İçerik temelli ingilizce öğretimi kapsam ve etkililiği üzerine ilkokul ingilizce öğretmen görüşleri

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 612 - 626, 30.12.2021

İrem Kışlal Melike Ünal Gezer

https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.1019971

Öz

Bu çalışma ilkokul düzeyinde İngilizce öğreten bir grup İngilizce öğretmeninin içerik temelli yabancı dil öğretimi etkililiği üzerine olan algılarını raporlamayı hedeflemiştir. Katılımcı öğretmenler içerik temelli İngilizce öğretim programını temel alan bir kurumda İngilizce eğitimi vermiş ve bu programın genel hatları ve efektif oluşuyla ilgili durumları anlamak adına oluşturulan mülakatlara katılmışlardır. Erken yaş İngilizce öğrenenlerle çalışan hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerine içerik temelli İngilizce öğretiminin etkililiği üzerine sorular verilmiş ve mülakatlarında içerik temelli İngilizce öğretiminin güçlü ve zayıf yönlerini ve kendi tecrübelerini bildiren paylaşımlarda bulunmuşlardır. Mülakatın içerik analizleri, içerik temelli İngilizce öğretiminin genel olarak yabancı dil eğitimine katkılar sunacağını göstermiştir. İçerik esaslı İngilizce öğrenimi ve öğretimi hem öğrenenler hem de öğretenler için hem öğretici hem de eğlenceli öğrenme fırsatları sunmaktadır. Hedef grup mülakatları ilgili öğretmen grubunun hem erken yaş öğrenenler için içerik temelli yabancı dil öğretimi ile ilgili gerekli bilgi ve beceri donanımına sahip olduklarını hem de katılımcı öğretmenlerin bu metoda pozitif tutum sergilediklerini bulgulamıştır. Bu çalışmanın bulguları eğitim politikası yapan ve program oluşturan yetkililere yabancı dil öğretiminde otantik ve içerik temelli öğrenme fırsatları sunmaları konusunda çıkarımlar sağlamayı hedeflemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Erken yaş yabancı dil öğrenenler, çocuklara yabancı dil öğretimi, içerik temelli öğretim, hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmeni

Turkish primary-level efl teachers’ views on the scope and effectiveness of content-based instruction

Öz

The present study aims to report on the perceptions of a group of English as a foreign (EFL) teachers’ on content-based instruction (CBI) in English as a foreign language teaching and its effectiveness for primary school students. The teachers participating in the study offered English as a foreign language through CBI and they were interviewed about their perspectives in terms of CBI lessons and the nature of overall program. In-service English language teachers working with young language learners received questions about the effectiveness of CBI, the advantages and disadvantages of implementation of CBI and their experiences and observations with it. The results show that CBI is a major opportunity for language teachers to increase the quality of English instruction with young language learners. Teaching and learning through content is fun and worthwhile both for students and teachers. Data collected through focus group interview reveal that teachers have positive attitudes towards CBI and they are quite informed about the scope and effectiveness of this instructional program for young language learners. Findings of the present study have important implications for policy makers and educational planning in Turkey by creating authentic learning opportunities integrating content matter with foreign language instruction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Teaching English to young learners, young language learners, content-based instruction, CBI, English-as-a-foreign language

Kaynakça

• Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Multilingual Matters.
• Barwell, R. (2005). Critical issues for language and content in mainstream classrooms: introduction. Linguistics and Education, 16, 143-150.
• Bayyurt, Y., & Alptekin, C. (2000). EFL syllabus design for Turkish young learners in bilingual education contexts. In J. Moon & M. Nikolov (Eds.), Research into teaching English to young learners, (pp. 312-322). Pecs: Pecs University Press.
• Bayyurt, Y., & Yalçın, S. (2014). Content based instruction. In S. Çelik (Ed.), Approaches and principles in English as a foreign language (EFL) education, (pp. 200-223). Eğiten Kitap.
• Bozdoğan, D. & Karlıdağ, B. (2013). A case of CLIL practice in the Turkish context: lending an ear to students. Asian EFL Journal Research Articles, 15, 89-110.
• Brown, D. (2011). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson.
• Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why and why not. System, 41, 587-597.
• Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System, 39, 523-532.
• Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. J. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. New York: Newbury House.
• British Council. (2013). Türkiye’de İngilizce Öğretimi Araştırması. Retrieved from https://www.britishcouncil.org.tr/programmes/education/research
• Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Snow, M. A. (2014). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Boston: National Geographic Learning.
• Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 543-562.
• Crandall, J.A. (1998). Collaborate and cooperate: teacher education for integrating language and content instruction. English Teaching Forum, 36, 2-9.
• Crandall, J. A. (1994). Content-centered language learning. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington DC. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.
• Curtain, H., & Dahlberg, C. A. (2010). Languages and children: making the match (4th ed.). Pearson.
• Davila, H. A. H. & Vela, M. L. C. (2011). A case study on content based instruction for primary school children. How Journal: A Colombian Journal for Teachers of English, 18, 112-134.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Sage.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
• Genesee, F. (2000). Brain research: implications for second language learning. ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington DC.
• Genesee, F. (1994). Language and content: Lessons from immersion (Educational Practice Report No.11). Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, and National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
• Goris, J. (2019). Content and Language Integrated Learning in English as a Foreign Language: A European Perspective. Radbout University.
• Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Pearson.
• Huang, K. (2011). Motivating lessons: A classroom-oriented investigation of the effects of content-based instruction on EFL young learners’ motivated behaviors and classroom verbal interaction. System, 39, 186-200.
• Krashen, S. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and use: the Taipei lectures. Heinemann.
• Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Cambridge University Press.
• Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practise in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
• Larsen-Freeman, D. (2004). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
• Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra J. M. (2009). Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64, 367-375.
• Loepp, F. L. (1999). Models of curriculum integration. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25, 21-25.
• Marsh, D. (2008). Language awareness and CLIL. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Springer.
• Met, M. (1998). Curriculum decision-making in content-based language teaching. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.), Beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and multilingual education, (pp. 35-63). Multilingual Matters.
• Met, M. (1991). Learning Language through Content: Learning Content through Language. Foreign Language Annals, 24, 281-295.
• Meyer, O. (2010). Introducing the CLIL-pyramid: Key strategies and Principles for Quality CLIL planning and teaching. In, M. Einsenmann, & T. Summer (Eds.), Basic issues in EFL-teaching and learning. Heidelberg.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2017). English language curriculum for primary education. Ankara: Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı
• Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching young language learners. Oxford University Press.
• Pladevall-Ballester, E. & Vallbona, A. (2016). CLIL in minimal input contexts: A longitudinal study of primary school learner’s receptive skills. System, 58, 37-48.
• Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approach and method in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
• Shin, J. K., & Crandall, C. A. (2014). Teaching young learners English: from theory to practice. Cengage Learning.
• Short, D.J. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 627–656.
• Snow, M. A. (2014). Content-based and immersion models of second/foreign language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.),Teaching English as a second or foreign language, (pp. 438-354). Heinle Cengage Learning.
• Snow, M. A. & Brinton, D. M. (1997). The content-based classroom: perspectives on integrating language and content. Longman.
• Snow, M. A., Met, M. & Geneese F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201-217.
• Stoller, F. L., & Grabe, W. (1997). A six-Ts approach to content-based instruction. In M.A. Snow & D.M. Brinton (Eds.), The content‐based classroom: perspectives on integrating language and content, (pp.53-66). Longman.
• Stryker, B. S. & Leaver L. B. (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language education: models and methods. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University.
• Tedick, D., Torgensen, K. & Geffert, T. (2001). Content-based language instruction: the foundation of language immersion education. The Bridge: From Research to Practice, 4, 1-8.
• Turkey Education Vision 2023. (2019). T.C. Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://2023vizyonu.meb.gov.tr
• Vazquez, R. (2009). Motivating student through content-based instruction. Published master’s thesis. Pirhua University.
• Wesche, M. B., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based, and content-based language instruction. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics, (pp. 207-228). Oxford University Press.
• Yalçın, Ş. (2013). İçerik temelli yabancı dil öğretim modeli. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 30, 107-121.
• Yalçın, Ş. (2007). Exploring the effects of content-based instruction on skill development, domain-specific knowledge and metacognition in the L2. Published master’s thesis. Boğaziçi University.
• Zarobe, Y. R. & Lasagabaster, D. (2010). CLIL in Spain: implementation, results and teacher training. Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
• Zhang, J. & Ke Q. (2017). The impact of CBI on college English autonomous learning ability. 4th International Conference on Advanced Education and Management, 264-270.