Edebiyat Öz Yeterliği İnancı Üzerine Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması

Öz

Edebiyat, çok eski çağlardan beri yabancı dil öğretiminde yararlı bir araç olarak kullanılmaktadır. Günümüzde bu metinlerin kullanım amaçları önemli ölçüde değişse de edebiyat, yabancı dil öğretimi ve öğreniminin en önemli çalışma alanlarından biri olmaya devam etmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, yabancı dil öğrencileri ve öğretmenleri için edebiyatta öz yeterlik inancı ölçeği geliştirmek ve akabinde ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirliğini belirlemektir. Bu nedenle keşfedici sıralı desen karma yöntemi tercih edilen çalışmanın ilk bölümünde madde havuzu oluşturmak için nitel bir yaklaşım benimsenmiştir. Daha sonra ikinci bölümde, ölçek maddelerinin yapı geçerliliği ve güvenilirliğini test etmek için nicel bir yaklaşım kullanılmıştır. Nitel kısma 45 öğretmen adayı, İngiliz Dili Eğitimi alanında deneyimli üç öğretim üyesi, üç İngilizce öğretmeni ve eğitim bilimleri alanında deneyimli dört öğretim üyesi katılmıştır. Ölçek maddelerinin psikometrik özellikleri altı devlet üniversitesinden eğitimlerinin 3. ve 4. yılındaki 529 yabancı dil öğrencisinin katılımıyla elde edilmiştir. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliği açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri ile belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, katılımcıların yabancı dil öğretiminde edebî metinlerin kullanımını değerli buldukları ve meslek hayatlarındaki derslerinde kullanmak istedikleri görülmüştür. Ayrıca nicel analizlerin sonuçları dikkate alındığında edebi metinler yoluyla yabancı dil öğretiminde İngiliz Dili Eğitimi öğrencilerinin ve öğretmenlerinin öz yeterlik inançlarının düzeyini ölçebilen altı boyut, 21 maddeden oluşan geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek (KMO=.880; α=.869; açıklanan varyasyon=%63,2) geliştirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öz yeterlik
• Edebiyat Yoluyla Dil Öğretimi
• Edebiyat Ölçeği
• İngilizce Öğretmenliği Öğrencileri

A Scale Development Study on Self-efficacy Beliefs in Literature

Öz

Literature has been used as a useful tool to teach foreign languages since ancient times. Although the purposes of these texts have changed considerably over time, literature remains one of the major areas of study in foreign language teaching and learning. The purpose of this study is to develop a self-efficacy scale for foreign language students and teachers and to determine the validity and reliability of the scale. Therefore, an exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was used, and a qualitative approach was established in the first phase of the study to create an item pool. Second, a quantitative approach was used to test the construct reliability of the scale items. Forty-five pre-service teachers, three scholars of English language teaching, three English teachers, and four scholars of educational sciences participated in the qualitative phase. The psychometric properties of the scale items were examined with the participation of 529 English as a foreign language student in their 3rd and 4th years of education at six state universities. The structural validity of the scale was determined through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In conclusion, it was observed that the participants found the use of literary texts in foreign language teaching valuable, and wanted to use them in their future classes. Moreover, considering the results of quantitative analyses, a valid and reliable scale (KMO = .880; α = .869; explained variation = 63.2%) consisting of 21 items with six dimensions was developed to measure the level of self-efficacy beliefs of students and teachers in foreign language teaching.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Self-efficacy
• Language Teaching through Literature
• Literature Scale
• EFL Students

Kaynakça

1. Alemi, M., & Pashmforoosh, R. (2013). EFL teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in teaching literature. The International Journal of Literacies, 19, 25-36.
2. Aslan, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri: Nicel karma nitel tasarımlar için bir rehber. Eğitim Yayınevi.
3. Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 1-45). Cambridge University Press.
4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
5. Bobkina, J., Dominguez, E. (2014). The use of literature and literary texts in the EFL classroom; Between consensus and controversy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(2), 248-260.
6. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Belkapp Press.
7. Butler, I. (2002). Language through literature through language: An action research report on the English 100 course at the University of North West. Literator 23(2),33-50.
8. Can, A. (2017). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (Quantitative data analysis with SPSS in the scientific research process). (5th ed.). Pegem Akademi.

9. Carter, R. (2007). Literature and language teaching 1986–2006: A review. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 3-13.
10. Collie, J., Slater, S. (1987). Literature in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
11. Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6(2), 147-168.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
13. Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian journal of applied linguistics, 10(2), 221-240.
14. Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Duff, A., & Maley, A. (2007). Literature (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
16. Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
17. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Ectj, 29(2), 75.
18. Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967-988.
19. Iva, K., Jasna, V. (2014). Literature in English for Specific Purposes Classroom. International Journal of Social and Educational Innovation (IJSEIro) 2, 26-31.
20. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
21. Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design in handbook of survey research (2. Edition). Emerald Group Publishing.
22. Küçükoğlu, H., Arıkan, A. (2011). Prospective English language teachers’ views on literature in their teacher education curriculum and its potential value. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences (15), 1718-1722.
23. Lazar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
24. Maddux, J. E. & Volkmann, J. (2010). Self-Efficacy. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.) Handbook of Personality and Self-Regulation (pp. 315-331). Blackwell Publishing.
25. Malhotra, N. (2006). Questionnaire design and scale development. In R. Grover & M. Vriens (Eds.), The handbook of marketing research: Uses, misuses, and future advances (pp. 84-94). SAGE Publications.
26. McAlister A. L., Perry C. L., Parcel G. S. (2008). How individuals, environments, and health behavior interact: social cognitive theory. In Glanz K., Rimer B. K., Viswanath K. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research and practice (4th ed., pp. 165-184). Jossey-Bass.
27. Mills, N. (2011). Teaching assistants’ self-efficacy in teaching literature: Sources, personal assessments, and consequences. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 61-80.
28. Nair, G. K. S., Setia, R., Ghazali, S. N., Sabapathy, E., Mohamad, R., Ali, M. M., ... & Hassan, N. S. I. C. (2012). Can literature improve English proficiency: The students perspective. Asian Social Science, 8(12), 21.
29. Ögeyik, M. C. (2007). Attitudes of the students in English Language Teaching programs towards literary education. Eğitim Araştırmaları Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (27), 151-162.
30. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
31. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive concept. Teaching and Teacher Education 17, 783-805.
32. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research 68 (2), 202-248.
33. Tuncer, H., & Kızıldağ, A. (2014). Pre-service EFL teachers’ attitude towards the use of literature in practice teaching. International Journal of Language Academy, 2(3), 170-185.
34. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
35. Zorba, M. G. (2013). Prospective English language teachers’ views on literature-oriented courses at Akdeniz University’s ELT department. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1911-1918.