimli bir süreç olarak ele almakta; kitap okuma, tartışma, iş birliği ve proje temelli üretim etkinliklerini bütünleştirmektedir. Araştırmada, modelin uygulanma sürecini ve sonuçlarını kapsamlı biçimde ortaya koyabilmek amacıyla karma yöntem deseni kullanılmıştır. Nicel boyutta deneysel desen benimsenerek öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama ve konuşma performanslarındaki değişimler incelenmiş; nitel boyutta ise uygulamaya katılan öğrenciler ve öğretmenlerle gerçekleştirilen yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelerden elde edilen veriler analiz edilmiştir. Yirmi hafta süren uygulama sürecine 10 öğretmen, 72 ortaokul öğrencisi ve 66 lise öğrencisi katılmıştır. Nicel bulgular, RDRWP modeline katılımın öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama ve konuşma becerilerine olumlu katkı sağladığını göstermiştir. Nitel bulgular ise modelin aktif katılımı, iş birlikli etkileşimi, öğrenci bağlılığını ve sınıflarda daha güçlü bir okuma kültürünün gelişimini desteklediğini ortaya koymuştur. Sonuç olarak, bulgular RDRWP modelinin okuryazarlık eğitiminde okuma, konuşma, iş birliği ve işbirlikli anlam oluşturma uygulamalarını bütünleştiren güçlü bir pedagojik çerçeve sunduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Okuma becerileri
• konuşma becerileri
• kitap okuma modeli
• kitap kulüpleri

Kaynakça

1. Akın, E., & Çeçen, M. A. (2014). Secondary school students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies (Muş-Bulanık sample). Turkish Studies, 9(8), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.6988
2. Anderson, R. C., & Pearson, P. D. (1984). A schema-theoretic view of basic processes in reading comprehension. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 255–291). Longman.
3. Arı, G. (2014). The effects of SQ3R and DR-TA reading strategies used by fifth-grade students on comprehension. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 10(2), 535–555. https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.49673
4. Arıcı, A. F., & Taşkın, Y. (2019). Relationship between reading skills and other language skills. International Journal of Field Education, 5(2), 185–194.
5. Baki, Y. (2023). The effect of the reading circle method on reading culture. RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies, Ö13, 127–156. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1379041
6. Balantekin, M., & Pilav, S. (2017). The effect of the reading circle method on understanding skills. Kırıkkale University Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 149–170.
7. Bamford, J., & Day, R. (2004). Extensive reading activities for teaching language. Cambridge University Press.
8. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

9. Bulut, K. (2015). The effect of microteaching on pre-service Turkish language teachers' speaking skills and anxieties (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University.
10. Bulut, K., Açık, F., & Çiftçi, Ö. (2016). The effect of microteaching on pre-service Turkish language teachers’ speaking skills. Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 4(1), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.36249
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç, Ç. E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Scientific research methods (25th ed.). Pegem Academy.
12. Çermik, H., Doğan, B., Ateş, S., & Yıldırım, K. (2019). Preservice teachers’ views on literature circles. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 87, 1–15.
13. Certo, J., Moxley, K., Reffitt, K., & Miller, J. A. (2010). I learned how to discuss a book: children’s perceptions of literature circles across grade levels and ability levels. Literacy Research & Instruction, 49(3), 243–263.
14. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105.
15. Chung, S. M., & Lee, M. Y. (2012). Using task-based and reader-response approaches in teaching children’s literature in the ESL classroom. NCUE Journal of Humanities, 6, 15–30.
16. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
17. Cullinan, B. E. (2000). Independent reading and school achievement. School Library Media Research, 3, 1–24.
18. Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: voice and choice in book clubs and reading groups (2nd ed.). Pembroke Publishers Limited.
19. Daniels, H. (2006). What is the next big thing with literature circles? Voices from the Middle, 13(4), 10–15.
20. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Pergamon.
21. Doğan, B. (2006). The effect of strategy teaching on students' reading comprehension in cooperative and traditional classes. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER), 23, 82–93.
22. Doğan, B., Çermik, H., Ateş, S., & Yıldırım, K. (2019). Preservice teachers’ views on the roles they took in literature circles. Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 7(1), 141–157.
23. Duursma, E., Augustyn, M., & Zuckerman, B. (2008). Reading aloud to children: the evidence. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 93(7), 554–557. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2006.106336
24. Emiroğlu, S., & Pınar, F.N. (2013). Relationship between listening and other skill types. Turkish Studies, 8(4), 769–782.
25. Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6, 126–135.
26. Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relationships between speech and reading (pp. 331–358). MIT Press.
27. Hardin, J. (2012). Motivating disengaged readers: Fifth grade readers and university students partner in literature circles (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas Tech University.
28. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
29. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). Cooperation in the classroom. Interaction Book Company.
30. Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 215–239). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31. Karasar, N. (1994). Scientific research method (6th ed.). 3A Research Education Consultancy Ltd.
32. Karatay, H. (2016). The comprehension level of figurative language by 6-8th grade students. Milli Eğitim Journal, 45(210), 265-286.
33. Karatay, H. (2017). The effect of literature circles on text analysis and reading desire. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 65-75, https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p65.
34. Karatay, H., & Soysal, İ. (2021). The effect of literature circles on the reading skills of 5th grade students. RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies, 22, 666–677. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.897109
35. Karatay, H., Külah, E., & Kaya, S. (2020). Methods, techniques and models for developing reading habit. Research in Reading & Writing Instruction, 8(1), 89–107. https://doi.org/10.35233/oyea.707967
36. Kardaş, M. N., & Görmez, E. (2017). The effect of aquarium method on the bilingual learners' Turkish speech anxiety. Iğdır University Journal of Social Sciences, 12, 1–30.
37. Kim, D., & Hall, J. K. (2002). The role of an interactive book reading program in the development of second language pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 332–348.
38. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science: challenges for practice and policy. Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 199–206.
39. Mete, G. (2020). Implementation of the reading circle method in reading education. Journal of History School, 45, 1147–1158. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/Joh40307
40. Morgan, D.N., Mraz, V., Padak, N.D. & Rasinski, T. (2009). Independent reading: practical strategies for grades K-3. Guilford Publications.
41. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
42. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life. Pearson.
43. Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: equilibration of cognitive structures. Viking Press.
44. Pitton, D. E. (2005). Lit circles, collaboration and student interest. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 9(4), 84–90.
45. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: the nature of constructively responsive reading. Routledge.
46. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
47. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1995). Reciprocal teaching: a review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 479–530.
48. Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In P. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and Performance VI (pp. 719–747). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
49. Schoonmaker, R. G. (2014). A blended learning approach to reading circles for English language learners. Second Language Studies, 33(1), 1–22.
50. Slavin, R. E. (1991). Cooperative learning: theory, research, and practice. Prentice-Hall.
51. Smith, F. (1994). Understanding reading: a psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. Routledge.
52. Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1465.html
53. Soares, L. B. (2009). An investigation of literature circles and critical literacy: differentiated learning opportunities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of North Carolina.
54. Souvignier, E., & Mokhlesgerami, M. (2006). Using self-regulation as a framework for implementing strategy-instruction to foster reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 212–228.
55. Stien, D., & Beed, P. L. (2004). Bringing the gap between fiction and nonfiction in the literature circle setting. The Reading Teacher, 57(6), 510-518
56. Tercanlıoğlu, L., & Akarsu, O. (2012). Reading theories in reading education. Journal of Graduate School of Social Sciences, 16(3), 59–72.
57. Thomas, J. W., & Mergendoller, J. R. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Buck Institute for Education.
58. Tracey, D., & Morrow, L. M. (2006). Lenses on reading: an introduction to theories and models. Guilford Press.
59. Varita, D. (2017). Improving reading comprehension through literature circles. English Education Journal, 8(2), 234–244. https://jurnal.usk.ac.id/EEJ/article/view/7231/5943
60. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
61. Whittingham, J. (2013). Literature circles: A perfect match for online instruction. Tech Trends, 57(4), 53–58.