Öğretmen Adaylarının E-Okuma-Anlama Uygulamaları ve Gelecekteki Sınıfları ile ilgili Algıları

Bu araştırmanın iki temel amacı vardır. İlki, öğretmen adaylarının kendi e-okumalarında kullandıkları anlama stratejilerini belirlemektir. İkinci olarak, öğretmen adaylarının gelecekte öğretim yapacakları sınıflarında e-okuryazarlık ve anlama stratejilerini kullanmaları ile ilgili algılarının belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini Ankara'da bulunan bir devlet üniversitesinin Sınıf Öğretmenliği Eğitimi Anabilim Dalı'nda, 2011 yılında, öğrenim gören 495 gönüllü öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Öğretmen adaylarının kullandıkları e-okuma stratejilerini belirleyebilmek için "E-Okuma Anlama Stratejileri Ölçeği" geliştirilmiştir Veri analizi sonuçları, araştırmada aşağıda yer alan 5 temel bulgunun ortaya çıktığını göstermektedir. (1) Katılımcıların çoğu okuma yapacakları metinler arasında tercih yapmaları gerekirse, e-metinleri seçtiklerini belirtmişlerdir, çünkü e-metinlerin okunması, üzerlerinde düzeltme yapılması ve kullanılması daha kolay bulunmuştur, (2) Öğretmen adayları toplamda 46 adet olan e-metinleri okumada kullanılan stratejiler içerisinden 41'ini çoğu zaman kendi okumalarında kullandıklarını belirtmişlerdir, (3) Basılı ve e-metinler üzerinde okuma yapmayı tercih eden öğretmen adaylarının, e-okuma-anlama stratejilerini kullanma sıklıkları arasında anlamlı bir farklılık bulunamamıştır, (4) Dördüncü sınıf öğretmen adayları e-okuma stratejilerini en fazla sıklıkta kullanmıştır ve (5) Görüşme yapılan öğretmen adaylarının tamamı e-okuma-yazma ve anlama stratejilerini gelecekteki sınıflarında öğrencilerine öğretme konusunda istekli olduklarını belirtmişlerdir.

Pre-Service Teachers' Online Reading Comprehension Practices and Beliefs about Their Future Classrooms

The purpose of this study is twofold: The first purpose is to investigate pre-service teachers' online reading comprehension practices. Secondly, pre-service teachers' perceptions about the use of online literacy and comprehension strategies in their future classrooms are investigated. The subjects of the study were 495 voluntary preservice teachers selected from the department of classroom teacher education in one of the major universities in Ankara in 2011. The pre-service teachers' use of online reading strategies was measured by using "The Online Reading Comprehension Strategies Survey." The results revealed that: (a) majority of the subjects selected online materials to read because reading, editing, and using online material is easier, (b) the pre-service teachers used 41 of the 46 online reading comprehension strategies most of the time, (c) there was no significant difference between pre-service teachers who preferred to read online and paper-based materials regarding practicing online reading comprehension strategies, (d) the fourth year pre-service teachers used the online reading comprehension strategies the most frequently, and (e) all of the interviewed pre-service teachers were willing to teach online literacy and comprehension strategies in their future classrooms.

PDF

___

Block, C. C., Duffy, G. (2008). Research on teaching comprehension: Where we've been and where we're going. In C. Block S. R. Parris (Eds), Comprehension instruction: Research--based best practices (2nd ed.) (pp. 19--37). NY: The Guilford Press.
Bromley, K. (2006). Technology and writing. In M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, R. D. Kieffer, &D. Reinking (Eds), International handbook of literacy and technology (Volume II) (pp. 349--353).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Burke, J. (2002). The Internet reader. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 38--42.
Coiro, J. (2003). Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56, 458--464.
Coiro, J. (2005). Making sense of online text. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 30--35.
Coiro, J. (2009). Rethinking online reading assessment. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 59--63.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. P., Gutmann, M. L., Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs.
In A. Tashakkori C. Teddue (Eds), Handbook of mixed methods in social behavioral research (pp. 209-- 240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
David, J. L. (2009). Teaching media literacy. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 84--86.
Duke, N. K., Schmar--Dobler, E., Zhang, S. (2006). Comprehension and technology. In M. C. McKenna, L. D.
Labbo, R. D. Kieffer, D. Reinking (Eds), International handbook of literacy and technology (Volume II) (pp. 317--326). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eagleton, M. B., Dobler, E. (2007). Reading the Web: Strategies for Internet inquiry. NY: The Guilford Press.
Esmer, B. (2013). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının elektronik ortamlarda okuma becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Gambrell, L. B. (2006). Technology and the engaged literacy learner. In M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, R. D. Kieffer, D. Reinking (Eds), International handbook of literacy and technology (Volume II) (pp. 289--294). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2008). Literacy and technology integration in the content areas. In D. Lapp, J. Flood, N. Farnan (Eds), Content area reading and learning: Instructional strategies (3rd ed.) (pp. 381--401). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. NY: State University of New York.
Johnson, B., Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). NY: Pearson/Allyn Bacon.
Kinzer, C. K., Risko, V. J. (1998). Multimedia and enhanced learning: Transforming preservice education. In D.
Reinking, M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, R. D. Kieffer (Eds) Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in post-typographic world (pp. 185--202). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Krathwohl, D. R. (1998). Methods of educational social science research: An integrated approach (2nd ed.). NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Labbo, L. D., Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C., Teale, W. H., Cammack, D., Kara--Soteriou, J., et al. (2003). Teacher wisdom stories: Cautions and recommendations for using computer--related technologies for literacy instruction. The Reading Teacher, 57, 300--304.
Lacina, J. (2008). Technologically based teacher resources for designing comprehension lessons. In C. C. Block S.
R. Parris (Eds), Comprehension instruction: Research--based best practices (2nd ed.) (pp. 362--377). NY: The Guilford Press.
Leu, D. J. (1997). Caity's question: Literacy as deixis on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 51, 62--67.
Leu, D. J. (2002). Internet workshop: Making time for literacy. The Reading Teacher, 55, 466--472.
Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D. K., Henry, L. A., Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In C. C. Block S. R. Parris (Eds), Comprehension instruction: Research--based best practices (2nd ed.) (pp. 321--346). NY: The Guilford Press.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction With networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 108--127.
Leu, D. ., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.) (pp. 1570--1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B. C., Liu, Y., et al. (2007). What is new about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? In L. S. Rush, A. J. Eakle, A. Berger, (Eds.). Secondary school literacy: What research reveals for classroom practice (pp. 37--68). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
McKenna, M. (2001). The new world of electronic text. Library Talk, l4(5), 30--31.
McNabb, M. (2005/2006). Navigating the maze of hypertext. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 76--79.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mokhtari, K., Kymes, A., Edwards, P. (2008/2009). Assessing the new literacies of online reading comprehension: An informative interview with W. Ian O'Byrne, Lisa ZaWilinski, ]. Greg McVerry, and Donald J. Leu at the University of Connecticut. The Reading Teacher, 62(4), 354--357.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Richards, L. (2005). Handling qualitative data: practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sorapure, M., Inglesby, P., Yatchisin, G. (1998). Web literacy: Challenges and opportunities for research in new medium. Computers Composition, 15, 409--424.
Sutherland--Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy web: Changes in reading from page to screen. The Reading Teacher, 55, 662--669.
Taffe, S. W., Gwinn, C. B. (2007). Integrating literacy and technology: Efiective practice for grades K--6. NY: The Guilford Press.
Vogt,W. P. (2007). Quantitative research methods for professionals. NY: Pearson/Allyn Bacon.
Zhang, S., Duke, N. K. (2008). Strategies for Internet reading with different reading purposes: descriptive study of twelve good Internet readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 128--162.