SavedAdd your journal

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

Readability of Turkish tales

Keziban TEKŞAN
Üzeyir SÜĞÜMLÜ
Enes ÇİNPOLAT
Pages
978–992
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)

It was found that the book titled Az Gittik Uz Gittik had a readability level of “difficult (frustration)” while the book titled Masal Masal İçinde had a readability level of “educational (assisted)” according to the Cloze Readability application.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz The present study aims to determine the readability and clarity levels of certain Turkish tales for middle-school students.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study material consists of three tales each chosen from the books titled Az Gittik Uz Gittik and Masal Masal İçinde, and the study group consists of 90 students who were studying in a middle school located in the central district of a province in the Spring semester of the 2018-2019 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that the book titled Az Gittik Uz Gittik had a readability level of “difficult (frustration)” while the book titled Masal Masal İçinde had a readability level of “educational (assisted)” according to the Cloze Readability application.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2018-2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler reading habit · Turkish tales · readability

Özet

Öz The present study aims to determine the readability and clarity levels of certain Turkish tales for middle-school students. The study was conducted with a survey model. The study material consists of three tales each chosen from the books titled Az Gittik Uz Gittik and Masal Masal İçinde, and the study group consists of 90 students who were studying in a middle school located in the central district of a province in the Spring semester of the 2018-2019 academic year. The data collection tools used in the study include the Ateşman Readability Formula, Çetinkaya-Uzun Readability Formula, and a Cloze Readability Application. Data collection was performed in two stages. In the first stage, the readability conditions of the first one hundred words of the tales were determined in order to apply the readability formulas. In the second stage, the Cloze Readability application was completed within three weeks by applying it to the study group using two texts per week. The analysis of the data was performed using the Descriptive Analysis technique. It was determined that the tales had a readability level of “easy” according to the Ateşman readability formula, and “educational” according to the Çetinkaya-Uzun readability formula. It was found that the book titled Az Gittik Uz Gittik had a readability level of “difficult (frustration)” while the book titled Masal Masal İçinde had a readability level of “educational (assisted)” according to the Cloze Readability application.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEKŞAN, K., SÜĞÜMLÜ, Ü., ÇİNPOLAT, E. (2020). Readability of Turkish tales. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 2, 978–992. https://ajindex.com/articles/28931

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Akçaalan, H. (2015). Tales in the point of functional theory and the evaluation of the state of tales in today's Kütahya (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Kütahya Dumlupınar University, Institute of Social Sciences, Kütahya, Turkey. Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi (Article in Turkish). Ankara Üniversitesi TÖMER Dil Dergisi, 58, 171-174.
  2. Bağcı, H. & Ünal, Y. (2013). Readability of texts in 8th grade Turkish textbooks. Journal of Mother Tongue Education, 1(3), 12-28.
  3. Baş, B. & İnan-Yıldız, F. (2015). Review of texts in 2nd class Turkish textbook in terms of readability. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 11(1), 52-61.
  4. Bilkan, A. F. (2009). Masal estetiği (Book in Turkish). İstanbul:
  5. Timaş Yayınları.
  6. Boratav, P. N. (2008). Az gittik uz gittik (4. Baskı) (Book in Turkish). İstanbul:
  7. İmge Kitabevi.
  8. Bormuth, J. R. (1967). The implications of the use of cloze procedure in the evaluation of instructional programs. Occasional Report No. 3. Center for the Study of Evaluation of Instructional Programs, University of California, Los Angites. Bozlak, Ü. G. (2018). The readability levels of stroytelling texts in the fifth grade Turkish text books with the formula developed by uzun-çetinkaya at 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 education and training period. Akra Kültür Sanat ve Edebiyat Dergisi, 6 (14), 209-234.
  9. Ceran, D. (2015). The Evaluation of readability levels of the books being in category “Turkish literature” of the list of a hundred fundamental works and the opinions of 7th grade students on these books. Journal of Language and Literature Education, 14, 23-51.
  10. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B. & Turner, L. A. (2015). Araştırma yöntemleri desen ve analiz (2. Baskı) (Book in Turkish). A. Aypay (Çev. Ed.), Ankara:
  11. Anı Yayıncılık. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. New York: Sage. Çakmak, G. & Çil, E. (2014). Evaluation of 4th grade science and technology course book with readability formulas: The case of exploring and knowing the world of living creatures. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies. 1(3), 1-26. Çeçen. M. A. & Aydemir, F. (2011). A study on pre-school story books in point of readability. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(6), 185-194.
  12. Çetinkaya, G. (2010). Identifying and classifying the readability levels of the Turkish texts (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Ankara University, Graduate School of Social Sciences, Ankara, Turkey. Çi