Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Süreç Tür Temelli Yazma Yaklaşımı ile İlgili Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Geleneksel yazma eğitiminin sınırlarını aşarak, öğrencilerin yazma becerilerini çok yönlü bir şekilde geliştirmeyi amaçlayan süreç tür temelli yazma yaklaşımı (STTYY), çağdaş eğitimde önemli bir yer edinmiştir. Eğitimde öğrenci merkezli bir anlayışın önem kazandığı günümüzde, öğretmen adaylarının STTYY'ye ilişkin farkındalıkları ve bu yaklaşımı uygularken benimsedikleri stratejiler, araştırmanın odak noktasını oluşturmaktadır. Bu araştırmanın temel amacı, sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının süreç tür temelli yazma yaklaşımına yönelik görüşlerini ve deneyimlerini derinlemesine incelemektir. Araştırma nitel araştırma desenlerinden biri olan fenomenolojik desene göre yürütülmüştür. Araştırmanın katılımcıları ölçüt örnekleme yöntemine göre belirlenmiştir. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını yirmi öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde içerik analizi uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları öğretmen adaylarının STTYY’ye yönelik olumlu görüşe sahip olduklarını ve farkındalıklarının olduğunu göstermektedir. Öğretmen adayları bu yaklaşımın öğrencilere birçok katkısının olduğunu ve güçlü ve zayıf yanlarının olduğunu ifade etmişlerdir. Özellikle öğretmen adayları bu yaklaşımı uygularken öğrenci merkezli bir anlayışı benimseyerek süreci yürüteceklerini ifade etmişlerdir. Öğretmen adayları STTYY’yi uygularken çeşitli sorunlarla karşılaşabileceklerini belirtmişlerdir. Bununla birlikte öğretmen adayları bu yaklaşımı etkileyen önemli faktörlerin olduğunu ve bu yaklaşımı uygularken tamamlayıcı ve geleneksel ölçme ve değerlendirme araçlarını kullanacaklarını söylemişlerdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yazma becerisi
• metin türü
• fenomenoloji
• süreç tür temelli yazma yaklaşımı

Examination of the Opinions of Prospective Classroom Teachers on the Process Genre-Based Writing Approach

Öz

The process and genre-based writing approach (PGBWA), which aims to develop students' writing skills in a multifaceted way by surpassing the limits of traditional writing education, has gained an important place in contemporary education. In today's education where a student-centered understanding is gaining importance, the awareness of prospective teachers about PGBWA and the strategies they adopt while implementing this approach form the focus point of the research. The main aim of this research is to deeply examine the opinions and experiences of prospective primary school teachers towards the process and genre-based writing approach. The research has been conducted according to the phenomenological design, which is one of the qualitative research designs. Participants of the research have been determined according to the criterion sampling method. Twenty prospective teachers constitute the participants of the research. A semi-structured interview form was used as a data collection tool in the research. Content analysis was applied in the analysis of the data. The research results show that prospective teachers have positive views towards PGBWA and are aware of it. Prospective teachers have expressed that this approach has many contributions to students and it has strengths and weaknesses. Especially, prospective teachers have stated that they will manage the process by adopting a student-centered understanding while implementing this approach. Prospective teachers have indicated that they may face various problems while implementing PGBWA. However, prospective teachers have said that there are significant factors affecting this approach and they will use complementary and traditional assessment and evaluation tools while implementing this approach.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• writing skills
• text type
• phenomenology
• process genre-based writing approach

Kaynakça

1. Acar, A.S. (2023). Genre pedagogy: A writing pedagogy to help L2 writing instructors enact their classroom writing assessment literacy and feedback literacy. Assessing Writing, 56, 100717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100717
2. Ariyanfar, S., & Mitchell, R. (2020). Teaching writing skills through genre: applying the genre-based approach in Iran. International Research Journal of Management, IT & Social Sciences, 7(1), 242-257.
3. Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153-160.
4. Bazerman, C. (1981). What written knowledge does: three examples of academic discourse. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11(3), 361-387.
5. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
6. Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25-37.
7. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge.
8. Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publication.

9. Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
10. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
11. Çakmak, F. (2017). A case study on teacher practice of genre-based writing and classroom ınteraction patterns at an advanced level. The Literacy Trek, 3(2), 114-129.
12. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105285962
13. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
14. Dirgeyasa, I.W. (2016). Genre-based approach: what and how to teach and to learn writing. English Language Teaching, 9(9), 45-51.
15. Erdoğan, Ö., & Aktürkoğlu, B. (2014). Süreç temelli yazma uygulamalarının yazılı anlatıma ve yazmaya ilişkin tutuma etkisi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1), 438–459.
16. Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Voelkl, K. E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn behavior and achievement among fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 95(5), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1086/461853
17. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387.
18. Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2005). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 695-727). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Genç Ersoy, B., & Göl Dede, D. (2022). Developing writing skills, writing attitudes and motivation through educational games: action research. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 9(3), 569-589. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1089781
20. Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4–6: A national survey. The Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 494–518. https://doi.org/10.1086/651193
21. Gillespie, A., & Graham, S. (2014). A meta-analysis of writing interventions for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 80(4), 454-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914527238
22. Göçer, A., & Kurt, A. (2022). Yazma eğitiminde süreç-tür odaklı yazma yaklaşımının kullanımı. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(2), 335-360. https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.1117059
23. Graham, S. (2006). Strategy Instruction and the Teaching of Writing: A Meta-Analysis. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 187–207). The Guilford Press.
24. Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D., & Olinghouse, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide (NCEE 2012-4058). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
25. Graham, S., & Harris, K.R. (2013). Common core state standards, writing, and students with ld: recommendations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 28–37.
26. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Mason, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge, and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(2), 207-241.
27. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Mason, L., Fink-Chorzempa, B., Moran, S., & Saddler, B. (2008). How do primary grade teachers teach handwriting? A national survey. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21(1-2), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9064-z
28. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Santangelo, T. (2015). Research-based writing practices and the common core: Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. The Elementary School Journal, 115(4), 498–522. https://doi.org/10.1086/681964
29. Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2011). Writing to read: A meta-analysis of the impact of writing and writing instruction on reading. Harvard Educational Review, 81(4), 710–744. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.4.t2k0m13756113566
30. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 879–896. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029185
31. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007a). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445
32. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007b). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Alliance for Excellent Education.
33. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2013). Writing next: Effective strategies for teaching writing in grades K-6. Routledge. Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: teachers and children at work. Heinemann Educational Books.
34. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Hammersley, M., & Traianou, A. (2012). Ethics in qualitative research. Sage Publications.
36. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
37. Huang, Y., & Jun Zhang, L. (2020). Does a process-genre approach help improve students’ argumentative writing in English as a foreign language? Findings from an intervention study. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(4), 339- 364. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1649223
38. Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
39. İpek Eğilmez, N. (2024). Türkçe öğretmenlerinin süreç temelli yazmaya yönelik görüş ve deneyimleri. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 12(2), 437-460. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.1443923
40. Jee, S. & Aziz, A. (2021) The Application of the Process-Based Writing Approach in Composing an Argumentative Essay: A Case Study of a Suburban Secondary School of Mukah District in Sarawak. Creative Education, 12, 880-896. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.124064.
41. Johnson, A.P. (2008). Teaching and reading writing: a guidebook for tutoring and remediating students. Rowman and Littlefied Education.
42. Karatay, H. (2023). Süreç ve tür temelli yazma eğitimi. H. Karatay (Ed.). Süreç ve tür temelli yazma yaklaşımı (s. 1-12). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
43. Karatay, H., & Demirel, A. (2023). Süreç ve tür temelli yazma eğitiminde ölçme ve değerlendirme. H. Karatay (Ed.). Süreç ve tür temelli yazma yaklaşımı (s. 1-12). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
44. Kaya, B., & Ateş, S. (2016). Üstbilişsel beceri odaklı yazma süreçlerinin dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin hikâye yazma becerisine etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 41(187), 137-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.6752
45. Kaya Özgül, B., Ateş, S., Yıldırım, K., & Rasinski, T. (2020). Geri bildirimin ilkokul dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin akıcı yazma becerilerine etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 45(201), 189–205. https://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.8413
46. Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive development perspective. Journal of Writing Research, 1(1), 1-26.
47. Kitajroonchai, N., Kitajroonchai, T., & Sanitchai, P. (2022). The effects of process genre-based writing and process writing approaches on asian efl pre-university students’ writing performance. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 13(4), 860-871. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1304.19
48. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Lee, I. (2012). Genre-based teaching and assessment in secondary English classrooms. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 11(4), 120-136.
49. Luu, T.T. (2011). Teaching writing through genre-based approach. BELT Journal, 2(1), 121-136.
50. Merriam, S.B., & Tisdell, E.J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE Publications.
51. Mirzamohammadi, B. (2024). The effects of using process genre approach on writing skill development in esp classes: a case of business students. International Journal of Practical and Pedagogical Issues in English Education, 2(1), 13-23. doi: 10.22034/ijpie.2024.192902
52. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications.
53. Murray, D. M. (1972). Teach writing as a process not product. The Leaflet, 71(3), 11-14.
54. Müldür, M. (2023). Yazma eğitiminde dijital kitap kullanımı. S. Aslan (Ed.). Teknolojik yaklaşımlara dayalı Türkçe öğretimi. (ss. 240-279). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
55. Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
56. Nguyen, T.T.A., & Truong, V. (2024). The effects of scaffolding in genre-based writing instructions on efl learners’ writing performance. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 5(1), 23-30.
57. Özdemir, O. (2019). Yazma eğitiminde süreç, tür ve süreç-tür temelli yaklaşımların kullanımları. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(1), 545-573.
58. Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222
59. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage Publications.
60. Reddy, Y. M., & Andrade, H. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862859
61. Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027268
62. Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage Publications.
63. Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
64. Saladana, J., & Omata, M. (2018). Qualitative research analyzing life. Sage Publications.
65. Sánchez, L. F., & López, M. M. (2019). Analysing mathematical word problem solving with secondary education CLIL students: A pilot study. Latin American Journal Of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 12(1), 72-98. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2019.12.1.4
66. Sever, E., & Memiş, A. (2013). Süreç temelli yazma modellerinin ilkokul dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin yazım–noktalama becerisine ve yazma eğilimine etkisi. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(9), 1-11.
67. Tavşanlı, Ö.F. (2019). Süreç temelli yazma modüler programının ilkokul 2. sınıf öğrencilerinin yazmaya ilişkin tutum, yazılı anlatım becerisi ve yazar kimliği üzerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa.
68. Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: responding to the needs of all learners. ASCD.
69. Turner, J. C., & Paris, S. G. (1995). How literacy tasks ınfluence children's motivation for literacy. The Reading Teacher, 48(8), 662-673.
70. Uzun, K., & Topkaya, E.Z. (2020). The effects of genre-based ınstruction and genre-focused feedback on l2 writing performance. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(5), 438-461. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1661317.
71. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
72. Y, U. (2022). Effectiveness of genre based approach on enhancing creative writing skills in english among secondary school students. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 3(6), 3793-3797.
73. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.