You are here

Home » Content

İÇERİK TABANLI DERSLERDE YABANCI DİLDE YAZMA BECERİSİNİ GELİŞTİRME

ENHANCING FOREIGN LANGUAGE WRITING IN CONTENT-BASED COURSES

Journal Name:

  • Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2011

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This article investigates the appropriateness, the impact and the feasibility of giving feedback on language errors in content-based courses where the language of instruction is either a second or foreign language of the students — French in this instance. The purpose of this semester-long study was to implement a portfolio as a way for students to manage their language errors in a content-based course. This tool was used to raise students‘ awareness about the errors they make in their written production. In this study, 53 students had to follow several steps from correcting the errors, coding and counting the frequency of the errors, monitoring their own progress, to writing a reflective paper on their progress. The error portfolio provided the teacher with ways that would encourage students to be actively aware of their language errors without undermining their language competence and the content of this course. Results show substantive improvement in the quality of students‘ written production: they were engaged in improving their language by being aware of - and avoiding - error patterns that occur in their written productions.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu makalede, eğitim dilinin öğrencilerin yabancı dili veya ikinci dili olduğu (bu çalışmada Fransızca) içerik temelli derslerde, dil hataları hakkında geribildirimde bulunmanın uygunluğu, etkisi ve uygulanabilirliği hakkındaki bir çalışmaya yer verilmektedir. Bir dönem boyunca devam eden bu çalışmanın amacı, içerik tabanlı bir derste öğrencilerin kendi dil hatalarıyla başa çıkmalarını sağlamak amacıyla dosya tutmalarını sağlamaktı. Böylelikle öğrencilerin, yazarken yapmış oldukları hatalar ile ilgili farkındalık düzeyleri arttırılmış olacaktı. Bu araştırmada 53 öğrenci, hata düzeltmekten başlayarak, hataların sıklığını sayma ve kodlamaya, kendi ilerlemelerini denetlemeye ve ilerlemeleri hakkında yansıtıcı yazılar yazmaya kadar bir dizi adımı takip etmek zorundaydılar. Bu hataların tutulduğu dosya, öğretmene, öğrencilerin kendi dil yetilerini ve dersin içeriğini hafife almadan kendi hataları hakkında aktif biçimde farkındalık oluşturmaya teşvik etme yöntemleri sunmaktaydı. Araştırma sonuçları göstermiştir ki, öğrencilerin yazdıklarının kalitesinde tatmin edici bir artış gerçekleşmiştir: öğrenciler, yazdıklarında ortaya çıkan hata desenlerinin farkına vararak ve bu hatalardan sakınarak dil becerilerini geliştirmekte başarı kaydetmişlerdir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_173599_7_pp_192-206.pdf
  • 2
192-206
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Bazerman, Charles, & Joseph Little, & Lisa Bethel, & Teri Chavkin, & Danielle Fouquette, & Janet Garufis, (2005). Reference Guide to Writing Across the Curriculum. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.
Bitchener, J., Young, S., Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 14, 191–205
Bitchener, J. (2008). Evidence in support of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, 102–118
Cohen, A., & Cavalcanti, M. (1990). Feedback on written compositions: Teacher and
student verbal reports. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom (pp. 155-177). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ferris, D., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes. How explicit does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing,10, 161-184.
Hedgcock, J. & Lefkowitz, N. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141-163.
Hyland, F., Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 10, 185– 212
Kelly, M (2009). Writing Across the Curriculum: The Importance of Integrating Writing in All Subjects. http://712educators.about.com/cs/writingresources/a/writing.htm
Lalande, John. (1984). Reducing Composition Errors: An Experiment. Modern Language Journal. 66, 140-149.
Lee, H. (2008). Learner agency and identity in second language writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 109–128.
Lindgren, E., Spelman Miller, K., & Sullivan K. P. H. (2008). Development of fluency and revision in L1 and L2 writing in Swedish high school years eight and nine. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 133–151.
Louw, H. (2008). The effectiveness of standardised feedback when L2 students revise writing. Language Matters, 39, 88–110.
National Commission on Writing in America‘s Schools and Colleges, (2003). The Neglected ―R‖: The Need for a Writing Revolution. New York, NY: College Entrance Exam Board. Retrieved February 25, 2006, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf
O‘Sullivan, I., Chambers, A. (2006). Learners‘ writing skills in French: Corpus consultation and learner evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing 15, 49–68
Robb, T., Ross, S., & Shortreed, I. (1986). Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL
writing quality. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 83–91.
Semke, H. (1984). The effect of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals, 17, 195-202
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327-369.
Truscott, J. (1999). The case for ―The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes‖: A response to Ferris. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 111-122.
Van Beuningen, C. G., de Jong, N. H., & Kuiken, F. (2008). The effect of direct and indirect corrective feedback on L2 learners‘ written accuracy. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 156, 279–296.
Van Weijen, D., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sanders, T. (2009). L1 use during L2 writing: An empirical study of a complex phenomenon. Journal of Second Language Writing 18, 235–250
Zamel, V. (1985). Responding to student writing. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (1), 79– 101.
Wong, W. & VanPatten, B. (2003). The Evidence is IN: Drills are OUT. Foreign Language Annals, 36, 403-423.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com