Aslı Lidice GÖKTÜRK SAĞLAM, Ayla YALÇIN DUMAN

Türkiye’deki Akademik Amaçlı İngilizce Programlarında Öğrencilerin Kaynak Tabanlı Yazma Değerlendirmeleri Hakkındaki Algılarının İncelenmesi

Bütünleşik yazma görevlerinin akademik amaçlı İngilizce öğrenme ortamlarında değerlendirmede kullanımı yaygınlaştıkça, bu tür sınavları değişik kültür gruplarındaki öğrencilerin nasıl algıladığına yönelik daha fazla araştırmaya ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu çalışma, Akademik Amaçlı İngilizce programı (EAP) öğrencilerinin bütünleşik yazma değerlendirmelerinde ikinci dil olan İngilizce’de kaynak kullanım algılarını yeniden incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Daha gerçekçi hedefler belirlemek ve akademik amaçlı İngilizce öğretim programları tasarlamak için, öğrencilerin kaynak tabanlı yazma görevlerini nasıl algıladıklarını anlamak gereklidir. Yüz otuz bir öğrenci, verilen parçaları okumayı ve bunlardan gerekli uygun yerleri savlarını desteklemek için kullanıp eleştirisel deneme yazısı oluşturmalarını gerektiren kaynak tabanlı yazma görevini tamamlamıştır. Bu yazma sınavından sonra, öğrencilere yazma süreçlerine ilişkin çevrimiçi anket verilmiştir. Öğrencilerden elde edilen bilgi, öğrencilerce bildirilen farklı yeterlilik düzeylerinde SPSS kullanılarak frekans analizi ve ki-kare testleri yapılıp nicel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan analizde, öğrencilerin yüksek olumlu algılar ve bildirilen yeterlilik düzeyine göre değişen bir şekilde kaynak kullanımının fikir oluşturma, gramer ve kelime modelleme için havuz olarak kullanıldığı görülmüştür. Bu çalışma, öğretim programı ve ölçme değerlendirme alanlarında çıkarımlarda bulunmakta ve öneriler sunmaktadır.

Exploring Student Perceptions of Source-based Writing Assessment in Exploring Student Perceptions of Source-based Writing Assessment in a Turkish EAP Context

As integrated writing tasks are becoming more common in assessment in EAP settings,there is need for more research to explore how different cultural groups perceive integrated writingassessment. With this in mind, this study aims to extrapolate students’ perceptions of L2 Englishfor Academic Purposes (EAP) in terms of their use of sources in an integrated writing assessmenttask and development as academic writers. It is necessary to comprehend students’ perceptionstowards source-based writing assessment tasks in order to set realistic goals and formulate effectiveinstructional design for EAP programs. One hundred and thirteen undergraduate studentscompleted the source-based assessment task, which required them to read texts and compose anargumentative essay by integrating relevant support from the texts. After the task, students weregiven an online questionnaire on their writing process. Student responses were analyzedquantitatively using frequency analysis and chi-square tests on SPSS across different self-reportedproficiency levels. Analysis revealed highly positive perceptions and a significant relationshipbetween reported proficiency, using sources as a repository for generating ideas, and modellinggrammar and vocabulary. The study has implications for instruction and testing

PDF

___

Akpinar, K. D., & Cakildere, B. (2013). Washback effects of high-stakes language tests of Turkey (KPDS and UDS) on productive and receptive skills of academic personnel. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 9(2), 81-94.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chapelle, C., Grabe, W., & Berns, M. (1997). Communicative language proficiency: Definition and implications for TOEFL 2000. (TOEFL monograph RM-97-3), Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Cumming, A. (2006). Analysis of discourse features and verification of scoring levels for independent and integrated tasks for the new TOEFL. (TOEFL Monograph No. MS-30 Rm 05-13) ETS, Princeton, NJ.
Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K., & James, M. (2005). Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10(1), 5–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2005.02.001
Cumming, A., (2016). Writing development and instruction for English learners. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd. ed, pp. 364-376). New York: The Guilford Press.
Currie, P. (1998). Staying out of trouble: Apparent plagiarism and academic survival. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90003-0
Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: A case study with prospective academicians. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2, 3303–3307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.505
Erkaya, O. R. (2009). Plagiarism by Turkish students: Causes and solutions. Asian EFL Journal, 11(2), 86-119. Feak, C., & Dobson, B. (1996). Building on the impromptu: A source-based writing assessment. College ESL, 6(1), 73–84.
Gebril, A. (2009). Score generalizability of academic writing tasks: Does one test method fit it all? Journal of Language Testing, 26, 507-531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209340188
Gebril, A., & Plakans, L. (2013). Toward a transparent construct of reading-to-write tasks: The interface between discourse features and proficiency. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.642040
Grabe, W. (2003). Exploring the dynamics of second language writing. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp.242-262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W., & Zhang, C. (2013). Reading and writing together: A critical component of English for academic purposes teaching and learning. TESOL Journal, 4(1), 9-24.
Hale, G., Taylor, C., Bridgeman, J., Carson, J., Kroll, B., & Kantor, R. (1996). A study of writing tasks assigned in academic degree programs. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1995.tb01678.x
Hamp-Lyons, L., & Kroll, B. (1996). Issues in ESL writing assessment: An overview. College ESL, 6(1), 52-72.
Hyland, T. A. (2009). Drawing a line in the sand: Identifying the borderline between self and other in EL1 and EL2 citation practices. Assessing Writing, 14, 62–74.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 36–69. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587974
Mansourizadeh, K., & Ahmad, U. K. (2011). Citation practices among non-native expert and novice scientific writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 152–161.
Karabulut, A. (2007). Micro level impacts of foreign language test (university entrance examination) in Turkey: a washback study [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Iowa State University. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/14884/
Kumar, R. (2011). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners (3rd ed.). Sage Press.
Ozmen, K. (2011). Analyzing washback effect of SEPPPO on prospective English teachers. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 7(2), 24-52.
Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201–239. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588141
Plakans, L. (2008). Comparing composing processes in writing-only and reading-to-write test tasks. Assessing Writing, 13, 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2008.07.001
Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2012). A close investigation into source use in integrated second language writing tasks. Assessing Writing, 17, 18–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2011.09.002
Plakans, L., & Gebril, A. (2017). Exploring the relationship of organization and connection with scores in integrated writing assessment. Assessing Writing, 31, 98-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.08.005
Rosenfeld, M., Leung, S., & Oltman, P. (2001). The reading, writing, speaking, and listening tasks important for academic success at the undergraduate and graduate levels. (TOEFL Monograph Series 21). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service
Sevimli, S. E. (2007). The Washback effects of foreign language component of the university entrance examination on the teaching and learning context of English language groups in secondary education: A case study [Unpublished MA Thesis]. Institute of Social Sciences, Gaziantep University.
Spivey, N. N. (1984). Discourse synthesis: Constructing texts in reading and writing. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Thompson, C., Morton, J., & Storch, N. (2013). Where from, who, why and how? A study of the use of sources by first year L2 university students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(2), 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.004
Weigle, S. (2004). Integrating reading and writing in a competency test for non-native speakers of English. Assessing Writing, 9, 27–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2004.01.002
Zhang, X. (2017). Reading-writing integrated tasks, comprehensive corrective feedback, and EFL writing development. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 217-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815623291