Yıl 2019, Cilt 4 , Sayı 2, Sayfalar 542 - 557 2019-12-30

İngilizce Öğretmen Adayları Mikro Öğretimlerde Neden 'Hiştler'? Erken Yaş Yabancı Dil Eğitiminde Bir Mikro Analiz
Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms

Orçin KARADAĞ [1]


Davranışsal sınıf yönetimi, çeşitli deneyim düzeyindeki tüm öğretmenler için bir endişe kaynağı olmuştur. Ancak, bu durumun hizmet öncesi ve acemi öğretmenler için daha büyük bir sorun kaynağı olduğu düşünülmektedir. Bu tarz sınıf yönetimini tehdit edici davranışları yönetmek için, bizler de öğrenci olduğumuz zamandan uyarı, ceza ve hatta fiziksel müdahaleler gibi çeşitli manevralara şahit olmuş olabiliriz. Bu çalışma, İngilizce öğretmen adaylarının öğrettiği erken yaş öğrencileri sınıflarında bahsedilmiş olan davranışsal sınıf yönetimi manevralarından “hiştleme” söz dizelerini ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma, Türkiye'de bir devlet üniversitesinin yerleşkesi içerisinde yer alan bir anaokulunda ve aynı üniversitenin İngilizce Öğretmenliği bölümünden 57 öğretmen adayıyla yürütülmüştür. Bu öğretmen adayları, ELT bölüm programında Erken Yaş Öğrencilerine İngilizce Öğretimi I ve II derslerine kayıtlıdır. Çalışma planına uygun olarak, mikro öğretim oturumları video kayıt cihazı ile kaydedilmiş ve Transana yazılımına kopyalanarak transkript edilmiştir. Hiştleme söz dizileri üzerinde yapılan incelemeler sonucunda, hiştlemenin; (1) Görev Dışı Konuşma Dizilerinde Hiştleme ve (2) Görev Tamamlama Dizilerinde Hiştleme olarak iki temel özelliği ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda öğretmen adaylarının sınıfın davranış yönetimi kontrolünde zorluk çektikleri görülmekte ve bu nedenle görev dışı davranışlara yönelik eylemleri kontrol altına almak için sık sık hiştlemeye başvurdukları anlaşılmaktadır. Bunun aksine, öğretmen adayları önceden tasarlanmış pedagojik görevleri sürdürmek için daha başarılı görev sürdürme yönetimi uyguladıkları ortaya konulmuştur. 

Behavioural classroom management has been a concern for all teachers at various level of experience, but it is believed to be denser in volume for both pre-service and novice teachers. To manage those face-threatening behaviours, we as students may have witnessed several implications as, warning, punishment and even physical interventions. Of these manoeuvres, the study aims at revealing ‘hushing’ sequences at young-learners classroom interaction in which pre-service teachers of English micro teach. The study is conducted at a kindergarten located at the campus zone of a state university in Turkey and with 57 pre-service teachers of English of the same university. These pre-service teachers are enrolled to Teaching English to Young Learners I and II courses in the ELT department program. In accordance with the study plan, micro teaching sessions are recorded and transcribed through Transana software. Special interest on hushing sequences revealed two main features of its deployment as (1) Hushing for Management at Off-Task-Talk Sequences and (2) Hushing for Management at Task Conveying Sequences. As a result of the study, pre-service teachers seem to have difficulty in behavioural management control of the class and hence they often deploy over controlling actions to off-task-talk behaviours. Contrary to this, the pre-service teachers implement more successful task conveying management to sustain the pre-designed pedagogical task. 

  • Allen, K. P. (2010). Classroom management, bullying, and teacher practices. The Professional Educator, 34(1).
  • Balli, S. J. (2011). Pre-service teachers’ episodic memories of classroom management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 245-251.
  • Brophy, J. (1986). Classroom management techniques. Education and urban society, 18(2), 182-194.
  • Bulunuz, M., Bulunuz, N., Tavşanlı, Ö. F., Orbak, A. Y., & Mutlu, N. (2018). İlkokullarda gürültü kirliliğinin düzeyi, etkileri ve kontrol edilmesine yönelik sınıf öğretmenlerinin görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 26(3), 661-671.
  • Burden, P. R. (2003). Classroom management. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
  • Cohen, S., Krantz, D. S., Evans, G. W., Stokols, D., & Kelly, S. (1981). Aircraft noise and children: Longitudinal and cross-sectional evidence on adaptation to noise and the effectiveness of noise abatement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(2), 331.
  • Coupland, J. (2014). Small talk. Routledge.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Five qualitative approaches to inquiry. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 2, 53-80.
  • Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  • Doehler, S. P. (2010). Conceptual changes and methodological challenges: on language and learning from a conversation analytic perspective in SLA. P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, Ch. Jenks (Eds.) Conceptualising learning in applied linguistics, 105-127.
  • Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom Organization and Management. In MC Wittrock (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 392-431). New York: MacMillam.
  • Erol, O., Özaydın, B., & Koç, M. (2010). Sınıf yönetiminde karşılaşılan olaylar, öğretmen tepkileri ve öğrenciler üzerindeki etkileri: unutulmayan sınıf anılarının analizi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 16(1), 25-47.
  • Evertson, C. M., & Harris, A. H. (1999). Support for managing learning-centered classrooms: The classroom organization and management program. Beyond behaviorism: changing the classroom management paradigm, 59-74.
  • Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues. Routledge.
  • Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997).On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The modern language journal, 81(3), 285-300.
  • Jenks, C. J. (2011). Transcribing talk and interaction: Issues in the representation of communication data. John Benjamins Publishing.
  • Karadağ, O. (2017). Behavioral classroom management manoeuvres of pre-service English language teachers in teaching young learners. Unpublished MA Thesis. Muğla.
  • Kramsch, C. (2002). Introduction: How can we tell the dancer from the dance. Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecological perspectives, 1-30.
  • Kryter, K. D. (1985). The eflects of noise on man. Environmental Science Series. New York: Academic Press I, 970.
  • Lantolf, J. P., Thorne, S. L. (2000). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. In Lantolf, J. P. (Ed), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (197-221), New York: Oxford.
  • Lundquist, P. (2003). Classroom noise: exposure and subjective response among pupils (Doctoral dissertation, Umeå Universitet).
  • Markee, N. (2005).The organization of off-task talk in second language classrooms. In Applying conversation analysis (pp. 197-213). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Markee, N. (2008).Toward a learning behavior tracking methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 404-427.
  • Markee, N., & Kasper, G. (2004). Classroom talks: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 491-500.
  • Martin, A. J., Linfoot, K., & Stephenson, J. (1999). How teachers respond to concerns about misbehavior in their classroom. Psychology in the Schools, 36(4), 347-358.
  • Martin, S. D. (2004). Finding balance: Impact of classroom management conceptions on developing teacher practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 405-422.
  • Pike, Kenneth L. (1967). Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human behavior, 2nd rev. ed., , (pp. 37-72). The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton & Co.
  • Ritter, J. T., & Hancock, D. R. (2007).Exploring the relationship between certification sources, experience levels, and classroom management orientations of classroom teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1206-1216.
  • Reupert, A., & Woodcock, S. (2010). Success and near misses: Pre-service teachers’ use, confidence and success in various classroom management strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(6), 1261-1268.
  • Robinson, J. D. (2013). Overall structural organization. The handbook of conversation analysis, In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (Ed) 257-280. UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
  • Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974).A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 696-735.
  • Scrivener, J. (1994).A guidebook for English language teachers.–. Oxford: Macmillan.
  • Scrivener, J. (2005). A guidebook for English language teachers.–. Oxford: Macmillan.
  • Seedhouse, P. (2004). Conversation analysis methodology. Language Learning, 54(S1), 1-54.
  • Seedhouse, P. (2005). Conversation analysis as research methodology. In Applying conversation analysis (pp. 251-266). UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Sert, O. (2010). A proposal for a CA-integrated English language teacher education program in Turkey. Online Submission, 12(3), 62-97.
  • Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Sert, O., Bozbıyık, M., Elçin, M., & Turan, S. (2015).Standart Hasta-Tıp Öğrencisi Etkileşiminde Ön Bilgi İddiaları ve Etkileşimsel Sorunlar. Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, 12(2).
  • Sidnell, J. (Ed.). (2009). Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives (Vol. 27). Cambridge University Press.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory in Basics of qualitative research: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Ten Have, P. (2004). Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. London: Sage.
  • Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis. London: Sage.
  • Thornberg, R. (2004). Värdepedagogik. Pedagogisk forskning i Sverige, 9(2), 99.
  • Thornberg, R. (2006). Hushing as a moral dilemma in the classroom. Journal of Moral Education, 35(1), 89-104.
  • Tüzel, S. (2013). Sınıf içi gürültünün öğrencilerin dinleme sürecindeki bilişsel performansına etkisi/ Effects of classroom background noise on cognitive performance of listenıng process in secondary school students. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 9(4), 363-378.
  • Üstünel, E., & Seedhouse, P. (2005). Why that, in that language, right now? Code‐switching and pedagogical focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 302-325
  • Walsh, S. (2006). Talking the talk of the TESOL classroom. ELT Journal, 60(2), 133-141.
  • Waring, H. Z. (2009).Moving out of IRF (Initiation‐Response‐Feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796-824.
  • Waring, H. Z. (2011). Learner initiatives and learning opportunities in the language classroom. Classroom Discourse, 2(2), 201-218.
  • Waring, H. Z. (2013a). ‘How was your weekend?’: developing the interactional competence in managing routine inquiries. Language Awareness, 22(1), 1-16.
  • Waring, H. Z. (2013b).Managing competing voices in the second language classroom. Discourse Processes, 50(5), 316-338.
  • Waring, H. Z. (2013c). Two mentor practices that generate teacher reflection without explicit solicitations: Some preliminary considerations. RELC Journal, 44(1), 103-119.
  • Waring, H. Z., & Hruska, B. L. (2011). Getting and keeping Nora on board: A novice elementary ESOL student teacher's practices for lesson engagement. Linguistics and Education, 22(4), 441-455.
  • Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York and London: Routledge.
  • Wright, T. (2005). Classroom management in language education. Springer. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Birincil Dil en
Konular Dil Bilim
Yayımlanma Tarihi Aralık 2019
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Orcid: 0000-0003-4246-1254
Yazar: Orçin KARADAĞ (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University
Ülke: Turkey


Teşekkür This paper comes out of MA thesis done by the author. This paper also presented as an oral presentation at the “10th International Research in Education Congress”. The author would like to thank Prof. Dr. Eda ÜSTÜNEL as supervisor and Prof. Dr. Şevki KÖMÜR and Prof. Dr. Turan PAKER for their invaluable support in the completion processes of the thesis and this article. The author also extends his sincere thanks to the anonymous referees of the manuscript.
Tarihler

Başvuru Tarihi : 4 Ekim 2019
Kabul Tarihi : 7 Kasım 2019
Yayımlanma Tarihi : 30 Aralık 2019

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { soylemdergi629491, journal = {Söylem Filoloji Dergisi}, issn = {}, eissn = {2548-0502}, address = {soylemdergi@hotmail.com}, publisher = {Yusuf ÇETİN}, year = {2019}, volume = {4}, pages = {542 - 557}, doi = {10.29110/soylemdergi.629491}, title = {Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms}, key = {cite}, author = {KARADAĞ, Orçin} }
APA KARADAĞ, O . (2019). Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi , 4 (2) , 542-557 . DOI: 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491
MLA KARADAĞ, O . "Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms". Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 4 (2019 ): 542-557 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/soylemdergi/issue/51290/629491>
Chicago KARADAĞ, O . "Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms". Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 4 (2019 ): 542-557
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms AU - Orçin KARADAĞ Y1 - 2019 PY - 2019 N1 - doi: 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491 DO - 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491 T2 - Söylem Filoloji Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 542 EP - 557 VL - 4 IS - 2 SN - -2548-0502 M3 - doi: 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491 UR - https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.629491 Y2 - 2019 ER -
EndNote %0 Söylem Filoloji Dergisi Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms %A Orçin KARADAĞ %T Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms %D 2019 %J Söylem Filoloji Dergisi %P -2548-0502 %V 4 %N 2 %R doi: 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491 %U 10.29110/soylemdergi.629491
ISNAD KARADAĞ, Orçin . "Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms". Söylem Filoloji Dergisi 4 / 2 (Aralık 2020): 542-557 . https://doi.org/10.29110/soylemdergi.629491
AMA KARADAĞ O . Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms. SFD. 2019; 4(2): 542-557.
Vancouver KARADAĞ O . Why Do Pre-Service Teachers of English Hush? A Micro Analysis at Young Learner Classrooms. Söylem Filoloji Dergisi. 2019; 4(2): 557-542.