Basit öğe kaydını göster

Reading Comprehension in EFL Education: Multimodal Semiotic Approach, Attitudes and Metacognitive Awareness

dc.contributor.advisorAlagözlü, Nuray
dc.contributor.authorYerdelen, Suna
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-02T10:38:11Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.date.submitted2024-02-02
dc.identifier.citationAdunyarittigun, D. (2002). An Invastigation of Factors affecting English Language Reading Success: A Case Study of an EFL College Reader. Thammasat Review, 7(1), 244–271. Ajayi, L. (2010). Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perception of Their Preparation to Teach Multiliteracies/Multimodality. The Teacher Educator, 46(1), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2010.488279 Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Open University Press. Al Seyabi, F., & Tuzlukova, V. (2015). Investigating EFL reading problems and strategies in post-basic schools and university foundation programmes: A study in the Omani context. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 11(2). Al-Jawi, F. D. (2010). Teaching the receptive skills. Retrieved June, 17, 2017. Allen, M., Titsworth, S., & Hunt, S. K. (2008). Quantitative Research in Communication. SAGE Publications. Altbach, P. G. (2007). The Imperial Tongue: English as the Dominating Academic Language. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(36), 3608–3611. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. (n.d.). Routledge & CRC Press. Retrieved May 14, 2023, from https://www.routledge.com/An-Introduction-to-Applied-Linguistics/Schmitt-Rodgers/p/book/9781138290136 Augustyn, P. (2012). On semiotics in language education. Semiotica, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2012-0079 Baaqeel, N. (2020). Improving Student Motivation and Attitudes in Learning English as a Second Language; Literature as Pleasurable Reading: Applying Garner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences and Krashen’s Filter Hypothesis. Arab World English Journal For Translation and Literary Studies, 4, 37–51. https://doi.org/10.24093/awejtls/vol4no1.4 Babayigit, Ö. (2019). Examination the Metacognitive Reading Strategies of Secondary School Sixth Grade Students. International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(3), 1–12. Baker, C. (1992). Attitudes and Language. Multilingual Matters. Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). 12 metacognitive skills and reading. Handbook of Reading Research, 1, 353. Bao, X. (2017). Application of Multimodality to Teaching Reading. English Language and Literature Studies, 7(3), 78. https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v7n3p78 Barahona, M. A. (2014). Exploración del currículo de la formación inicial de profesores de segunda lengua en Chile: Un estudio de caso. Perspectiva Educacional, 53(2), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.4151/07189729-Vol.53-Iss.2-Art.261 Becker, M., McElvany, N., & Kortenbruck, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation as predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 773–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020084 Bensoussan, M., & Kreindler, I. (1990). Improving advanced reading comprehension in a foreign language: Summaries vs. short-answer questions. Journal of Research in Reading, 13(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.1990.tb00322.x Bergman, M. (2010). C. S. Peirce on Interpretation and Collateral Experience. Signs - International Journal of Semiotics, 4, 134–161. Bicen, H., & Beheshti, M. (2019). Assessing perceptions and evaluating achievements of ESL students with the usage of infographics in a flipped classroom learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(3), 498–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1666285 Biria, R., & Mehrabi Boshrabadi, A. (2014). The Efficacy of Multimodal vs. Print-Based Texts for Teaching Reading Comprehension skills to Iranian high School Third Graders. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5, 365–380. Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. Pearson/Longman. Carr, E., & Ogle, D. (1987). K-W-L Plus: A Strategy for Comprehension and Summarization. Journal of Reading, 30(7), 626–631. Carrell, P. L., Devine, J., & Eskey, D. E. (1988). Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. Cambridge University Press. Chan, E., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Image–language interaction in online reading environments: Challenges for students’ reading comprehension. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38(2), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0023-y Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th edition). SAGE Publications, Inc. Cupita, L. A. L., & Franco, L. M. P. (2019). The Use of Infographics to Enhance Reading Comprehension Skills among Learners. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 21(2), 230–242. Dabarera, C., Renandya, W. A., & Zhang, L. J. (2014). The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System, 42, 462–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.020 Daly, A., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Analysis and comprehension of multimodal texts. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 34(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651846 Danesi, M. (2000). Semiotics in Language Education. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110823080 Danesi, M. (2007). The Quest for Meaning: A Guide to Theory and Practice in Semiotics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Danesi, M. (2012). Semiotics in Language Education. Walter de Gruyter. Dijk, T. A. V., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. Dogancay-Aktuna, S., & Kiziltepe, Z. (2005). English in Turkey. World Englishes, 24(2), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2005.00408.x Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language Learning, 53(S1), 3–32. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press. http://82.194.16.162:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/573 Dreyer, C., & Nel, C. (2003). Teaching reading strategies and reading comprehension within a technology-enhanced learning environment. System, 31(3), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00047-2 Erten, I. H., & Razi, S. (2009). The Effects of Cultural Familiarity on Reading Comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 21(1), 60–77. Erton, Ä. (2006). Semiotic Nature of Language Teaching Methods in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 2(1), Article 1. http://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/24 Falk-Ross, F. (2014). Language-Based Approaches to Support Reading Comprehension. Rowman & Littlefield. Farías, M., & Véliz, L. (2019). Multimodal Texts in Chilean English Teaching Education: Experiences From Educators and Pre-Service Teachers. Profile Issues in Teachers` Professional Development, 21(2), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n2.75172 Farías, M., & Véliz, L. (2019). Multimodal Texts in Chilean English Teaching Education: Experiences From Educators and Pre-Service Teachers. Profile Issues in Teachers` Professional Development, 21(2), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n2.75172 Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2005). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGraw-Hill. Ganapathy, M., & Seetharam, S. A. (2016). The Effects of Using Multimodal Approaches in Meaning-Making of 21st Century Literacy Texts among ESL Students in a Private School in Malaysia. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 7(2), 143–155. Griffith, P. L., & Ruan, J. (2005). What Is Metacognition and What Should Be Its Role in Literacy Instruction? In Metacognition in Literacy Learning. Routledge. Groebel, L. (1980). A Comparison of Students’ Reading Comprehension in the Native Language with Their Reading Comprehension in the Target Language. ELT Journal, XXXV(1), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/XXXV.1.54 Guillén, S., & Mar, M. del. (2021). The effects of applying multimodality in oral comprehension tasks in the English classroom of Batxillerat: Students’ performance and attitudes. http://dspace.uvic.cat/xmlui/handle/10854/6863 HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ - İngilizce Öğretmenliği (104810274) | YÖK Lisans Atlası. (n.d.-a). Retrieved June 12, 2021, from https://yokatlas.yok.gov.tr/lisans.php?y=104810274 Harrison, C. (2003). Visual Social Semiotics: Understanding How Still Images Make Meaning. Technical Communication, 50(1), 46–60. Heaton, J. B., Harmer, J., & Kingsbury, R. (1990). Writing English language tests. Longman. https://www.longmanhomeusa.com/catalog/products/language-assessment-principles-and-classroom-practices/ Jewitt, C. (2005). Multimodality, “Reading”, and “Writing” for the 21st Century. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 26(3), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300500200011 Jewitt, C. (2012). Multimodal Teaching and Learning. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. American Cancer Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0815 Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing Multimodality. Routledge. Karatza, S. (2020). Multimodal literacy and language testing: Visual and intersemiotic literacy indicators of reading comprehension texts. Journal of Visual Literacy, 39(3–4), 220–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2020.1826222 Kasim, U., & Raisha, S. (2017). EFL students’ reading comprehension problems: Linguistic and non-linguistic complexities. English Education Journal, 8(3), Article 3. Kong, N. (2011). Establishing a Comprehensive English Teaching Pattern Combining the Communicative Teaching Method and the Grammar-Translation Method. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 76–78. Kökçü, Y., & Demirel, Ş. (2020). A STUDY ON DEVELOPING A READING COMPREHENSION TEST. European Journal of Education Studies, 0, Article 0. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.3075 Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold Publishers. Kress, Gunther. 2001. Sociolinguistics and social semiotics. In Paul Cobley (ed.), Kress, J. B., Gunther. (2015). Multimodality, Learning and Communication: A social semiotic frame. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687537 Kumar, R. (2010). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners. SAGE Publications. Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices – Pearson ELT USA. (n.d.). Retrieved September 5, 2021, from Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2013). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching 3rd edition—Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers. Oxford University Press. Larson-Hall, J. (2009). A Guide to Doing Statistics in Second Language Research Using SPSS (0 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203875964 Lee, H.-C. (2013). An Examination of ESL Taiwanese University Students’ Multimodal Reading Responses. Literacy Research and Instruction, 52(3), 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2013.774449 Lier, L. van. (2004). The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: A Sociocultural Perspective. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7912-5 Lin, J. (2018). Factors Related to EFL/ESL Learners’ Reading Strategy Use: A Literature Review. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 92. Liu, F. (2010). A Short Analysis of the Nature of Reading. English Language Teaching, 3(3). Liu, L.-Y., & Liu, P. (2015). An Empirical Study on Multimodal Learning Mode in College English. 244–249. https://doi.org/10.2991/sschd-16.2016.49 Mackey, E. A., Gass, S. M., Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2012). Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition. A Practical Guide. Manalu, T., & Wirza, Y. (2021). Metacognitive Strategies by Low Achieving Students in Reading Multimodal Texts. 600–605. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210427.091 McCarthy, M. (1996). The teaching of Shakespeare: A semiotic approach. Irish Educational Studies, 15(1), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/0332331960150118 McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Chapter 9 Toward a Comprehensive Model of Comprehension. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 297–384). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2 McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009b). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. In The psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 51 (pp. 297–384). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51009-2 Miki, M. H. (2020). Investigating of Pre- Service Teavhers’ Perception and Readiness to Digital Multimodal Literacy at Lakidende University. https://doi.org/10.21009/ijlecr.061.08 Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249 Monika, M., & V, A. D. (2022). A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Metacognitive Strategies and Multimodal Tools in Blended Learning English Language Classroom. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(11), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1211.03 Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive Multimodal Learning Environments: Special Issue on Interactive Learning Environments: Contemporary Issues and Trends. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2 Nan, C. (2018). Implications of Interrelationship among Four Language Skills for High School English Teaching. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(2), 418. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0902.26 Nan, C. (2018). Implications of Interrelationship among Four Language Skills for High School English Teaching. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(2), 418. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0902.26 National Park Service. (2009, October 27). Ellis Island. HISTORY. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.history.com/topics/immigration/ellis-island Neisser, U. (1964). Visual search. Scientific American, 210(6), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0664-94 Ntelioglou, B. Y., Fannin, J., Montanera, M., & Cummins, J. (2014). A multilingual and multimodal approach to literacy teaching and learning in urban education: A collaborative inquiry project in an inner city elementary school. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00533 Özdemir Ç., E., & Akyol, H. (2019). The Development of a Reading Comprehension Test. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 563–570. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070229 Pan, X., & Zhang, Z. (2020). An Empirical Study of Application of Multimodal Approach to Teaching Reading in EFL in Senior High School. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(2), 98–111. Pang, E. S., Muaka, A., Bernhardt, E. B., & Kamil, M. L. (2003). Teaching reading. Pardo, L. S. (2004). What Every Teacher Needs to Know About Comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(3), 272–280. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.58.3.5 PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do. (n.d.). [Text]. Retrieved September 4, 2021, from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_5f07c754-en Pourhosein Gilakjani, A., & Sabouri, N. (2016). How Can Students Improve Their Reading Comprehension Skill? Journal of Studies in Education, 6, 229. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v6i2.9201 Price C. P, & Rajiv S. J., & I-Chant A. C., & Dana C. L., & Carrie C. Research Methods in Psychology – Simple Book Publishing. (n.d.). Retrieved January 23, 2024, from https://opentext.wsu.edu/carriecuttler/ Programs, H. D. (n.d.-a). Ellis Island | Virtual Tour by Heritage Documentation Programs. Retrieved September 2, 2021, from https://www.nps.gov/hdp/exhibits/ellis/Ellis_Index.html?html5=prefer Publications—PISA. (n.d.-b). Retrieved September 4, 2021, from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/pisa-2018-results-volume-iii-acd78851-en.htm Putra, K. M. (2021). The use of infographics to enhance EFL students reading interest. Journal of Educational Study, 1(1), 60-66. Rossiana, Y. (2010). The Effects of Jigsaw and GTM on the Reading Comprehension Achievement of the Second Grade of Senior High School Students. Magister Scientiae, 27, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.33508/mgs.v0i27.647 Royce, T. D., & Bowcher, W. L. (2007). New Directions in the Analysis of Multimodal Discourse. Psychology Press. Rumelhart, D. E. (1985). Toward an Interactive Model of Reading. Sankey, M., Birch, D., & Gardiner, M. (2010). Engaging students through multimodal learning environments: The journey continues. In C. Steel, M. Keppell, P. Gerbic, & S. Housego (Eds.), Proceedings ASCILITE 2010: 27th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Curriculum, Technology and Transformation for an Unknown Future (pp. 852–863). University of Queensland. http://ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney10/Ascilite%20conference%20proceedings%202010/Sankey-full.pdf Schmitt, N., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2019). An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. Routledge. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. Routledge. Semetsky, I. (2010). Semiotics Education Experience. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789460912252 Serafini, F. (2013). Reading the Visual: An Introduction to Teaching Multimodal Literacy (Illustrated edition). Teachers College Press. Sert, O. (2006). Semiotic approach and its contributions to English language learning and teaching. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(31), Article 31. Siegel, M. (2012). New Times for Multimodality? Confronting the Accountability Culture. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55(8), 671–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.00082 Snow, C. (2002). Reading for Understanding: Toward an R&D Program in Reading Comprehension. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1465.html Solak, E. (2016). Teaching Listening Skills (pp. 29–44). Sornkeaw, J. (2021). The Effects of Using KWL-Plus Strategy through Infographics on Thai EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension Skills: The Effects of Using KWL-Plus Strategy through Infographics on Thai EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension Skills. SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH AND ACADEMIC JOURNAL, 16(3), Article 3. Soto, C., Gutiérrez de Blume, A. P., Jacovina, M., McNamara, D., Benson, N., & Riffo, B. (2019). Reading comprehension and metacognition: The importance of inferential skills. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1565067. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1565067 Stanovich, K. E. (1980). Toward an Interactive-Compensatory Model of Individual Differences in the Development of Reading Fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 16(1), 32–71. Su, Y. (2009). A Case Study of How a Kindergarten Teacher Incorporates Multiple Semiotic Systems in Her Classroom Instruction. Şenel, M. (2007). The Semiotic Approach and Language Teaching and Learning. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(1), Article 1. The New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u The New London Group. (2010). A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–93. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160u The Routledgecompanion to semiotics and linguistics, 66–82. London: Routledge. Thorndike, E. L. (1917). Reading as reasoning: A study of mistakes in paragraph reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 8(6), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075325 Unsworth, L. (2008). Multimodal Semiotics: Functional Analysis in Contexts of Education. Bloomsbury Publishing. Unsworth, L. (2014). Multimodal reading comprehension: Curriculum expectations and large-scale literacy testing practices. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 9(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2014.878968 Unsworth, L., & Chan, E. (2009). Bridging multimodal literacies and national assessment programs in literacy. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 32(3), 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03651812 Varaporn, S., & Sitthitikul, P. (2019). Effects of multimodal tasks on students’ critical reading ability and perceptions. 31(1), 81–108. Weninger, C., & Kiss, T. (2013). Culture in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Textbooks: A Semiotic Approach. TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 694–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.87 Yılmaz, C. (2012). An Investigation into Turkish EFL Students‟. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(5), 823–828. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.5.823-828 Yimwilai, S. (2019). Increasing EFL Students’ English Reading Ability and Engagement through Multimodal Learning Environments. Humanities and Social Sciences Journal of Pibulsongkram Rajabhat University, 13(2), Article 2. Yurko, N., & Protsenko, U. (2020). READING COMPREHENSION: THE SIGNIFICANCE, FEATURES AND STRATEGIES. COLLECTIVE MONOGRAPHS, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.36074/rodmmrfssn.ed-1.10 Zabi̇tgi̇l Gülseren, Ö. (2019). Revisiting the Classical Method in Language Education: Grammar Translation Method (Gtm) (pp. 336–344). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4603663 Zhang, L. J. (2010). Awareness in Reading: EFL Students’ Metacognitive Knowledge of Reading Strategies in an Acquisition-poor Environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410108667039tr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11655/34842
dc.description.abstractReading comprehension is one of the ultimate aims of English language teaching. To achieve this aim, traditional text-bound reading instruction practices such as translation and making detailed grammatical explanations are still being used today. However, thanks to the technological advancements, today’s reading tasks have gained a new semiotic environment conveying meaning to readers through various modes such as visuals and sounds alongside words. Therefore, it can be concluded that traditional reading instruction practices do not reflect authentic reading tasks. Also, previous studies conducted in various EFL contexts showed that the application of multimodal teaching approach and employing semiotic signs were effective in improving students’ reading comprehension. By combining the multimodal and semiotic approaches, this study aimed to explore their combined effect on English reading comprehension through the multimodal semiotic approach (MSA), students’ attitudes towards MSA, and the relationships of MSA’s effect on reading comprehension levels with attitudes towards MSA and with metacognitive awareness levels of reading strategies (MARS) in Turkish EFL context, so far uninvestigated in the literature. Post-test only with nonequivalent comparison groups design was employed with two groups of students studying ELT at a state university in Turkey to explore the effect of MSA. Then, a Likert-type survey was administered to experimental group to discover their MARS and attitudes towards MSA. The findings indicated that MSA was helpful in increasing students’ reading comprehension levels, attitudes towards MSA were positive, and there were positive relationships of reading comprehension levels by MSA with the attitudes and with the MARS levels.tr_TR
dc.language.isoentr_TR
dc.publisherEğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsütr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesstr_TR
dc.subjectReading comprehensiontr_TR
dc.subjectMultimodalitytr_TR
dc.subjectSemioticstr_TR
dc.subjectAttitudetr_TR
dc.subjectMetacognitive awarenesstr_TR
dc.subjectMetacognitive reading strategiestr_TR
dc.subjectEnglish language teachingtr_TR
dc.subjectEFL educationtr_TR
dc.subject.lcshİngiliz dilitr_TR
dc.titleReading Comprehension in EFL Education: Multimodal Semiotic Approach, Attitudes and Metacognitive Awarenesstr_TR
dc.title.alternativeYabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce Eğitiminde Okuma Anlama: Çok Modlu Göstergebilimsel Yaklaşım, Tutumlar ve Üstbilişsel Farkındalıktr_TR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesistr_TR
dc.description.ozetOkuduğunu anlama, İngilizce öğretiminin temel hedeflerinden biridir. Bu hedefe ulaşmak için çeviri ve ayrıntılı dilbilgisi açıklamaları yapma gibi geleneksel, metne bağlı okuma öğretimi teknikleri günümüzde kullanılmaya devam edilmektedir. Ancak teknolojik gelişmeler sayesinde günümüz okuma etkinlikleri, sözcüklerin yanı sıra görseller ve sesler gibi çeşitli modlar aracılığıyla okuyuculara anlam ileten yeni bir göstergebilimsel ortam kazanmıştır. Bu yüzden geleneksel okuma öğretimi tekniklerinin gerçek okuma etkinliklerini yansıtmadığı sonucuna varılabilir. Ayrıca, çeşitli İngilizce öğretimi bağlamlarında yapılan önceki çalışmalar, öğretim sürecinde çok modlu öğretim yaklaşımının uygulanmasının ve göstergebilimsel işaretlerin kullanılmasının öğrencilerin okuma anlama becerilerini geliştirmede etkili olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu çalışma, çok modlu yaklaşımı ve göstergebilimsel yaklaşımı birleştirerek İngilizcenin yabancı dil olarak öğretildiği ve ana dilin Türkçe olduğu bir bağlamda çok modlu göstergebilimsel yaklaşım (ÇMGY) aracılığıyla okuma anlama üzerindeki şimdiye kadar literatürde araştırılmamış olan bu birleşik etkiyi, öğrencilerin ÇMGY’ye yönelik tutumlarını ve ÇMGY’nin okuma anlama düzeyleri üzerindeki etkisinin, ÇMGY'ye yönelik tutumlarla ve okuma stratejilerine ilişkin üstbilişsel farkındalıkla (OSİÜF) ilişkilerini araştırmayı amaçlamıştır. ÇMGY'nin etkisini araştırmak için Türkiye'de bir devlet üniversitesinde İngilizce Öğretmenliği okuyan iki grup öğrenci ile eşdeğer olmayan karşılaştırma gruplarıyla yalnızca son test deseni kullanıldı. Ardından öğrencilerin ÇMGY’ye yönelik tutumlarını ve OSİÜF’lerini ortaya çıkarmak için Likert tipi bir anket deney grubuna uygulandı. Bulgular, ÇMGY'nin öğrencilerin okuma anlama düzeyini artırmada faydalı olduğunu, ÇMGY'ye yönelik tutumların olumlu olduğunu, ÇMGY yardımıyla elde edilen okuma anlama düzeylerinin; ÇMGY’ye yönelik tutumların düzeyleri ve okuma stratejilerine ilişkin üstbilişsel farkındalıkların düzeyleri arasında pozitif ilişkiler bulunduğunu gösterdi.tr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentYabancı Diller Eğitimitr_TR
dc.embargo.termsAcik erisimtr_TR
dc.embargo.lift2024-04-02T10:38:12Z
dc.fundingTÜBİTAKtr_TR


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Ad:
Suna_Yerdelen_Tez.pdf
Boyut:
3.903Mb
Biçim:
PDF
Açıklama:
İngiliz Dili Eğitimi Yüksek ...
Göster/Aç

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster