Teachers' Views on Constructivism in Turkish Primary EFL Classes

Bu çalışma yapılandırmacılığın temellerinin ve yabancı dil öğretimi alan yazınındaki yerinin kısabir betimlemesi ile başlamaktadır. Alan yazın taraması bu kavramın sadece kuramsal boyutunu içermeklekalmayıp, aynı zamanda yapılandırmacılık odaklı uygulamalı çalışmalara da değinmektedir. Bu çalışmatemel olarak Türkiyedeki ilköğretim okulundaki İngilizce derslerinde yapılandırmacılığın nasıl uygulan- dığını ortaya ortaya koymayı hedeflemektedir. Yapılandırmacılığın Turkiyedeki durumunu tam olarakanlamak için, araştırmacı Konya ilinde ilköğretim okullarında çalışan İngilizce öğretmenleri için bir anketgeliştirmiştir. Bu veri toplama aracı (1) yapılandırmacılığın temel prensiplerinin sınıf içinde uygulamayakonulmasını (2) uygulama sırasında meydana gelebilecek olası problemleri (3) yapılandırmacılığın pren- siplerinin Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı tarafından dağıtılmış olan kitaplarda nasıl uygulamaya konulduğunuortaya çıkarmak için geliştirilmiştir. SPSS 15.0 ile analiz edilen anketin Cronbach Alpha değeri .752olarak bulunmuştur. Anket sonuçları İlköğretim eğitiminde önemli bir paydaş olan İngilizce öğretmenleri- nin yapılandırmacılığın şu anki durumu ve uygulanması konusunda ne düşündüklerini ortaya koymuştur.T-test ve ANOVA sonuçları anket maddelerinin biri hariç diğerlerinde cinsiyete göre istatistiksel anlamdaönemli bir fark olmadığını göstermiştir. Benzer şekilde, öğretmenlerin lisans veya yüksek lisans mezunuolmaları da istatistiksel açıdan önemli bir farka sebep olmamıştır. Ayrıca, analizler İngilizce Öğretmenliğibölümü mezunu olanlar ile olmayanlar arasında da önemli bir fark olmadığını göstermiştir. Bu çalışmaanket sonuçlarının tarışması ile sona ermektedir.

Türkiye deki İlköğretim İngilizce Derslerinde Yapılandırmacılık Üzerine Öğretmen Görüşleri

This study starts with a brief description of both what constructivism is, and its place in foreignlanguage teaching literature. This literature review includes not only the theoretical dimension of theconcept, but also over those practical studies with a constructivist focus. This study aims to find out howthis theory is put into practice in Turkish EFL classes in primary schools. In order to obtain a robustunderstanding of the current situation of constructivism in primary EFL classes in Turkey, the researcherdeveloped a survey for EFL teachers working in primary schools in the province of Konya. The datacollection tool was designed to uncover issues regarding; (1) the implementation of constructivist learningprinciples in lessons (2) practical problems that are likely to emerge in the classroom (3) how constructivistprinciples are put into practice in the course books provided by the Ministry of Education. The Cronbach sAlpha coefficient of the survey, analysed by using SPSS 15.0, was .752. The results revealed what Englishteachers, as significant stakeholders in primary school education, thought about the current situation andthe practice of constructivism in primary school EFL classes. The independent samples t-test and analysisof variance results showed that there were no statistically meaningful differences between sexes exceptfor one item in the questionnaire; similarly, no statistically significant differences were found betweenteachers with a BA and those with MA degrees, except for one item. Moreover, analysis has not revealedany significant differences between ELT and non-ELT graduates. The study ends with a discussion of theresults of the survey.

PDF

___

Akar, H., & Yıldırım, A. (2004). Oluşturmacı Öğretim Etkinliklerinin Sınıf Yönetimi Dersinde Kullanılması: Bir Eylem Araştırması. [Use of Constructivist Learning Activities in Classroom Management Course: An Action Research] Sabancı Üniversitesi, İyi Örnekler Konferansı. http://www.erg.saban- ciuniv.edu/iok2004/bildiriler /Ali%20Yildirim.doc (Retrieved: 10.12.2009).
Applefield, J., Huber, R., & Moallem, M. (2001). Constructivism in theory and practice: Toward a better understanding. High School Journal, 84, 35-53.
Ayas, C. (2006). An Examination of the Relationship between the Integration of Technology into Social Studies and Constructivist Pedagogies, The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), 5 (1).
Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2006). Innovations in Teacher Education: A Social Constructivist App roach. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. J. (1999). In search of understanding: The case f or constructivist classrooms. New York: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Can, T. (2006). Oluşturmacılık ve Yabancı Dil Dersleri, Eğitimde Çağdaş Yönelimler-3: Yapılandırmacılık ve Eğitime Yansımaları. Conference Proceedings, 29th. April, 2006, 282-288.
Council of Europe (2000). European language portf olio (ELP): Principles and guidelines. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Education Committee.
Council of Europe (2001). Common European f ramework of ref erence f or languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Çınar, O., Teyfur, E., & Teyfur, M. (2006). İlköğretim Okulu Öğretmen ve Yöneticilerinin Yapılandır- macı Eğitim Yaklaşımı ve Programı Hakkındaki Görüşleri. İnönü University Journal of Faculty of Education, 11. Malatya.
Demirel, Ö. (2005). Avrupa Konseyi Dil Projesi ve Turkiye uygulaması [European Language Portfolio and Application in Turkey]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 33 (167), 65-80.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS f or Windows step by step: A simple guide and ref erence (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical Constructivism: A way of Knowing and Learning. London: The Falmer Press.
von Glasersfeld, E. (2000). Problems of constructivism. Ed. L. P. Steffe, & P. W. Thompson. Radical Constructivism in Action Building on the Pioneering Work of Ernst von Glasersf eld, 1-9. London: Routledge.
Halocha, J. (2007). Developing investigative work/enquiry. Ed. J. Johnston, J. Halocha, & M. Chater, Developing teaching skills in the primary school (154-173). Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
Jonassen, D. (2009). Reconciling a human cognitive architecture. Ed. S. Tobias, & T. M. Duffy. Constructivist instruction: success or f ailure?, 13-33. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Johnston, J. (2007). Questioning. Ed. J. Johnston, J. Halocha, & M. Chater. Develop ing teaching skills in the primary school, 81-98. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
Kırkgöz, Y. (2008). A case study of teachers implementation of curriculum innovation in English language teaching in Turkish primary education. Teaching and Teacher Education 24, An International Journal of Researches and Studies, 1859-1875. Elsevier Science.
Küçüközer, H., Bostan, A., Kenar, Z., Seçer, S., & Yavuz, S. (2008). Evaluation of six grade science textbooks according to constructivist learning theory. Elementary Education Online, 7(1), 111-126.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Constructivism as a Theory of Learning versus Constructivism as a Prescription for Instruction, Ed. S. Tobias, & T. M. Duffy. Constructivist instruction: success or f ailure?, 184-200. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivism: From philosophy to p ractice. Eric Digest, (ED444966). Record details, http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebportal/
Ministry of Education (MEB) (2006). English Language Curriculum f or Primary Education (Grades 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8). Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü Basımevi.
Nuthall, G. (2002). Social constructivist teaching and the shaping of students' knowledge and thinking. In J. X Social Constructivist Teaching, 43-79, Elsevier Science.
Oldfather, P., West, J., & White, J. (1999). Learning Through Children's Eyes: Social Constructivism and the Desire to Learn. Washington, DC: Routledge.
Phillips, D. C., & Soltis, J. F. (1998). Perspectives on learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Reinfried, M. (2000). Can radical constructivism achieve a viable basis f or f oreign language teaching ? Available at: http://webdoc.gwdg.de/edoc/ia/eese/artic20/marcus/8_2000.html Retrieved 19 November, 2009.
Rockmore, T. (2005). On constructivist epistemology. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Sarıkaya, M., Güven, E., Göksu, V., & Aka, E. İ. (2010). The impact of constructivist approach on students academic achievement and retention of knowledge. Elementary Education Online, 9 (1), 413-423. http://ilköğgretim-online.org.tr
Savin-Baden, M., & Wilkie, K. (2006). Problem-based learning online. New York: Open University Press.
Schcolnik, M., Kol, S., & Abarbanel, J. (2006). Constructivism in Theory and in Practice. English Teaching Forum, 44 (4), 12-21. Washington.
Schwartz , Daniel L . Robb L., & Lewis, S. (2009). Constructivism in an Age of Non-Constructivist Assessments. Ed. S. Tobias, & T. M. Duffy. Constructivist instruction: success or f ailure?, 3-11. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Sert, N. (2008). Constructivism in the elementary school curricula. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 4(2), 291-316. Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University.
Smith, J. (2001). Modelling the social construction of knowledge in ELT teacher education. ELT Journal, 55 (3), 221-227; doi:10.1093/elt/55.3.221. Oxford.
Sotillo, Susana M. (2002). Constructivist and collaborative learning in a wireless environment. Teachers of English to Speakers to other Languages Journal, 11(3), 16-20. Virginia, Alexandria.
Tan, O. S. (2003). Problem-based learning innovation: Using problems to power learning in the 21st century. Singapore: Cengage Learning.
Tobias, S., & Duffy, T. M. (2009). The Success or Failure of Constructivist Instruction: An Introduction. Ed. S. Tobias, & T. M. Duffy. Constructivist instruction: success or f ailure?, 3-13. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Weasenf orth, D. (2002). Realizing constructivist objectives through collaborative technologies: Threaded discussions. Language Learning and Technology, 6 (3), 58-86.
White, H. B. (2001). Getting started in problem-based learning. Ed. B. J. Duch, S. E. Groh, & D. E. Allen. The power of problem-based learning, 69-78. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing.
Wilson, K. (2003). A social constructivist approach to teaching reading: turning the rhetoric into reality. 16th Educational Conf erence. Melbourne.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72 (2), 131-175.