Investigation of Reading and Writing Strategies Used by Future Teachers: Do Good Readers Write Well?

Ersoy Topuzkanamış

Abstract


The number of studies regarding determining reading and writing strategies that students use and the effect of strategy training on skills development is quite abundant. However, no study has ever investigated whether there is a correlation between reading and writing strategies in terms of frequency of use. In spite of this, there have been several resources indicating that reading and writing skills are interrelated. Based on the assumption that this indication might possibly impact the use of strategies to some extent, current research aimed to determine the types of strategies used by first grade undergraduate students at a faculty of education together with their frequency of use and if there is a correlation between two scores. To conduct the research, 420 first-grade participants from various departments of Necatibey Faculty of Education, Balıkesir University were selected. As for the data collection, these students were administered a Reading Strategies Survey (RSS) developed by Karatay (2007) and a Writing Strategies Survey (WSS) developed by Ülper (2011). Related statistical analyses were conducted based on the data gathered from the scale, revealing that females used reading and writing strategies more often than males, and there was a moderate and positive correlation between the frequencies of the uses of writing and reading strategies. Apart from that, no difference was detected in terms of departments.

Keywords


Reading Strategies, Writing Strategies, Candidate Teachers, Turkish Language Education, Teacher Training

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abbott, R., & Berninger, V. W. (1993). Structural equation modeling of relationships among developmental skills and writing skills in primary- and intermediategrade writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 478-508.

Allen, L. K., Snow, E. L., Crossley, S. A., Jackson, G. T., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Reading comprehension components and their relation to writing. LAnnee psychologique, 114(4), 663-691 https://www.cairn.info/revue-l-annee-psychologique1-2014-4-page-663.htm.

Baymur, F. (1946). Türkçe öğretimi Birinci Kitap, Kenan Matbaası, İstanbul.

Bektaş Esen, E. ve Yiğit, N. (2013). Öğrencilerin fen ve teknoloji dersinde kullandıkları okuma ve yazma stratejileri, Fen Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Derneği Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, Volume: 1 Issue: 1.

Brand-Gruwel, S., Aarnoutse, C. A. J., & van den Bos, K. P. (1998). Improving text comprehension strategies in reading and listening settings. Learning and Instruction, 8(1), 63–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(97)00002-9.

Burles, Faye Dinah. (2000). Use of Metacognitive Strategies When Reading Both Narrative and Expository Text. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Victoria Faculty of Education, Canada.

Cain, K. (1999). Ways of reading: How knowledge and use of strategies are related to reading comprehension. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17(2), 293–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/026151099165285.

Casbarro, Susan Nanna. (1996). Content area reading strategies for English speakers of other languages (CARS for ESOL). Unpublished master’s thesis. Nova Southeastern University

Cheong, C. M., Zhu, X., & Liao, X. (2018). Differences between the relationship of L1 learners’ performance in integrated writing with both independent listening and independent reading cognitive skills. Reading and Writing, 31(4), 779-811.

Clouse, B. F. (2002). Transitions: From reading to writing. WCB/McGraw-Hill.

Çöğmen, S. (2008). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin kullandığı okuduğunu anlama stratejileri, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Aydın.

De La Paz, S., and Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and knowledge: Writing instruction in middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 687–698.

Emre, Y., & Temur, T. (2016). Farklı akademik seviyedeki ilkokul 4. sınıf öğrencilerinin okuma stratejilerini kullanma durumları. Electronic Turkish Studies, 11(3), 2571-2598.

Fırat, M., & Kurt, A. (2015). İnternette bilgi kirliliği ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi ve uygulanmasi. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(1), 89-103.

Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 39-50 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_5.

Gelen, İsmail. (2003). Bilişsel farkindalik stratejilerinin türkçe dersine ilişkin tutum, okuduğunu anlama ve kaliciliğa etkisi. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana.

Göğüş, B. (1978). Orta dereceli okullarımızda Türkçe ve yazın eğitimi. Ankara: Kadıoğlu Matbaası.

Grabe, W. (2003). Reading and writing relations: second language perspectives on research and practice. In B. Kroll (ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 241–262.

Graham, S., Kiuhara, S. A., Harris, K., & Fishman, E. J. (2017). The relationship among strategic writing behavior, writing motivation, and writing performance with young, developing writers. Elementary School Journal, 118(1), 82-104. https://doi.org/10.1086/693009

Graham, S., Liu, X., Bartlett, B., Ng, C., Harris, K. R., Aitken, A., Barkel, A, Kavanaugh, C., & Talukdar, J. (2018). reading for writing: a meta-analysis of the impact of reading interventions on writing. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 243-284.

Green, J. M., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL quarterly, 29(2), 261-297.

Güngör, Arzu. (2005). Altıncı, yedinci ve sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin okuduğunu anlama stratejilerini kullanma düzeyleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. S. 28, s. 101-108.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2007). Offline consequences of online victimization: School violence and delinquency. Journal of school violence, 6(3), 89-112.

Hopkins, C. (2002). Improving tenth-grade students’ five paragraph essay writing skills using various writing strategies, guided assignments, and portfolios for growth. M.A. Action Research Project, Nova Southeastern University.

İnal, S. (2006). Yabancı dil öğretimindeki hedeflerin gerçekleştirilmesinde (clustering) yazılı anlatım tekniğinin öğrenci tutumu ve başarısı üzerindeki etkileri (Doctoral dissertation, DEÜ).

Juel, C., Griffith, P., & Gough, P. (1986). A longitudinal study of the changing relationships of word recognition, spelling, reading comprehension, and writing from first to second grade. Journal of Educational, 78, 243-255.

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business horizons, 53(1), 59-68.

Karatay, Halit. (2007). İlköğretim Türkçe öğretmeni adaylarının okuduğunu anlama becerileri üzerine alan araştırması. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Gazi University, Ankara.

Kirby, K. (1986). Reading and writing processes of selected high-risk college freshmen. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.

Kumar, A. (2013). Rise in polluters of scientific research: How to curtail information pollution (infollution). Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine, 4(2), 271-271.

Langer, J. A. (1986). Children reading and writing: Structures and strategies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Logan, S., & Johnston, R. (2010). Investigating gender differences in reading. Educational Review, 62(2), 175-187.

MEB. (2015) Uluslararası Öğrenci Değerlendirme Programı PISA 2015 Ulusal Raporu. Retrieved 11.6.2019. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/PISA2015_UlusalRapor.pdf

Monroe, B. W. & Troia, G. A. (2006). "Teaching Writing Strategies to Middle School Students with Disabilities". The Journal of Educational Research, vol. 100, 1. pp. 21-33.

Muijselaar, M. M., & de Jong, P. F. (2015). The effects of updating ability and knowledge of reading strategies on reading comprehension. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 111-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.08.011

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2009). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2009. Retrieved 11.6.2019, nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading.

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2011). The Nation’s Report Card: Writing 2011. Retrieved 11.6.2019, nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/writing.

National Research Council. 1998. Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/6023.

O'Keeffe, G. S., & Clarke-Pearson, K. (2011). Clinical report—the impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics, peds-2011. www.pediatrics.org/cgi/doi/10.1542/peds.2011-0054 doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0054

Özdemir, Ş. (2016). Individual contributions to infollution (information pollution): trust and share. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 7(2), 23-33.

Ryan, S. M. (1985). An examination of reading and writing strategies of selected fifth grade students. In J. Niles & R. Lalik (Eds.), Issues in literacy: A research perspective (Thirty-fourth yearbook of the National Reading Conference, pp. 386-390), Rochester, NY: National ReadingConference.

Şen, H. Ş. (2003). Biliş ötesi stratejilerin ilköğretim okulu beşinci sınıf öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama düzeylerine etkisi. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Gazi University, Ankara.

Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Shanahan, T. (1984). Nature of the readingwriting relation: An exploratory multivariate analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 466-477.

Shanahan, T., & Lomax, R. G. (1986). An analysis and comparison of theoretical models of the reading–writing relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 116.

Shen, M. Y. (2009). Reading-writing connection for EFL college learners’ literacy development. The Asian EFL Journal, 11(1), 89-108.

Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 431-449.

Solmaz, B., Tekin, G., Herzem, Z., & Demir, M. (2013). İnternet ve Sosyal Medya Kullanimi Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Selçuk üniversitesi iletişim fakültesi akademik dergisi, 7(4), 23-32.

Spörer, N., Brunstein, J. C., & Kieschke, U. (2009). Improving students' reading comprehension skills: effects of strategy instruction and reciprocal teaching. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 272–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.003

Temizkan, Mehmet. (2007). İlköğretim ikinci kademe Türkçe derslerinde okuma stratejilerinin okuduğunu anlama üzerindeki etkisi. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Gazi University, Ankara.

Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D. (1983). Toward a composing model of reading. Language arts, 60(5), 568-580.

Tierney, R. J., Soter, A., O'Flahavan, J. F., & McGinley, W. (1989). The effects of reading and writing upon thinking critically. Reading Research Quarterly, 134-173.

Topuzkanamış, E. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının okuduğunu anlama ve okuma stratejilerini kullanma düzeyleri. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.

Ülper, H. (2008). Bilişsel süreç modeline göre hazırlanan yazma öğretimi programının öğrenci başarısına etkisi. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara.

Ülper, H. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının yazma stratejilerini kullanma ve bu stratejilere dönük eğitim alma durumlarına ilişkin bir inceleme. G. L. Uzun ve Ü. Bozkurt. (Ed.). Türkçenin Eğitimi-Öğretiminde Kuramsal ve Uygulamalı Araştırmalar. Essen: Die Blaue Eule, ss. 209-223.

Vural, Z., & Bat, M. (2010). Yeni bir iletişim ortamı olarak sosyal medya: Ege Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesine yönelik bir araştırma. Journal of Yasar University, 5(20).

Yang, H. C., & Plakans, L. (2012). Second language writers’ strategy use and performance on an integrated reading‐listening‐writing task. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 80-103.

Yazar, Ulvican. (2001). Teaching reading effectively with reading strategies. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Atatürk University, Erzurum.

Zsigmond, I. (2015). Writing strategies for fostering reading comprehension. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 1698-1703.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.3p.89

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2010-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.