İşitme Engelli Okuyucuların Biçimbilim Farkındalık Becerilerinin İncelenmesi

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 26 Sayı: 3, 653 - 660, 15.05.2018

Emre Laçin , Birkan Güldenoğlu , Tevhide Kargın

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.419285

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu araştırmada, işitme engelli öğrencilerin biçimbilim
farkındalık becerilerinin işiten akranlarıyla karşılaştırmalı olarak
incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmaya Ankara ilindeki dört farklı lisede
öğrenim gören 112 (53 işitmen engelli - 59 işiten) öğrenci katılmıştır. Çalışma
içerisinde öğrencilerin biçimbilim farkındalık becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi
amacıyla iki farklı boşluk doldurma işlemi geliştirilmiştir. Her iki işlemde
öğrencilerden, hedef sözcüklere uygun ekleri ekleyerek cümlelerde yer alan
boşlukları doldurmaları istenmiştir. İşlemler, öğrencilerin kendi okulları
içerisinde belirlenmiş bir ortamda yaklaşık 10-15 dakikalık bireysel
oturumlarla uygulanmıştır. Yapılan uygulamalardan elde edilen veriler, MANOVA
ile analiz edilmiştir. Analizden elde edilen sonuçlar, işitme engelli
öğrencilerin işitenlere göre biçimbilim farkındalık becerilerinde ciddi
sınırlılıkları olduğunu göstermiştir. Tartışma bölümünde ortaya çıkan bu bulgu
işitme engelli öğrencilerin sahip oldukları dil ve okuma becerileri temelinde
tartışılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

biçimbilim, biçimbilim farkındalığı, işitme engelli okuyucular, okuma ve okuduğunu anlama.

Examining the Morphological Awareness of Deaf Turkish Readers

Öz

The purpose of this study was to comparatively examine the morphological awareness skills of Turkish deaf and normal hearing readers. The study group consisted of 112 students (53 were deaf students and 59 were students with normal hearing) who were enrolled in high schools in Ankara. Two different fill-in the blank tasks were developed in order to assess students’ morphological awareness skills in this study. For both of the tasks the students were asked to fill-in the blanks in the sentences by adding appropriate suffixes to the target words. The tasks were carried out in a predetermined place in students’ schools during one-to-one sessions and lasted about 10 to 15 minutes in average. MANOVA was used to analyze the data collected from the tasks. The results of the analyses showed that deaf students had significant limitations in morphological awareness skills compared to their hearing counterparts. This finding is discussed in terms of language skills and its impacts on reading acquisition of deaf students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

morphology, morphological awareness, deaf readers, reading and reading comprehension.

Kaynakça

• Blamey, P., Sarant, J. Z., Paatsch, L. E., Barry, J. G., Wales, C. P., Wright, M., Psarros, C., Rattigan, K. & Tooher, R. (2001). Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss and age in children with impaired hearing. Journal of speech, language and hearing research, 44, 264–285.
• Breadmore, H. L. (2007). Inflectional morphology in the literacy of deaf children. Un-published PhD Thesis. The University of Birmingham
• Brown, J. B. (1984). Examination of grammatical mor-phemes in the language of hard-of hearing children, Volta Review, 86, 229–238.
• Bryant, P. & Nunes, T. (2006). Morphemes and literacy: a starting point. In Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Pretzlik, U. and Hurry, J. (Ed.), Improving literacy by teaching mor-phemes, Routledge: Taylor and Francis Group, London and Newyork (s.335).
• Carlisle, J. F. (1995). Morphological awareness and early reading achievement. In L. B. Feldman, (Eds.), Morphological aspects of language processing (pp. 189–209). HilSDale,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Carlısle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12, 169-190.
• Chamberlaın, C. & Mayberry, R. I. (2000). Theorizing about the relation between ASL and reading. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford and R. I. Mayberry (Ed.), Language acquisition by eye, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, (s. 221-259).
• Clark,D., Gilbert, G. & Anderson, M. (2011) Morphological Knowledge and Decoding Skills of Deaf Readers, Psychology, 2, 109-116.
• Conrad, R. (1979). The deaf school child. London: Harper and Row.
• Cooper, R. L. (1967) The ability of deaf and hearing children to apply morphological rules, Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 10, 77–86.
• Deacon, S. H., & Bryant, P. (2006). Getting to the root: Young writers' sensitivity to the role of root morphemes in the spelling of inflected and derived words. Journal of Child Language, 33(02), 401-417
• Deacon, S. H., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied psycholinguistics, 25(2), 223-238.
• Fabbretti, D., Volterra, V. & Pontecorvo, C. (1998). Written language abilities in deaf Italians. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 3, 231-244.
• Fowler, A.E. & Liberman, I. Y. (1995). The role of phonology and orthography in mor-phological awareness. In Feldman, LL.B. (ed.) Morphological aspects of language processing. pp. 157-188. Hillsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Gaustad, M. G. & Kelly, R. R. (2004). The relationship between reading achievement and morpho-logical word analysis in deaf and hearing students matched for reading level, Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 269–285.
• Gaustad, M. G. (2000). Morphographic analysis as a word identification strategy for deaf readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 60-80.
• Gaustad, M. G., Kelly, R. R., Payne, J. A. & Lylak, E. (2002). Deaf and hearing students’ morphological knowledge applied to printed English, American Annals of the Deaf, 144, 320–324.
• Geers, A. E. (2003). Predictors of reading skill development in children with early cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing, 24, 59-68.
• Girgin, Ü. (1997). Okuduğunu anlamada işitme engelli çocukların soru yanıt stratejilerini etkin kullanımı, Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 302, 29-36.
• Holt, J. A. (1993). Stanford achievement test – 8th edition: reading comprehension sub-group results, American Annals of the Deaf, 138, 172-175.
• Hoogmoed, A. H., Verhoeven, L., Schreuder, R., & Knoors, H. (2011). Morphological sensitivity in deaf readers of Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32(03), 619-634.
• Isaacson, S. (1996). Simple ways to assess deaf or hard of hearing student’ writing skills. Volta Review, 98(1), 183-199.
• Izzo, A. (2002). Phonemic awareness and reading ability: An investiga- tion with young readers who are deaf. American Annals of the Deaf, 147, 18-28.
• Johnson, C. ve Goswami, U. (2010). Phonological awareness, vocabulary, and reading in deaf children with cochlear implants. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 237-261.
• Kelly, R. R. & Gaustad, M. G. (2007). Deaf college students' mathematical skills relative to morphological knowledge, reading level, and language proficiency. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 25-37.
• Kemps, R. J., Wurm, L. H., Ernestus, M., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, H. (2005). Prosodic cues for morphological complexity in Dutch and English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(1-2), 43-73.
• Kyle, F. E. & Harris, M. (2010). Predictors of reading development in deaf children: A three year longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107(3), 229-243.
• Kyle, F. E. ve Harris, M. (2006). Concurrent correlates and predictors of reading and spel-ling achievement in deaf and hearing school children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(3), 273-288.
• Kyle, F. E. ve Harris, M. (2010). Predictors of reading development in deaf children: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 229-243.
• Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507- 548.
• Mahony, D., Singson, M., & Mann, V. (2000). Reading ability and sensitivity to morpho-logical relations. Reading and Writing, 12(3), 191-218.
• Makaroglu, B. (2012). İşitme engelli yetişkinlerin Türkçe Biçimbilimi Farkındalığı / Tur-kish morphology awareness of deaf adults. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(3), 53.
• Makaroğlu, B. & Ergenç, İ. (2016). Inflectional morphological awareness of Turkish deaf students. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 7(1), 30-46.
• Marschark, M. & Harris, M. (1996). Success and Failure in Learning to Read: The Special Case (?) of Deaf Children. In C. Cornoldi and J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading compre-hension disabilities: Processes and intervention, Hillsdale, NJ: LEA, (s. 279 -300).
• Marschark, M., Rhoten, C. ve Fabich, M. (2007). Effects of cochlear implants on child-ren’s reading and academic achievement. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Educa-tion, 12(3), 269-282.
• Mcguckıan, M.& Henry, A. (2007). The grammatical morpheme deficit in moderate hear-ing impairment, International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 42, 117-136.
• Meyen, E., L. & Skrtic, T.M. (1995). Special education and student disability: An introduc-tion. Denver: Love Publishing Company.
• Norbury, C. F., Briscoe, J. & Bishop, D. V. (2001). Phonological processing, language, and literacy: A comparison of children with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss and those with specific language impairment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(3), 329-340.
• Padden, C. & Hanson, V. L. (2000) Search for the missing link: The development of skilled reading in deaf children. In K. Emmorey & H. Lane (Eds.), The signs of language revisited, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, (s. 435-447).
• Picard, C. J. (2001). Handbook for personel serving students who are deaf for hard of hear-ing. Louisiana Department of Education.
• Roberts, A. J. (2000). Factors influencing behavioural problems in preschool deaf children. Academic Press, Manchester.
• Schirmer, B. R. (2001). Psychological, social and educational dimensions of deafness. Boston: Allyn and Bacon
• Schreuder, R. and Baayen, R. H. (1995). Modeling morphological processing. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological aspects of language processing, Hillsdale, NJ: Law-rence Erlbaum, (s. 131–154).
• Singson, M., Mahony, D., & Mann, V. (2000). The relation between reading ability and morphological skills: Evidence from derivational suffixes. Reading and Writing, 12(3), 219-252.
• Tüfekçıoğlu, U. (1992). Kaynaştırmadaki işitme engelli çocuklar: Eskişehir ilindeki normal okullarda eğitim gören işitme engelli öğrencilerin durumu, Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları, Eskişehir.
• Tüfekçioğlu, U. (2007). Çocuklarda işitme kaybının etkileri. U.Tüfekçioğlu. (Ed.), İşitme,konuşma ve görme sorunu olan çocukların eğitimi (s.1-45). Eskişehir: Anado-lu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Volterra, V., & Bates, E. (1989). Selective impairment of italian grammatical morphology in the congenially deaf: A case study. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 6(3), 273-308.
• Walker, L., Munro, J., & Richards, F. W. (1998). Teaching Inferential Reading Strategies through Pictures. Volta Review, 100(2), 105-20.
• Waters, G.S., & Doehring, D. (1990). Reading acquisition in congenitally deaf children who communicate orally. In T. Carr & B. Levy (Eds.), Reading and Its Develop-ment (pp. 323-373). New York: Academic Press.
• Wolk, S. & Allen, T. E. (1984). A 5-year follow-up of reading- comprehension achieve-ment of hearing-impaired students in special education programs. Journal of Spe-cial Education, 18, 161–176.
• Zeshan, U. (2002). Sign Language in Turkey: The story of a hiddenlanguage. Turkic Lan-guages 6(2), 229-274.