BİLGİSAYAR DESTEKLİ İŞBİRLİKÇİ DİL ÖĞRENİMİ GÖREVE DAYALI DİL ÖĞRENİMİNE YÖNELİK ÖZEL BİR ATIFLA

Bu makale eşzamanlı çevrimiçi ortamla desteklenen işbirlikçi görevlerin tasarısı için bir taslak ortaya koyar ve bilgisayar aracılı ortamlara dayalı sözcük yoğunluğu ve anlam görüşmesi yönünden öğrenen dil çıktısını miktar ve kalite açısından raporlandırır. Çalışma, öncelikle çevrimiçi görev tasarıları ile ilgili temel teorileri ele alır ve bilgisayar odaklı dil öğrenimin etkileşimli doğası ile ilgili önemli noktaları ortaya koyar. Katılımcıların profilleri ve kendi dil kapasiteleri hakkındaki görüşleri bir anket aracılığıyla toplanırken, işbirlikçi çevrimiçi görevlerle desteklenen dil çıktıları ise ses kayıtlar ve ekran görüntüleri ile belirlenmiştir.kaydetmek için bir ekran kaydedici yazılımın kullanılması sadece etkileşimin analizini kolaylaştırmamış aynı zamanda katılımcıların etkileşim esnasında ortaya çıkan iletişim sorunları ile başa çıkmak için kullandıkları eylemlerin izlenmesine de olanak tanımıştır. Katılımcıların uyarılmış geri çağırma yöntemi ile elde edilmiş kendi dil performansları ve bilgisayarın dil öğrenim ve öğretim sürecine eklenmesi ile ilgili son değerlendirmelerine dayalı bulgularla birlikte çalışma son bulur. Bu bulgulara dayalı olarak görülmüştür ki, etkileşimci ve işbirlikçi ortamlar dil görevleri ile birlikte öğrencinin sözlü olarak katılımlarında hem katılım süresi hem de kalitesi bakımından geleneksel ortamlara göre daha yüksektir. Geleneksel öğretiminin yürütüldüğü sınıflarda, öğrencilerin sözlü olarak katılımları çoğunlukla en çok iki veya üç girişimle ve sadece öğretmen sorularına cevap verme biçimiyle sınırlı kalırken, bilgisayar destekli etkileşimci bir öğrenme ortamında, etkileşimi başlatma, soru sorma ve cevaplama, etkileşim sırasını belirleme ve etkileşimi sonlandırma gibi tüm sorumluluklar öğrencinin kendisine aittir.

COMPUTER ASSISTED COLLABORATIVE LANGUAGE LEARNING: WITH THE SPECIAL REFERENCE TO TBLL

This article presents a framework for the design of collaborative tasks in a synchronous online environment and reports the findings based on learner output from quantity and quality aspects such as lexical density and negotiation of meaning in the mode of computer mediated interaction (CMI). The study first focuses on the underlying theories in designing online tasks, and then, presents a number points concerning the interactive nature of CALL. Data about participants' profile and their perceptions about own language competences were collected through a survey questionnaire. For the quantity& quality measures of language output generated through collaborative online task were based on recordings, and screen shots.synchronous interaction recorded by screen-shot software not only facilitated the analysis of interaction but also let the track of participants' actions that they employed to deal with the emerged communication problems. The paper concludes by reporting the findings based on stimulated recall about participants' reflections on their linguistic efforts and final attitudes towards the integration of computer assisted tasks into the language learning and teaching process. Based on these findings, it was seen that on an interactive and collaborative platform which is supported by language tasks, the degree of learner active oral participation is considerably higher than the one in traditional setting. While in traditional classrooms the incidents of learners' oral participations are mostly restricted to two or three times at most and confined to the mode of giving answers to the teachers' questions, in computer assisted interactive learning environment learners take all responsibilities of initiating interaction, asking and responding questions, assigning turn allocations, and finalizing the interaction. While in traditional classrooms the incidents of learners' oral participations are mostly restricted to two or three times at most and confined to the mode of giving answers to the teachers' questions, in computer assisted interactive learning environment learners take all responsibilities of initiating interaction, asking and responding questions, assigning turn allocations, and finalizing the interaction.

PDF

___

ABRAMS, Z.I. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and group journals: Expanding the repertoire of participant roles. System, 29, 489-503.
ABRAMS, Z. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (2), 157-167.
ALLWRIGHT, R.L. (1984). The importance of interaction in Classroom Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 5/2, 156-171. http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/5/2/156.pdf
ALLWRIGHT, D. (2000). Interaction and negotiation in the language classroom: their role in learner development. Available as CRILE Working Paper 50. http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/groups/crile/docs/crile50allrigh.pdf
ALLUM, P. (2004). Evaluation of CALL: Initial vocabulary learning. ReCALL, 16 (2), 488-501.
AYCAN, A. (2013). L"enseignement du fle aux enfants assiste par le multimedia, Turkish Studies, 10, 8, Sayfa : 77 - 96 www.turkishstudies.net, Doi Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.5875
AYRES, R., (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 241-249
BLAKE, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 120-136.
CARTER, R., & Nunan, D. (Eds.). (2001). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
CHAPELLE, C.,(1998). Research on the use of technology in TESOL: analysis of interaction sequences in CALL. TESOL Quarterly 32 4, pp. 753-757
CHAPELLE, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (1), 22-34.
CHAPELLE, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing, and research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
CHAUDRON, C. (1988). Second Language Classrooms: Research on Teaching and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
COOK, V. (2001). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching (3rd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press
COWIE, N. (2009). 'Observation' in Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics, 165 -181, Editors: J. Heigham and R. A. Croker. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
DARHOWER, M. (2000). Synchronous CMC in the intermediate Spanish class: A case study. Presentation at the CALICO Conference, Tucson, AZ.
DAUD, N.M. (1995). A computer attitude scale for language teachers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 8, 355-363.
DELMONTE, R. (2003). Linguistic knowledge and reasoning for error diagnosis and feedback generation. CALICO Journal, 20 (3), 513-532.
ELLIS, R. (2003). Task Based Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
FOSTER, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 19(1): 1-23.
FUENTES, A. C. (2001). Lexical behaviour in academic and technical corpora: Implications for ESP development. Language Learning & Technology, 5 (3), 106-129.
GASS, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
GRAFF, M. (2003). Cognitive style and attitudes towards using online learning and assessment methods. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 1, 21 - 28.
HALL, J. K. (1995). 'Aw man, where you goin'?'': Classroom interaction and the development of L2 interactional competence,' Issues in Applied Linguistics 6/2: 37-62
HAMPEL, R. (2006). Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL 18 (1): 105-121.
KRASHEN, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon
KRASHEN, S.D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York: Longman Inc.
KRASHEN, S.D. (2003). Explorations in Language Acquisition and Use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
LONG, M.H. (1983). Native/non-native conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics 4(2): 126-41.
LONG, M. (1985). A Role for Instruction in Second Language Acquisition. In: K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann, eds. Modelling and Assessing Second Language Learning[C]. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
LONG, M.H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie,W.C. and Bhatia, T.K., editors, Handbook of second language acquisition. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
MACKEY, A., & GASS, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MEMİŞ, M.R.,& ERDEM, M.D. (2013). Yabancı dil öğretimde kullanılan yöntemler, kullanım özellikleri ve eleştiriler. Turkish Studies, Volume 8/9 Summer 2013, p. 297-318. http://turkishstudies.net, Doi Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.5089
MERRIAM, S.B., & Associates (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
NUNAN, D. (1992). Research Methods in Language Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press
NUNAN, D. (1996). 'Hidden voices: insiders' perspectives on classroom interaction' in K. Bailey and D. Nunan (eds.). Voices from the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
NUNAN, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
PELLETTIERI, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In: Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. (Eds.). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,59-86.
PICA, T. (1987). "Second-language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom." Applied Linguistics, 8, 3-21.
PICA, T., HOLLIDAY, L., LEWIS, N. and MORGENTHALER, L. (1989) "Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learner." Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11/1, 63-90.
PICA, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: what does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, outcomes? Language Learning 44(3): 493-527
PRABHU, N.S. 1992: The dynamics of the language lesson. TESOL Quarterly 26(2): 225-41.
RALLIS, S.F., ROSSMAN, G.B. (2009). 'Ethics and Trustworthiness' in Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics, 263 - 288, Editors: J. Heigham and R. A. Croker. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
SWAIN, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (eds.). Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
SWAIN, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.) Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
SWAIN, M. and LAPKIN, S. (1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16, 371-391.
TOMLINSON, B. (2005). English as a foreign language: Matching procedures to the context of learning. In E. Hinkel (ed.) Handbook of Research in Second LanguageTeaching and Learning (pp. 137-153).
TOYODA, E. & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 82-99.
TUDOR, I. (1996). Learner-centredness as language education. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
TSUI, A.B.M. (1995). Introducing classroom interaction. London: Penguin.
TSUI, A.B.M. (2001). Classroom interaion. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.).The -Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
VAN LIER, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. London: Longman.
WALSH, S. (2002) 'Construction or Obstruction': Teacher Talk and Learner Involvement in the EFL Classroom'. Language Teaching Research, Vol 6, pp 1-23.
WILLIAMSON, G. (2009). Type-Token Ratio (TTR): Retrieved September 11, 2011, from http://www.speech-therapy-information-and-resources.com/downloads/type-token-ratio.pdf
WILLIS, D. (1996). Accuracy, fluency and conformity. In Willis, J. and Willis, D., editors, Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford, Heinemann.
For the Visuals:
Google Images: http://www.google.com.tr/imghp?hl=tr&tab=wi