KELİME ÖĞRETİMİNDE GRAFİK DÜZENLEYİCİLERİ (FRAYER MODELİ ÖRNEĞİ)

Kelime dağarcığı, temelinde bilgiye dayalı sözcükler, terimler ve kavramlar bilgisi olup; aslında insan bilincinin bir evrenidir (Vygotsky, 1986). Bu açıdan kelime kazanımı ve gelişimi, bireyin akademik, sosyal ve kültürel gelişiminin, kısacası profesyonel yaşamın gerekli bir parçasıdır. Zengin kelime bilgisi, eğitimsel deneyimlerin tüm içerik bölgelerini etkiler ve özellikle iletişimin bütün bölümlerinde etkin bir rol oynar. Kelime öğretiminde bir grafik düzenleyici olan Frayer modeli, sosyal ve bilişsel yapılandırmacı öğrenme kuramını temel alarak öğrenci öğrenmesini destekler; bu nedenle model, başarılı kelime öğretiminin tüm bileşenlerine fazlasıyla sahiptir. Nitekim bu tip bir düzenleyici kullanmanın en büyük avantajlarından biri de, öğrencilerin yeni bilgiyi şemalarında bulunan ön bilgi ve yaşantılarına bağlamasıdır. Şema teorisine göre, bir kişi zihinde daha önce depoladığı bilgiyle yeni bilgi arasında anlamlı bir bağ kuramadığı sürece yeni bilgiyi öğrenemez. Dolayısıyla Frayer modeli, öğrencilerin kelimeleri uzun süreli belleğe kaydetmesini amaçlayan bilgi işlem sürecine dayalı bir strateji olup; kelimelere yeni anlamlar kazandırarak semantik haritalar oluşturmasına yardımcı olur. Ayrıca Frayer modeli, öğrencilerin anahtar kelimeye ilişkin tanımını ve temel özelliklerini açıklamalarına, örnek olan ve örnek olmayan kavramları belirlemelerine, böylece kendi anlamlarını geliştirmelerine katkı sağlar. Bu araştırmanın amacı, Frayer modelinin özelliklerini açıklamak ve modele yönelik Sosyal bilgiler, Matematik ve Fen ve Teknoloji dersleri bağlamında örnek etkinlikler sunmaktır. Araştırmada, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan 'doküman incelemesi' yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Sonuç olarak modelin kullanımının kavramsal algı zorluğu çeken öğrenciler ya da zayıf okuyucular üzerinde olumlu etkiler yaratması, soyut ve karmaşık kelimelerin öğretiminde ya da öğrencinin öğrenmesine engel olduğu herhangi bir kavram bölgesinde kullanılarak anlamlı öğrenmeyi gerçekleştirmesi açısından öğrenme ortamında etkili olacağı önerilmektedir

GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS ON TEACHING OF VOCABULARY (SAMPLE OF FRAYER MODEL)

Vocabulary is information of words, terms and concepts on the basis of background knowledge in fact a microcosm of human consciousness (Vygotsky, 1986). In this respect, the development and acquisition of vocabulary is an essential part of one’s academic, social and cultural development, shortly professional life itself. Rich vocabulary knowledge affects all content areas in educational experiences and especially plays role in virtually all aspects of communication. Frayer model a graphic organizer on vocabulary instruction supports student learning by taking into account social and cognitive constructivist learning theory; therefore, it has more all components of successful vocabulary instruction. Indeed, one of the greatest advantages of using type of organizer that it connects new information students’ prior knowledge and experiences already have in their schemas. To theory of schemas, a person can ‘not learn new information without establishing meaningful connections between new knowledge and already knowledge memorized in the brain. Thus, Frayer model is a strategy based on cognitive process, which provides to aim students’ knowledge to longterm memory, also helps them to create semantic maps by rebuilding new meaning to the words. In addition, Frayer model provides that students definite the keyword, explain its characteristics also, identify its examples and non-examples; thus contributes to development their own meanings. The purpose of this study is to explain the characteristics of Frayer model and present sample teachings activities related to model in the context of Social Studies, Mathematics and Science and Technology courses. In the research, ‘document examination’ method which is one of qualitative research methods was used. Consequently, it is suggested that the use of Frayer model will be effective in learning environment in term of providing positive effects on students have difficulties conceptual perception and poor readers, teaching on abstract and complex words, and developing meaningful learnings by using any student’s concept district that obstacles his/her learning

PDF

___

AJIDEH, P. (2003). Schema Theory-Based PRE-Reading Tasks: A Neglected Essential in the ESL Reading Class. The Reading Matrix, 13 (1)
AUSUBEL, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
BARTON-ARWOOD, S.M. & LITTLE, A. (2013).Using Graphic Organizers to Access the General Curriculum at the Secondary Level. Intervention in School and Clinic 49: 6, DOI: 10.1177/1053451213480025
BAUMANN, J. F., KAME'ENUI, E. J., & ASH, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary instruction: Voltaire redux. in J. Flood, J. M. Jensen, D. Lapp, & J.R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Teaching the English Language Arts (2n ed., pp. 752-785). New York.
BECK, I. L., MCKEOWN, M. G., & KUCAN, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford Press.
BECKER, W.C. (1977). Teaching reading and language to the disadvantaged-What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review, 47, pp.518-543.
BILLMEYER, R. & BARTON, M. L. (2002). Teaching reading in the content areas: If not me, then who? Aurora, CO: ASCD.
BISHOP, M., & MCINTOSH, K. (2009). Differentiated learning in science. Educator’s Voice (2), 28-35
BLACHOWICZ, C, FISHER, P., OGLE, D. & WATTS-TAFFE, S. (2006). Vocabulary: Questions from the classroom. Reading Research Quarterly, 41, pp.524-539.
BLACHOWICZ, C.L.Z. & FISHER, P. (2004). Vocabulary lessons. Educational Leadership, 61, 66-69
BOZEN, S. & HONNERT, A. (2004). The effects of note taking and summarization skills on the success of students in a seventh grade science course. Master’s degree action research, Aurora University Kelime Öğretiminde Grafik Düzenleyicileri (Frayer Modeli Örneği) 765 Turkish Studies International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 9/3 Winter 2014
BREWER, W. F., & TREYENS, J. C. (1981). Role of schemata in memory for places. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 207-230.
BROMLEY, K. (2007). Nine things every teacher should know about words and vocabulary instruction. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 50, 528-537.
BUEHL, D. (2001). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (2nd ed.). Newark, DE:
CARR, E. & WIXSON, K.K. (1986). Guidelines for evaluating vocabulary instruction. Journal of Reading, 29, 588-595.
CRONAN, C. (2010). Determining Best Practice for Vocabulary Instruction in a Middle School Setting. Doctor of philosophy, University of Kansas
CUNNINGHAM, A. E., & STANOVICH, K. E. (1998). What reading does for the mind? American Educator, 8-17.
CURTIS, C. Y. (2008). Socially Mediated vs. Contextually Driven Vocabulary Strategies: Which are most effective? A Dissertation Doctor of Education, University of Oregon
DAVIS, F.(1994). Fundamental factors of comprehension in reading. Psychometrical, 9, pp.185-97
DESHLER, D. D., PALINCSAR, A. S., BIANCAROSA, G., & NAIR, M. (Eds.). (2008). Informed choices for struggling adolescent readers: A research-based guide to instructional programs and practices, (pp. 11-36). NY, International Reading Association, New York
EBBERS, S. M., & DENTON, C. A.(2008). A root awakening: Vocabulary instruction for older students with reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 23(2), 90-102.
ELLIS, E., & HOWARD, P. (2007). Graphic organizers: Power tools for teaching students with learning disabilities. Current Practice Alerts, 13, 1-4. Erişim: http://teachingld.org/ alerts#graphic-organizers adresinden 12.02.2014’te alınmıştır.
ENGE, S. (2005). The impact of the Frayer Model on vocabulary. Unpublished Action Research, Shawnee Mission Board of Education, Shawnee Mission
FISHER, P. J., & BLACHOWICZ, C. L. Z. (2005). Vocabulary instruction in a remedial setting. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21, 281-300. DOI: 10.1080/10573560590949386
FRAYER, D. A., FREDRICK, W. C., & KLAUSMEIER, H. J. (1969). A schema for testing the level of concept mastery (working paper No. 16). Madison, WI: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning
FREEBODY, P., & ANDERSON, R. C. (1983). Effects of vocabulary difficulty, text cohesion, and schema availability on reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 18 (3): 277-294.
GRAVES, M. F. (1985). Vocabulary Learning and instruction. Review of Research in Education. American Educational Research Association: Erişim;http ://www.sagepublications.com adresinden 03.03.2014’te alınmıştır, DOI: 10.3102/0091732X013001049
GRAVES, M. F. (2006). The vocabulary book: learning and instruction. Language and Literacy Series. New York
GRAVES, M. F., & PENN, M. C. (1986). Costs and benefits of various methods of teaching vocabulary. Journal of Reading, Vol. 29, No. 7 Special Issue on Vocabulary, pp. 596-602 766
GREENWOOD, S.C. (2002). Making words matter: Vocabulary study in the content areas. The Clearing House, 75, 258-263.
HARMON, J. M., & HEDRICK, W. B. (2000). Zooming in and zooming out: Enhancing vocabulary and conceptual learning in social studies. The Reading Teacher, 54 (2): 155–159.
HARMON, J. M., W. B. HEDRICK, & FOX, E. A. (2000). A content analysis of vocabulary instruction in social studies textbooks for grades 4-8. The Elementary School Journal 100 (3):253-272.
HUGHES, C. A., MACCİNİ, P., & GAGNON, J. C. (2003). Interventions that positively impact the performance of students with learning disabilities in secondary general education classes. Learning Disabilities, 12, 101-111.
JENKINS, J. STEIN, M. & WYSOCKI, K.(1984). Learning Vocabulary through Reading. American Educational Research Journal Winter 1984, Vol 21, No. 4, pp. 767
JOHNSON, C., & JOHNSON, D. (n.d.). Why teach vocabulary? Erişim: http://eps.schoolspecialty.com/downloads / articles/Why _Teach_Vocabulary.pdf adresinden 10.03.2014’te alınmıştır.
KARJALA, L. (2010). Math Vocabulary Instruction in an Inclusive Classroom 1 Direct Instruction and the Frayer Model: Effects on Mathematics Achievement in an Inclusive Classroom. Master of Science in Education Action Research Project. Southwest State University Education Department Marshall, Minnesota 56258
KING, M. (2011). Effects of Teaching Vocabulary Using Various Forms of Rich Instruction in Thematically Versus Randomly Grouped Sets. A Doctor of Philosophy dissertation Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.
LABROSSE. P. (2007). Analysis of the Effect of Specific Vocabulary Instruction on High School Chemistry Students’ Knowledge and Understanding. Doctor of Education in Mathematics and Science Education University of Massachusetts Lowell
LAFLAMME, J.G. (1997). The effect of multiple exposure vocabulary method and target reading writing strategy of test scores. Journals of adolescent adult literacy. 40,372-381
LAPP, D., FLOOD, J., & RANCK-BUHR, W. (1995). Using multiple text formats to explore scientific phenomena in middle school classrooms. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 11(2), 173– 186.
MANZO, U., MANZO, U., & THOMAS, M. (2006). Rationale for systematic vocabulary development: Antidote for state mandates. Journal for Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49, 610- 619.
MARZANO, R. (2006). Preliminary report on the 2004-05 evaluation study of the ASCD program for building academic vocabulary. Alexandria, VA.
MARZANO, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
MARZANO, R. J. (2004). Building background knowledge for academic achievement: Research on what works in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Kelime Öğretiminde Grafik Düzenleyicileri (Frayer Modeli Örneği) 767 Turkish Studies International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 9/3 Winter 2014
MARZANO, R. J., GADDY, B. B., & DEAN, C. (2000). What Works in classroom instruction. Erişim: https://c1.livetext. Com/folder /7826068 /rZK2ngUJ_ Marzano_What_Works. pdf adresinden 18.03.2014’te alınmıştır
MILLER, G.A. & GILDEA, P., M.(1987).How Children Learn Words. Scientific American, v.257; n3 pp.94-99
MONROE, E. E. (1998). Using graphic organizers to teach vocabulary: Does available research inform mathematics instruction? Education (118), p.538-572.
MONROE, E.E., & PENDERGRASS, M. (1997). Effects of mathematical vocabulary on fourth grade students. Reading improvement, 34,(3), 120-132.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
National Behaviour Support Service [NBSS]. (n.d). Vocabulary Strategy-Frayer Model. Navan Education Centre Athlumney Navan Co. Meath, Erişim: http://www.nbss.ie/sites/default/files/publications/frayer_model_-vocbulary_strategy _handout__copy_3. Pdf adresinden 21.03.2014’te alınmıştır
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). The report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NİH Publication No. 00- 47699). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office
NOVAK, J.D.(2010). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society Vol. 6, n. 3, (pp. 21 - 30) ISSN: 1826-6223 | eISSN: 1971-8829
PARIS, S. G., CARPENTER, R. D., PARIS, A. H., & HAMILTON, E. E. (2005). Spurious and genuine correlates of children's reading comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds.), Children's reading comprehension & assessment (pp. 152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
PETERS, C.W. (1974). A Comparison between the Frayer Model of Concept Attainment and the Textbook Approach to Concept Attainment. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 252-254
POPIELARCHECK, A. E. (2008). The Investigation of the Affect Literacy Strategies have on the Reader Friendliness of Expository Text. Master of Education. California University of Pennsylvania
RICE, G. E. (1994). Need for explanations in graphic organizer research. Reading Psychology, 15, 39–67
SENECHAL, M. & CORNELL, E. H. (1993). Vocabulary acquisition through shared reading experiences. Reading Research Quarterly, 28; 360-374
SHEA, A.A.(2011). Redefining Vocabulary: The New Learning Strategy for Social Studies. The Social Studies 102, 95-103; Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0037-7996 DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2010.509371
STAHL, S. A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
STAHL, S., & FAIRBANKS, M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 72-1 10. 768
STRANGMAN, N., HALL, T., & MEYER, A. (2003). Graphic organizers with UDL. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Erişim: http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_goudl.html adresinden 12.02.2014’te alınmıştır
TABACHNICK, B. R. , Weible, E., & Frayer, D. A.(1970). Selection and analysis of social studies concepts for inclusion in tests of concept attainment. Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, Working Pap
TABER, K. (2002). Chemical misconceptions-prevention, diagnosis, and cure, theoretical background (Vol. I). Glasgow, Scotland: Royal Society of Chemistry
Texas Reading Initiative / Texas Education Agency. (2000). Promoting Vocabulary Development. Austin, TX: Texas Reading Initiative/Texas Education Agency, 2000. Erişim: https://education.ucf.edu /mirc /Research /TRA%20-%20Promoting_ Vocabulary _ Development . pdf adresinden 08.02.2014’te alınmıştır.
TRASK, C.P.(2011). Raising Achievement of Special Education Students through Vocabulary Instruction. A Project, Specialist in Education Lagrange, Georgia
VAUGHN, S., VOS, C. S., & SCHUMM, J. S. (2007). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk (4th ed.) Boston, Ma: Pearson Education
VYGOTSKY, L.S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press., p.256
WARREN, P. C. (1973). A Comparison between the Frayer Model of Concept Attainment and the Textbook Approach to Concept Attainment. Doctor of Philosophy Education the University of Wisconsin
WATTS, S. M. (1995). Vocabulary instruction during Reading Lessons in Six Classrooms. Journal of Reading Behavior, Vol (27), No. 3; 399-424
WIXSON, K.K. (1986). Vocabulary instruction and children’s comprehension of basal stories. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 317-329
YILDIRIM, A. ve ŞİMŞEK, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık