Kaynaştırma Ortamındaki İşitme Engelli Öğrencilerin Sözcükleri Anlamsal İşlemleme Becerilerinin İşiten Okuyucularla Karşılaştırılması

Yıl 2017, , 421 - 441, 17.08.2017

Halime Miray Sümer , Tevhide Kargın , İsa Birkan Güldenoğlu

https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.334888

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu araştırma, işiten, koklear
implantlı ve işitme cihazı kullanan işitme engelli öğrencilerin sözcükleri
anlamsal olarak işlemleme performanslarını karşılaştırılmalı olarak incelemeyi
amaçlayan nedensel karşılaştırılmalı bir araştırmadır. Çalışma grubunu 3. ve 4.
sınıf düzeylerinde genel eğitim sınıflarında öğrenim gören 32 işiten, 34 işitme
cihazı kullanan işitme engelli öğrenci ve 35 koklear implantlı işitme engelli öğrenci
olmak üzere toplam 101 öğrenci oluşturmuştur. Araştırmada 48 sözcük
çiftinden (24 tanesi ilişkili iki sözcük çifti, 24 tanesi ilişkisiz iki sözcük
çifti) oluşan bir işlem ile veri toplanmıştır. Analizler
sonucunda; anlamsal sözcük işlemleme doğruluk oranı açısından işiten
okuyucuların, işitme cihazlı ve koklear implantlı okuyuculardan daha iyi
performans gösterdikleri bulunmuştur. Ayrıca koklear implantlı okuyucularla
işitme cihazlı okuyucuların sözcükleri hem tepki hızı hem de hata ortalamaları
açısından benzer performans göstererek işlemledikleri görülmüştür. Araştırmaya
katılan tüm okuyucuların farklı anlamsal kategorilerdeki sözcükleri işlemleme
becerilerine bakıldığında ise okuyucuların sözcükleri anlamsal kategorilere
bağlı kalmadan benzer tepki hızları ve hata oranları ile işlemledikleri
görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Okuma, okuduğunu anlama, anlamsal sözcük işlemleme

Kaynakça

• Akçamete, G. (1999). Improving question skills for students with hearing impairment. Europan Journal of Special Needs Education, 14(2), 171-177.
• Akçamete, G., & Gürgür, H. (2009). İşitme yetersizliği olan çocukların eğitimi. G. Akçamete (Ed.), Genel eğitim okullarında özel eğitime gereksinimi olan öğrenciler ve özel eğitim içinde [In Special education and students with special education needs in general education schools] (ss. 441-473). Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.
• Akmeşe, P. P., & Acarlar, F. (2016). Using narrative to investigate language skills of children who are deaf and with hard of hearing. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(15), 1367-1381.
• Allen, T. E. (1986). Patterns of academic achievement among hearing impaired students: 1974 and 1983. In A. N. Schildroth & M.A. Karchmer (Eds.), Deaf children in America (pp. 161-206). Boston, MA: College-Hill.
• Allington, R., & Cunningham, P. (2007). Schools that work: Where all children read and write (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
• Amedieu, F., Tricot, A., & Marine, C. (2010). Interaction between prior knowledge and concept-map structure on hypertext comprehension, coherence of reading orders and disorientation. Interacting With Computers, 22(2), 88-97. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2009.07.001.
• Avcıoğlu, H. (2008). İşitme yetersizliği olan öğrenciler. İ. Diken. (Ed.), Özel eğitime gereksinimi olan öğrenciler ve özel eğitim içinde [In Students with special education needs and special education] (ss. 167-215). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Bolger, P. A., & Zapata, G. C. (2011). Semantic categories and context in L2 vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 61(2), 614-646.
• Can, E. (2009). İşitme kayıplı Türk çocuklarda alıcı ve ifade edici dil becerilerinin gelişim (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi) [The receptive and expressive language development of Turkish hearing-impaired children (Master’s thesis)] Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
• Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. I. (2000). Theorizing about the relation between ASL and reading. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 221-259). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Darıca, N., & Şipal, F. (2011). İşitme engelli çocuklarda gelişim ve eğitsel müdahale [Development and educational intervention in hearing-impaired children]. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Basımevi.
• Dyer, A., MacSweeney, M., Szczerbinski, M., & Campbell, R. (2003). Predictors of reading delay in deaf adolescents: The relative contributions of rapid automatized naming speed and phonemic awareness and decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 215-229.
• Gallaudet Research Institute. (2005). Literacy and deaf students. Retrieved from: http://gri.gallaudet.edu/Literacy/
• Geers, A. E. (2003). Predictors of reading skill development in children with early cochlear implantation. Ear Hear, 24(1), 59-68.
• Girgin, Ü. (1997). Eskişehir ili ilkokulları 4 ve 5. sınıf işitme engelli öğrencilerinin okumayı öğrenme durumlarının çözümleme ve anlama düzeylerine göre değerlendirilmesi [Assessment according to their level of processing and understanding of learning situations of the 4th and 5th grade hearing impaired students of Eskişehir province primary schools]. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Yayınları, No: 62.
• Girgin, Ü. (2003). Okuduğunu anlamada işitme engelli çocukların soru yanıt stratejilerini etkin kullanımı [Effective use of question-answer strategies of hearing-impaired children in reading comprehension]. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 302, 29-36.
• Girgin, Ü. (2005). İşitme engelli çocuklarda bireyselleştirilmiş okuma eğitimi. [Individualized reading instruction in hearing impaired children]. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(3), 143-150.
• Girgin, Ü. (2006). Evaluation of Turkish hearing impaired students’ reading comprehension with the Miscue Analysis Inventory. International Journal of Special Education, 21(3), 68-84.
• Goodman, A. (1965). Reference zero levels for puretone audiometers. ASHA, 7, 262-273.
• Güldenoğlu, B. (2012). İşiten ve işitme engelli okuyucuların sözcük işlemleme ile okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi (Doktora tezi). [Comparing the word processing and reading comprehension skills of prelingually deaf and hearing readers (Doctoral dissertation)] Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Güldenoğlu, B., Kargın, T., & Miller, P. (2012). İyi ve zayıf okuyucuların sözcük işlemleme ve okuduğunu anlama becerilerinin karşılaştırılmalı olarak incelenmesi. [Comparing the word processing and reading comprehension of skilled and less skilled readers]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4), 2807-2828.
• Güldenoğlu, B., Kargın, T., & Miller, P. (2014). İşiten ve işitme engelli okuyucuların sözcük işlemleme becerilerinin karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi [An investigation of the word processing skills of deaf and hearing readers]. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 29(73), 18-38.
• Holt, J. A. (1993). Stanford Achievement Test-8th edition: Reading comprehension subgroup results. American Annals of the Deaf, 138(2), 172-175.
• Holt, J. A., Traxler, C. B., & Allen, T. E. (1996). Interpreting the scores: A user’s guide to the 9th edition Stanford Achievement Test for educators of deaf and hard of- hearing students. Unpublished manuscript, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC.
• Isaacson, S. (1996). Simple ways to assess deaf or hard of hearing student’ writing skills. Volta Review, 98(1), 183-199.
• Jackson, D. W., Paul, P. V., & Smith, J. C. (1997). Prior knowledge and reading comprehension ability of deaf adolescents. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2(3), 172-184.
• Johnson, C., & Goswami, U. (2010). Phonological awareness, vocabulary, and reading in deaf children with cochlear implants. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(2), 237-261.
• Kargın, T., Guldenoglu, B, Miller, P., Hauser, P., Rathman, C., Kubus, O., & Superegeon, E. (2011). Differences in word processing skills of deaf and hearing individuals reading in different orthographies. Journal of Development & Physical Disabilities, 24(1), 65-83.
• Kendeou, P., & Van Den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567–1577.
• Marschark, M., & Harris, M. (1996). Success and failure in learning to read: The special case (?) of deaf children. In C. Cornoldi & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension disabilities: Processes and intervention (pp. 279-300). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
• McQuarrie, L., & Parrila, R. (2009). Phonological representations in deaf children: Rethinking the “functional equivalence” hypothesis. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14(2), 137-154.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2004). Özel Eğitim Hizmetleri Yönetmeliği (Gözden Geçirilmiş) [Special Education Services Regulation Revised] http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/66.html adresinden elde edilmiştir.
• Meyen, E., L., & Skrtic, T .M. (1995). Special education and student disability: An introduction. Denver: Love Publishing Company.
• Miller, P. (1997). The effect of communication mode on the development of phonemic awareness in prelingually deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 40(5), 1151-1163.
• Miller, P. (2000). Syntactic and semantic processing in deaf and hearing readers. American Annals of the Deaf, 145(5), 436-448.
• Miller, P. (2001). Communication mode and the information processing capacity of Hebrew readers with prelingually acquired deafness. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 13(1), 83-96.
• Miller, P. (2002a). Another look at the STM capacity of prelingually deafened individuals and its relation to reading comprehension. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(5), 56-70.
• Miller, P. (2002b). Communication mode and the processing of printed words: Evidence from readers with prelingually acquired deafness. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 7(4), 312-329.
• Miller, P. (2004a). The importance of voweldia critics for reading in Hebrew: What can be learned from readers with prelingual deafness? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17(6), 593-615.
• Miller, P. (2004b). Processing of written word and non-word visual information by individuals with prelingual deafness. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47(5), 990-1000.
• Miller, P. (2004c). Processing of written words by individuals with prelingual deafness. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 979-989.
• Miller, P. (2005a). Reading comprehension and its relation to the quality of functional hearing: evidence from readers with different functional hearing abilities. American Annals of the Deaf, 150(3), 305–323.
• Miller, P. (2005b). What the word recognition skills of prelingually deafened readers tell about the roots of dyslexia. Journal of Development & Physical Disabilities, 17(4), 369-393.
• Miller, P. (2005c). Changes in the processing of letters, written words, and pseudo-homophones: A comparison of fifth graders and university students. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164, 407-434.
• Miller, P. (2006a). What the processing of real words and pseudo-homophones tell about the development of orthographic knowledge in prelingually deafened individuals. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11(1), 21-38.
• Miller, P. (2006b). What the visual word recognition skills of prelingually deafened readers tell about their reading comprehension problems. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 18(2), 91-121.
• Miller, P. (2009). The nature and efficiency of the word reading strategies of prelingually deafened, orally raised students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14(3), 344–361.
• Miller, P. (2010). Phonological, orthographic, and syntactic awareness and their relation to reading comprehension in prelingually deaf individuals: What can we learn from skilled readers? Journal of Development and Physical Disabilities, 22(9), 549-561.
• Miller, P. (2012). Factors distinguishing skilled and less skilled deaf readers: Evidence from four orthographies. Journals of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(4), 439-462.
• Miller, P., Kargın, T., & Guldenoglu, B. (2013). The reading comprehension failure of Turkish prelingually deaf readers: Evidence from semantic and syntactic processing. Journal of Development & Physical Disabilities, 25(2), 221–239.
• Miller, P, & Clark, D. (2011). Phonemic awareness is not necessary to become a skilled deaf reader. Journal of Development and Physical Disabilities, 23(5), 459-476.
• Monreal, S. T., & Hernandez, R. S. (2005). Reading levels of Spanish deaf students. American Annals of the Deaf, 150(4), 379-387.
• Moog, J. S. (2002). Changing expectation for children with cochlear implants. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 111(5), 138-142.
• Murphy, M. L. (2003). Semantic relations and the lexicon: Antonymy, synonymy, and other paradigms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Nielsen, D. C., & Luetke-Stahlman, B. (2002). Phonological awareness: One key to the reading profiency of deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(3), 11-19.
• 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 (pp. 435-447). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Perfetti, C. A., & Sandak, R. (2000). Reading optimally builds on spoken language: Implications for deaf readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 32-50.
• Picard, C. J. (2001). Handbook for personel serving students who are deaf for hard of hearing. Louisiana Department of Education. Retrieved from www.doe.state.la.us/lde/uploads/965pdf
• Roberts, A. J. (2000). Factors influencing behavioural problems in preschool deaf children. Manchester: Academic Press.
• Santana, R., & Torres, S. (2003). Desarrollo comunicativolingu¨ ı´stico en el nin˜o sordo profundo [Communicative linguistic development in the profoundly deaf child]. In M. Puyuelo & J. A. Rondal (Eds.), Manual de desarrollo yalteraciones del lenguaje [Manual of language development] (pp. 205–251). Barcelona, Spain: Masson.
• Schirmer, B. R. (2001). Psychological, social and educational dimensions of deafness. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2005). Dyslexia (specific reading disability). Biological Psychiatry, 57(11), 1301–1309.
• Spencer, L. J., Barker, B. A., & Tomblin, J. B. (2003). Exploring the language and literacy outcomes of pediatric cochlear implant users. Ear and Hearing, 24(3),236-47.
• Sterne, A., & Goswami, U. (2000). Phonological awareness of syllables, rhymes and phonemes in deaf children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41(5), 609-625.
• Tarchi, C. (2010). Reading comprehension of informative texts in secondary school: a focus on direct and indirect effects of reader’s prior knowledge. Learning & Individual Differences, 20(5), 415–420.
• Transler, C., & Reitsma, P. (2005). Phonological coding in reading of deaf children. Pseudohomophone effects in deaf children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23(4), 525–542.
• Transler, C., Gombert, J. E., & Leybaert, J. (2001). Phonological decoding in severely and profoundly deaf children: Similarity judgment between written pseudowords. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22(1), 61-82.
• Traxler, C. (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test (9th Edition): National norming and performance standards for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(4), 337-345.
• Tüfekçioğlu, U. (1992). Kaynaştırmadaki İişitme engelli çocuklar [Student with hearing impaired in the mainstreamed School]. Eskişehir:Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Tüfekçioğlu, U. (2007). Çocuklarda işitme kaybının etkileri. U.Tüfekçioğlu (Ed.), İşitme, konuşma ve görme sorunu olan çocukların eğitimi içinde [In Education of children with hearing, speech and vision problems] (ss. 1-45). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Wauters, L. N, VanBon, W. H. J., & Tellings, A. J. M. (2006). Reading comprehension of dutch deaf children. Reading and Writing, 19(1), 49-76.
• Wolk, S., & Allen, T. E. (1984). A 5-year follow-up of reading- comprehension achievement of hearing-impaired students in special education programs. Journal of Special Education, 18(2), 161–176.
• Yurkowski, P., & Ewoldt, C. (1986). A case for the semantic processing of the deaf reader. American Annals of the Deaf, 131(3), 243–247.