Pandemi döneminde yapılan uzaktan eğitim çalışmalarıyla ilgili İngilizce öğretmenlerinin görüşleri (bir odak grup tartışması)

Öz

Covid-19 küresel salgını eğitim de dâhil olmak üzere yaşamın her alanını etkilemiştir. Bu bağlamda okullar virüsün daha hızlı yayılmasını önlemek için kapatılmış ve uzaktan eğitim sistemine geçiş yapılmıştır. Acil durum çözümlerinde ilk etapta uygulama sorunları yaşanması kaçınılmazdır. Uzaktan eğitim döneminde yabancı dil öğretiminde de uygulama kaynaklı bazı sorunlar tespit edilmiştir. Bu süreçte öğretmenlerin sorumluluğu oldukça fazladır. Bu noktadan hareketle mevcut araştırma pandemi sürecinde İngilizce öğretmenlerinin uzaktan eğitim uygulamalarını, süreçteki problemlerini ve de gelecek uygulamaları için çözüm önerilerini ortaya koymayı amaçlamıştır. Nitel bir araştırma olarak tasarlanan araştırma odak grup tartışması tekniğiyle yürütülmüştür. Araştırmanın katılımcıları pandemi süresince Elazığ ilinde ortaokul düzeyinde çalışan altı İngilizce öğretmenidir. Araştırmanın bulguları pandemi sürecinde yabancı dil öğretiminde öğrenci, öğretmen, teknoloji ve veli kaynaklı birtakım problemler yaşandığını göstermektedir. Katılımcıların gelecek uygulamaları iyileştirecek ve onlara yol gösterecek nitelikte olan önerilerinden bazıları şu şekildedir: Öğretmenler uzaktan eğitim ve teknoloji kullanımı bazında eğitimlerle desteklenmeli; iletişimsel yaklaşım ve etkileşim içeren yabancı dil öğretim yöntemleri uzaktan eğitime uyarlanmalı ve ders saatleri artırılmalı; öğrencilere teknolojiyi öğrenme için kullanmaları doğrultusunda yol gösterilmeli; öğrencilere motivasyon desteği sağlanmalı; öğrencilerin bireysel öğrenme yetenekleri desteklenmeli; veliler süreçle ilgili bilinçlendirilmeli ve de sosyal eşitliği sağlamak için ihtiyacı olan öğretmen ve öğrencilere teknolojik destek sağlanmalıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Covid-19 küresel salgını
• uzaktan eğitim
• yabancı dil öğretimi

EFL teachers’ views on the pandemic distance education (a focus group discussion)

Abstract

The Covid-19 is a deadly pandemic that has affected every aspect of life including education. The schools have been closed to prevent the spread of the virus, and they have converted their system into distance education. As a part of emergency solutions, it is inevitable to have implementation problems at the first stage. During the distance education period, some practical problems have been identified in foreign language teaching as well. The responsibility of teachers in this pandemic process is far too much. Thus the current research aimed to reveal the distance education practices of English as foreign language (EFL) teachers; the problems they met during the process and their suggestions for future implementations. The study, designed as qualitative research, was carried out by the focus group discussion technique. The participants of the study were six EFL teachers who worked at the secondary school level in Elazig during the pandemic period. The findings have revealed that some problems in the EFL teaching process were caused by students, teachers, technology and parents. Some of the suggestions of the participants that will guide and improve the future practices are as follows: Teachers should be trained on distance education and technology use; EFL teaching methods including an adaptation of communicative approach and interaction to distance education; course hours should be increased; students should be guided in using technology for their learning; students should be provided with motivational support; their individual learning abilities should be supported; parental awareness about distance education should be raised to ensure social equality, and technical support should be offered to teachers and students who need it.

Keywords

• Covid-19 pandemic
• distance education
• EFL teaching

Kaynakça

1. Acat, B & Demiral, S. (2002). Türkiye’de yabancı dil öğreniminde motivasyon kaynakları ve sorunları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 8(31), 314-326.
2. Al-Hazemi, H. (2000). Lexical Attrition of Some Arabic Speakers of English as a Foreign Language: a Study of Word Loss. Internet TESL J [Serial online] Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Al-Hazemi-Attrition/
3. Allen, E. & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences: Online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group Report. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529952.pdf.
4. Al-Mohammadi, A. & Derbel, E. (2014). The effects of embedding information technology within ELT on EFL learners‟ motivation and internet.” International of Applied Linguistics & English Literature 3(1), 181-186.
5. Al-Otaibi, G. (2004). Language Learning Strategy Use among Saudi EFL Students and Its Relationship to Language Proficiency Lever, Gender, and Motivation [Doctoral Dissertation]. Proquest Dissertations Publishing. (3129188).
6. Alrubaie, S.A., & Alrubaie, M.A., & Hassoon, I.M. (2020). The Role of Activating Electronic Training in Increasing Efficiency of Training Process. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 55 (1), 1-11.
7. Alsaleem, B. I. A. (2014). The effect of “WhatsApp” electronic dialogue journaling on improving writing vocabulary word choice and voice of EFL undergraduate Saudi Students. Harvard: 21st Century Academic Forum Conference Proceedings.
8. Atreya, A. & Acharya, J. (2020). Distant virtual medical education during Covid-19: Half a loaf of bread. The Clinical Teacher, 17, 418-419.

9. Bahrani, T., & Tam, S. S. (2011). Technology and language learning: Exposure to TV and radio news and speaking proficiency. Kritika Kultura, 17, 144-160.
10. Bal, S. M. (2006). Teachers’ Perceptions of Communicative Language Teaching (Clt) In Turkish EFL Setting Theory Vs. Practices. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Çukurova Üniversitesi Kütüphanesi. (6326).
11. Balci, A., & Tezel Şahin, F. (2016). Sosyal medyanın aile katılımında kullanılabilirliği üzerine bir inceleme. Kastamonu Üniversitesi Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(5), 2309-2322.
12. Baxter, J., & Eyles, J. (1997). Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: Establishing ‘rigour’ in interview analysis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4), 505-525.
13. Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51).
14. Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative Research Methods for Social Sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
15. Bozkurt, A. (2020). Koronavirüs (Covid-19) pandemi süreci ve pandemi sonrası dünyada eğitime yönelik değerlendirmeler: Yeni normal ve yeni eğitim paradigması. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 112-142.
16. Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), i-vi.
17. British Council & Tepav (2013). Türkiye’deki Devlet Okullarında İngilizce Dilinin Öğretimine İlişkin Ulusal İhtiyaç Analizi. Ankara: Yorum Yayın.
18. Burrows, D., & Kendall, S. (1997). Focus groups: What are they and how can they be used in nursing and health care research? Social Sciences in Health 3, 244–253.
19. Cavanagh, S. (1997). Content Analysis: Concepts, Methods and Applications. Nurse Researcher, 4, 5-16.
20. Coeckelbergh, M. (2020). The postdigital in pandemic times: A comment on the Covid-19 crisis and its political epistemologies. Postdigital Science and Education,2, 547-550. CONRAD, D. (2004). University instructors’ reflections on their first online teaching experiences. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 8(2), 31–44.
21. Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID‑19 pandemic. Prospects, 1-6, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3
22. Fansuary, A. H., & Januarty, R., & Rahman, A.W. & Syawal, (2020). Digital Content for Millennial Generations: Teaching the English Foreign Language Learner on Covid-19 Pandemic. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 55(3), 1-12.
23. Far, R. M., & Trukowski, E., & Holz, E. (1996). Public Opinion, Group Discussion and Theory of Social Representations. (Research Papers in Psychology No: 9602). London School of Economics.
24. Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English? A guide to forecasting the popularity of the English language in the 21st century (Vol. 29). The British Council. Retrieved from https://doanbangoc.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/the-future-of-english.pdf
25. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75-91.
26. Iivari, N., Sharma, S., & Ventä-Olkkonen, l. (2020). Digital transformation of everyday life – How COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care? International Journal of Information Management, 55, 1-6.
27. Jasrial, D. (2018). Utilizing WhatsApp application for teaching English language: Why and how?. International Seminar and Annual Meeting BKS, 1(1), 151-157.
28. Jolliffe, A., Ritter, J., & Stevens, D. (2001). The online learning handbook: Developing and using web-based learning. UK: Kogan Page Limited.
29. Karaca, O., Topal, M.& Aldir, Z. (2011). Uzaktan eğitim sorunları. Uluslararası Bilim ve Teknoloji Konferansında sunulan ,bildiri, 7-9 Aralık, İstanbul. Erişim adresi: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ozan_Karaca/publication/273057693_Uzaktan_Egitim_Sorunlari/links/54f5b0420cf2f28c1366a0dc/Uzaktan-Egitim-Sorunlari.pdf
30. Kayaduman, H., & Demirel, T. (2020). Investigating the Concerns of First-Time Distance Education Instructors. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 20 (5), 85-103.
31. König, W. (1989). Türkiye’deki yabancı dil öğretim sorunları, dışardan bir bakış. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4, 167-172.
32. Kunnan, A. J. (2005). Language assessment from a wider context. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
34. Littlewood, W. (1992). Teaching oral communication: A methodological framework. Oxford: Blackwell.
35. Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., & Lee, S. (2002). A Look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.
36. Manan, N. A. (2017). Whatsapp mobile tool in second language learning. Indonesian EFL Journal, 3(1), 87-92.
37. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2008). Türkiye’nin Eğitim İstatistikleri . http://www.meb.gov.tr.html. adlı adresten alınmıştır.
39. Osterloh, K. H. (1982). Die Rolle der sozialen Vorerfahrung im Fremdsprachenunterricht in der Türkei (Türkiye'de yabancı dil öğretiminde toplumsal öndeyin rolü).
40. Birkenfeld. Helmut (Ed): Qastarbciterkinder aus der Türkeİ. Zwishei Eingliederung und Rückkehr. -München; s. 44 - 54 ve 165 -166.
41. Özsevik, Z. (2010). The Use of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT): Turkish EFL Teachers’ Perceived Difficulties in Implementing CLT in Turkey (Master Thesis). Available at https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/16211/Ozsevik_Zekariya.pdf?seq uence=2.
42. Öztürk Karataş, T., & Tuncer, H. (2020). Sustaining Language Skills Development of Pre-Service EFL Teachers despite the COVID-19 Interruption: A Case of Emergency Distance Education. Sustainability, 12 (19), 8188.
43. Paker, T. (2012). Türkiye’de neden yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğretemiyoruz ve neden öğrencilerimiz iletişim kurabilecek düzeyde ingilizce öğrenemiyor? Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 89-94.
44. Parvin, R. H., & Salam, S. F. (2015). The effectiveness of using technology in English language classrooms in government primary schools in Bangladesh. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, 2(1), 47-59.
45. Pourhosein Gilakjani, A. (2013). Factors contributing to teachers’ use of computer technology in the classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 1(3), 262-267.
46. Richards, J. C., Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Second Edition, Cambridge Language Teaching Library, USA: Cambridge University Press.
47. Rodinadze, S., & Zarbazoia, K. (2012). The advantages of information technology in teaching English language. Frontiers of Language and Teaching, 3, 271-275.
48. Roth, B. (2008). The Importance of Parental Encouragement and Support. Retrieved from http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Importance-of-Parental-Encouragement-andSupport&id=1622042
49. Russell, V., & Curtis, W. (2013). Comparing a large- and small-scale online language course: An examination of teacher and learner perceptions. Internet and Higher Education, 16, 1-13.
50. Santana De Oliveira, M.M., & Torres Penedo, A.S., & Pereira, V. (2018). Distance education: Advantages and disadvantages of the point of view of education and society. Dialogia, 29, 139-152.
51. Sato, K., & Kleinsasser, R. (1999). Communicative language teaching: practical understandings. The Modern Language Journal. 83 (iv), 94-517.
52. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22, 63-75.
53. Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (3rd edition). London: Sage.
54. Smedley, J.K. (2010). Modelling the impact of knowledge management using technology. Insight 23, 233-250.
55. Ta’amneh, M. A. A. (2017). The effect of using WhatsApp Messenger in learning English language among university students. International Research in Education, 5 (1), 143-151.
56. Thomas, L., & Macmillan, J.,& Mccoll, E.,& Hale, C., & Bond, S. (1995). Comparison of focus group and individual interview methodology in examining patient satisfaction with nursing care. Social Sciences in Health 1, 206-219.
57. Tok, H. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin İngilizce dersine ilişkin duyuşsal tutumlarının bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 185, 90-106.
58. Tümen Akyıldız, S. (2020). College students’ views on the pandemic distance education: A focus group discussion. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 322-334.
59. UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 educational disruption and response. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/ covid19/education response
60. Ushida, E. (2005). The role of studentsʼ attitudes and motivation in second language learning in online language courses. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 4978.
61. Warschauer, M. (2000). The death of cyberspace and the rebirth of CALL. English Teachers’ Journal, 53, 61–67.
62. Wilkinson, S. (2015). Focus groups, in: J. A. Smith (Ed), Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. London: Sage.
63. Williams, C. H. (2017). Teachers in East Asia: A teacher’s guide to Chinese, Japanese, and Korean learners. Singapore: Springer.
64. World Health Organization-WHO (2020). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public. Coronavirus disease 2019. Retrieved from https :// www.who.int/emerg encie s/disea ses/novel -coron aviru s-2019/advic e-for-public.
65. Yi, Y., & Jang, J. (2020). Envisioning possibilities amid the COVID‐19 pandemic: Implications from English language teaching in South Korea. Current issues in TESOL: TESOL and the Covid‐19 pandemic, 11(3).
66. Zhou, C., & Griffiths, C. (2011). Intercultural communicative competence. English Language and Literature Studies, 1, 113-122.
67. Zhu, C. (2010). Teacher roles and adoption of educational technology in the Chinese context. Journal for Educational Research Online, 2(2), 72-86.