SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2

The investigation into prospective teachers’ Turkish metalinguistic awareness

İ̇zzet ŞEREF
Behice VARIŞOĞLU
Pages
959–977
Publication Date
2020-06-24
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, it was found out that prospective teachers have a higher level of linguistic awareness in Turkish, it was also seen that their lowest awareness is in morphological awareness sub-dimension and highest awareness is in the cultural awareness sub-dimension.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Language awareness is the totality of conscious efforts to know and practice the language.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As to the sample, it consists of final year students chosen with purposive sampling technique (N=164).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, it was found out that prospective teachers have a higher level of linguistic awareness in Turkish, it was also seen that their lowest awareness is in morphological awareness sub-dimension and highest awareness is in the cultural awareness sub-dimension.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler language · language education · language awareness

Özet

Öz Language awareness is the totality of conscious efforts to know and practice the language. As to the metalinguistic awareness, it refers to the discovery of the social, cultural, historical and ideological aspects of language as a whole, as well as knowledge of the language and ability to use it. The current study aims to investigate native Turkish speakers' metalinguistic awareness who study at English Language Teaching, German Language Teaching, Turkish Language Teaching, and Turkish Literature departments according to their genders and departments. The study uses descriptive survey design, which is a quantitative approach. The population of the study consists of students who study at English Language Teaching, German Language Teaching, Turkish Language Teaching and Turkish Literature departments in Ataturk University Kazım Karabekir Faculty of Education. As to the sample, it consists of final year students chosen with purposive sampling technique (N=164). The data were collected via Turkish Metalinguistic Awareness Scale, developed by B. Varisoglu (2018). To analyze the data, descriptive analysis techniques were used. As a result, it was found out that prospective teachers have a higher level of linguistic awareness in Turkish, it was also seen that their lowest awareness is in morphological awareness sub-dimension and highest awareness is in the cultural awareness sub-dimension. It is also seen that there is significant difference in favor of female prospective teachers according to the gender variable, but the department variable does not have a significant effect on their Turkish metalinguistic awareness.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞEREF, İ., VARIŞOĞLU, B. (2020). The investigation into prospective teachers’ Turkish metalinguistic awareness. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 959–977. https://ajindex.com/articles/28930

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Acarlar, F. (1995). Türkçe kazanımında kullanılan fonolojik süreçlerin incelenmesi ve fonolojik bozukluğu olan çocuklardaki süreçlerle karşılaştırılması (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
  2. Acarlar, F., Ege, P. & Turan, F. (2002). Türk çocuklarında üst dil becerilerinin gelişimi ve okuma ile ilişkisi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17 (50), 63-73.
  3. Akbey, G. Ö. (2016). Down Sendromlu bireylerin akıcı okuma ve okuduğunu anlama ile fonolojik farkındalık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki (Unpublished MA thesis). Anadolu University, Eskişehir. Akoglu, G & Turan, F. (2012). Eğitsel müdahale yaklaşımı olarak sesbilgisel farkındalık: zihinsel engelli çocuklarda okuma becerilerine etkileri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 42(42), 11-22.
  4. Aktan, E. (1996). Çocuğun dil gelişiminde fonolojik duyarlılığın (sesbirim duyarlılığı) karşılaştırılmalı olarak incelenmesi (Unpublished MA thesis), Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  5. Alderson, J. C. & Hudson, R. (2012). The metalinguistic knowledge of undergraduate students of English language or linguistics. Language Awareness, 22(4), 320-337.
  6. Ali, S. (2011). Critical language awareness in pedagogic context. English Language Teaching, 4(4), 28-35
  7. Alim, H. S. (2005). Critical language awareness in the US: Revisiting issues and revising pedagogies in a resegregated society. Educational Researcher, 34, 24-31.
  8. Allor, J. H. (2002). The relationships of phonemic awareness and rapid naming to reading development. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 47-57.
  9. Andrews, S. (1997). Metalinguistic awareness and teacher explanation. Language Awareness, 6(2), 161-177.
  10. Andrews, S. (2001). The language awareness of the L2 teacher: Its impact upon pedagogical practice. Language Awareness, 10(23), 28-35.
  11. Andrews, S. (2007). “Researching and developing teacher language awareness: developments and future directions”, In J. Cummins and C. Davidson (Eds.), International Handbook of English Language Teaching, New York: Springer. Andrews, S. (2008). “Teacher language awareness”. In Encyclopedia of Language and Education, New York: Springer. Anthony, J. L & Francis, D. J. (2005). Development of phonological awareness. Current Directions in Psycological Science, 14(5), 255-259.
  12. Aytas, G., & Cecen, M. A. (2010). Ana dili eğitiminde dil bilgisi öğretiminin yeri ve önemi. Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, 27, 77-89.
  13. Batur, Z. & Beyret, T. N. (2015). Relationship between metalinguistic awareness skills and writ