Technology Related Expectations Of Turkish 
As A Second Language Learners At Hacettepe University

Year 2013, Volume: 14 Issue: 2, 282 - 291, 01.06.2013

Mahir Kalfa Haydar Yalcın

Abstract

Aside from ‘lingua franca’ of the current age, technology enhanced language learning is stil in its infancy for the less commonly taught languages. Hacettepe TOMER has been teaching Turkish as a foreign/second language to the exchange students for several years though; technology related expectations of the language learners have never been precisely determined. The current study, as an action research of which the institution would benefit from, aimed to explore the language learners’ technology related expectations. The sample of the study is 17 foreigner students attending Turkish as a second language programs with different native languages. The data were gathered through a questionnaire form developed by the researchers and a thorough literature review. The results revealed that HUTOMER should enhance their technologic facilities and improve the quality of the language education provided at the institution because participants do expect more multimedia resources during their language education. Suggestions were made for further research.

Keywords

Turkish as a Second Language, HUTOMER, Digital Natives, Technology Enhanced Language Learning.

References

• Bayraktar, N. (2002). Yabancilara Türkçe öğretiminin tarihsel gelişimi [Historical
• Development of Teaching Turkish as Foreign/Second Language]. Retrieved April13, 2007 from http://turkoloji.cu.edu.tr/DILBILIM/bayraktar_01.php
• Beheshti, J. (2012). Teens, " Virtual environments and information literacy". Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 38(3), 54-57.
• Brown, H. (1991). Breaking the language barrier. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
• Callas, J. E. (2012). A Review of "Dancing with Digital Natives: Staying in step with the generation that's transforming the way business is done". [Book Review]. Internet
• Reference Services Quarterly, 17(1), 37-38. Cantijoch, M. (2012). Communication in the 2008 U.S. election. Digital natives elect a president. [Book Review]. Information, Communication & Society, 15(2), 324-325.
• Chapelle, C. (2007). Technology and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 27, 98-114.
• Cheung, L. (2011). Second language learner perceptions of ICT community to support collaborative knowledge construction in an English writing course. International
• Journal of Web Based Communities, 7(3), 324-341. Celik, S. (2011). Developing collocational competence through concordance activities.
• The Novitas Royal, 5(2), 173-186. Celik, S. (2012). Internet assisted technologies for English language teaching in
• Turkish universities. Computer Assisted Language Learning. DOI:1080/09588221.2012.692385.
• Dickinson, G. K. (2012). The digital natives are restless. Library Media Connection, 30(4), 6-6.
• Dwyer, D. (1996). A response to Douglas Noble: We're in this together. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 24-27.
• Harley, K. (2012). Dancing with digital natives: staying in step with the generation that's transforming the way business is done." Indexer, 30(1), 60-61.
• Houston, C. (2012). "Digital natives, 21st Century school libraries, and 21st century preparation programs: An Informal Affirmation of Branch and deGroot." School
• Libraries Worldwide, 18(1), 138-143. Katırcı, E. (2010). Farklı çoklu ortamların öğrencilerin mekanik konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesine ve bilişsel yüklenmelerine etkilerinin incelenmesi: Görsel- uzamsal zekâ boyutunda bir analiz [An investigation into the effect of multimedia materials on removing learners’ misconceptions of mechanics and cognitive loads].
• Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Marmara Univ. Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Istanbul. Kongrith, K., & Maddux, C. D. (2005). Online learning as a demonstration of type II technology: Second-language acquisition." Computers in the Schools, 22(1/2), 97
• Lam, W. S. E. (2000). L2 literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenager writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 457–482.
• Leloup, J. W., & Ponterio, R. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Technology: A
• Review of the Research. Eric Digest. EDO-FL-03-11. McGrath, B. (1998). Partners in learning: twelve ways technology changes the teacher- student relationship. Technological Horizon In Education, 25(9), 58-62.
• Nowaczyk, R. (1998). Student perception of multimedia in the undergraduate classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25, 367-368.
• Parry, W. (2012). Dancing with digital natives: Staying in step with the generation that's transforming the way business is done." [Book Review]. Managing Information, 18(10), 58-58.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 1." On The Horizon, 9(5), 1
• Salaberry, M. (2001). The use of technology for second language learning and teaching: a retrospective. The Modern Language Journal, 85(1), 41-56.
• Vijayakumar, J. K. (2012). Use of Web 2.0 Applications in Medical Education and E
• Learning." Information Studies, 18(2), 73-78. White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement." First Monday, 16(9), 7-7.
• Wilsey, B. B., & Keengwe, J. (2012). Technology integration curriculum framework for effective program evaluation." International Journal of Information & Communication
• Technology Education, 8(1), 15-25. Zimerman, M. (2012). Digital natives, searching behavior and the library." New Library World, 113(3/4), 174-201.