You are here

Home » Content

Çok Katmanlı Okuryazarlık Öğretimine İlişkin Türkçe Öğretmen Adaylarının Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

AN INVESTIGATION OF PROSPECTIVE TURKISH TEACHERS’ VIEWS REGARDING MULTIMODAL LITERACY TEACHING

Journal Name:

  • Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Studies related to the use of multimodal texts which are defined as settings where scripts, paroles, static and mobile images could be used together, have increased recently. Concentrating upon the meaning that is constructed together rather than the meaning made by each component in multimodal texts seems to be important because the meaning in multimodal texts appears not by taking the components separately but by contextualizing them. Those characteristics of multimodal texts reveal the idea that multimodal literacy teaching should be taken into consideration as separately at faculties of education. A case study method which is among qualitative research methods was used in this study which intended to reveal prospective teachers’ views regarding multimodal literacy teaching. 61 prospective teachers studying at Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Department of Turkish Education, 4th grade and their views were taken into consideration within the scope of the study. Through the findings, it was revealed that prospective teachers have a low level of awareness regarding multimodal text structure and multimodal literacy teaching. Besides, about two thirds of prospective teachers (f=42) suggested the idea that multimodal texts should be used in Turkish courses at secondary schools and just 1 of them expressed as being qualified enough regarding multimodal literacy teaching.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Yazının, sözün, durağan ve hareketli görüntülerin bir arada kullanılabildiği ortamlar olarak tanımlanan çok katmanlı metinlerin, dil öğretiminde kullanımına ilişkin çalışmalar son dönemde artmıştır. Çok katmanlı metinlerin bünyesinde bulunan her bir unsurun ürettiği anlamdan ziyade bir arada ürettikleri anlama yoğunlaşılması önemli görülmektedir. Çünkü çok katmanlı metinlerde anlam, bütünü oluşturan parçaların ayrı ayrı ele alınmasıyla değil; aksine bütünü oluşturan parçaların bir arada yorumlanmasıyla ortaya çıkmaktadır. Çok katmanlı metinlerin bu özellikleri, çok katmanlı okuryazarlık öğretiminin eğitim fakültelerinde ayrıca ele alınması gereğini ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Türkçe öğretmen adaylarının çok katmanlı okuryazarlık öğretimine ilişkin görüşlerinin ortaya konulmasının amaçlandığı bu çalışma, nitel araştırma yaklaşımlarından durum çalışması yöntemi kullanılarak desenlenmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Türkçe Öğretmenliği 4. Sınıfta öğrenim gören 61 öğretmen adayının görüşüne başvurulmuştur. Elde edilen bulgulardan hareketle, öğretmen adaylarının çok katmanlı metin yapısına ve çok katmanlı okuryazarlık öğretimine ilişkin farkındalık düzeylerinin düşük olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmen adaylarının yaklaşık üçte ikilik kısmı (f=42) çok katmanlı metinlerin ortaokul Türkçe derslerinde kullanılması gerekliliğini savunurken yalnızca 1 öğretmen adayı çok katmanlı okuryazarlık öğretimi konusunda kendini yeterli gördüğünü ifade etmektedir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_173599_9_pp_133-151.pdf
  • 2
133-151
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Albers, P. (2007). Visual discourse analysis: An introduction to the analysis of school-generated visual texts. In D. W. Rowe, R. T. Jiménez, D. L. Compton, D. K. Dickinson, Y. Kim, K. M. Leander, & V. J. Risko, 56th yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 81-95). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
Bearne, E., & Wolstencroft, H. (2009). Visual approaches to teaching writing: Multimodal literacy 5-11. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore,Washiington DC : Sage Publications.
Callow, J., & Zammit, K. (2012). 'Where lies your text?': Engaging high school students from low socioeconomic backrounds in reading multimodal texts. English in Australia, 47 (2), 69-77.
Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. J. (2010). Central Issues in New Literacies and New Literacies Research . In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. J. Leu, Handbook of Research on New Literacies (pp. 1-21). New York and London: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.
Cooper, K., & White, R. E. (2012). The Recursive Process in and of Critical Literacy: Action Research in an Urban Elementary School. ,. Canadian Journal Of Education, 35(2), 41-57.
Cumming, J., Kimber, K., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2012). Enacting Policy, Curriculum and Teacher Conceptualisations of Multimodal Literacy and English in Assessment and Accountability. English In Australia, 47(1),, 9-18.
Doering, A., Beach, R., & O’Brien, D. (2007). Infusing multimodal tools and digital literacies into an English education program. English Education, 40 (1), 41-60.
Gibbs, R. G. (2007). Analyzing qualitative data. London: Sage Publications.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction (4th Edition). Boston: Pearson.
Göğüş, B. (1978). Orta Dereceli Okullarımızda Türkçe ve Yazın Eğitimi. Ankara: Kadıoğlu Matbaacılık.
Haggerty, M. (2010). Exploring curriculum implications of multimodal literacy in New Zealand early childhood setting. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18 (3). doi: 10.1080/1350293X.2010500073, 117-189.
Harste, J., Woodward, V., & Burke, C. (1984). Language stories and literacy lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Jewitt, C., & Kress, G. (. (2003). Multimodal literacy. New York : Peter Lang.
Jewitt, C., Moss, G., & Cardini, A. (2007). Pace, interactivity and multimodality in teacher design of texts for interactive white boards in the secondary school classroom. Learning, Media and Technology, 32, 303–317.
King, J. R., & O’Brien, D. (2002). Adolescents’ multiliteracies and their teachers’ needs to know: Toward a digital détente. In D. E. Alvermann, Adolescents and literacies in a digital world. New York: Peter Lang.
Kress, G. R. (2010b). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London and New Yorrk: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2010). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (Second Edition). London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies: Changing knowledge and classroom learning. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell, & N. J. Unrau, Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Livingstone, S., & Bovill, M. (2001). Children and their changing media environment. NJ: Erlbaum.
Miller, S. M., & Borowicz, S. (2006). Why multimodal literacies? Designing digital bridges to 21st century teaching and learning. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage Publication.
Munns, G., Arthur, L., Downes, T., Gregson, R., Power, A., Sawyer, W., . . . Steele, F. (2006). Motivation & engagement for boys. Evidence-based teaching practices. Canberra : Australia.
O’Brien, D. G., & Bauer, E. B. (2005). New literacies and the institution of old learning. . Reading Research Quarterly, 40 (1), 120-131.
OECD. (2001). Learning for Tomorrow's First Results from PISA 2003: The Learning Environment and Organisation off Schooling. Retrieved ocak 22, 2011, from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/58/59/33918026.pdf
Özbay, M. (2006). Türkçe Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri I. Ankara: Öncü Kitap.
Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2006). An exploratory study of teachers’ and students’ use of multimodal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (15), 1843–1866.
QCA (2005). More than words 2. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority Publications.
QCA (2004). More than Words: Multimodal Texts in the Classroom. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority Publication.
Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U., Roberts, D. F., & Brodie, M. (1999). Kids & Media @ The new millenium. CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
Siegel, M. (2006). Rereading the signs: Multimodal transformations in the field of literacy education. Language Arts, (84 (1), 65-77.
Smolin, L. &. Lawless, A. (2003). Becoming literate in the technological age: Newresponsibilities and tools for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 56, 570-577.
Turner, K. (2012). Multimodal Hip Hop Productions as Media Literacies. Educational Forum, 76 (4), 497-509.
Tüzel, S. (2012). İlköğretim ikinci kademe Türkçe derslerinde medya okuryazarlığı: Bir eylem araştırması. Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi.
Tüzel, S. (2012a). Medya Okuryazarlığı Eğitiminin Türkçe Dersleriyle İlişkilendirilmesi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi.
Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the curriculum: Changing contexts of text and image in classroom practice. Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Walsh, M. (2009). Pedagogic potentials of multimodal literacy. In W. H. Tan, & R. Subramanian, Handbook of Research on New Media Literacy at the K-12 Level: Issues and Challenges. US: Science Refference, Hershey.
Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal litaracy: What does it mean for classroom practice? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33 (3), 211-239.
Wissman, K. (2012). 'You're Like Yourself': Multimodal Literacies in a Reading Support Class. Changing English: Studies In Culture & Education, 19 (3), 325-338.
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.

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