Dergiler / IOJET / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

THE EFFECT OF TWO MODES OF INSTRUCTION: MODELING VS. PRESENTATIONAL

Dergi
IOJET
Sayfa
460–495
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The modeling conditionalso showed and reported a more process-oriented approach to writing.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:We implemented an intervention of four lessons and tested the effects of two instructionalmodes as compared to the regular curriculum practices for completing a synthesis task at thepreparatory program of a Turkish university.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Participants were 48 upper-intermediate Englishas a Foreign Language learners (mean age = 18) assigned to three conditions.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The modeling conditionalso showed and reported a more process-oriented approach to writing.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

We implemented an intervention of four lessons and tested the effects of two instructionalmodes as compared to the regular curriculum practices for completing a synthesis task at thepreparatory program of a Turkish university. Participants were 48 upper-intermediate Englishas a Foreign Language learners (mean age = 18) assigned to three conditions. Thepresentational condition received direct strategy instruction supported by mnemonics; themodeling condition observed a video of a peer doing the task using the same strategiesmnemonic. In the control condition, there was no explicit reference to strategies; rather,students inferred the necessary information about writing an effective synthesis text from theinstruction and the lesson materials. We hypothesized that both of the experimentalconditions would have a positive effect on students’ synthesis text quality and writingprocesses and that modeling of explicit strategy use would have an effect over and above theother conditions. Results showed that students in the modeling condition improved theirsource use skills significantly more than students in the presentational condition, which wasmaintained in the delayed posttest four weeks later. No statistically significant conditioneffect was observed for content and authenticity of students’ texts. The modeling conditionalso showed and reported a more process-oriented approach to writing.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KARA, M. B., STEENDAM, E. V., RIJLAARSDAM, G., KURU, H. (2022). THE EFFECT OF TWO MODES OF INSTRUCTION: MODELING VS. PRESENTATIONAL. IOJET, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 460–495. https://ajindex.com/articles/542360

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Graham, S. (2003). Teaching expressive writing to students with learning disabilities: Research-based applications and examples. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 109 - 123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002221940303600204
  2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social privates of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Berninger, V. W., & Swanson, H. L. (1994). Modification of the Hayes and Flower model to explain beginning and developing writing. In E. Butterfield (Ed.), Advances in cognition and educational practice. Children’s writing: Toward a process theory of development of skilled writing (Vol. 2, pp. 57–82).
  3. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  4. Bouwer, R., Béguin, A., Sanders, T., & Van den Bergh, H. (2015). Effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores. Language Testing, 32(1), 83-100. doi: 10.1177/0265532214542994 Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H. (2002). Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 405-415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94
  5. Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition & Instruction, 22, 1–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532690Xci2201_1
  6. Braaksma, M. A. H., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Couzijn, M. (2001). Effective learning activities in observation tasks when learning to write and read argumentative texts. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1, 33-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03172993.
  7. Breetvelt, I., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Relations between writing processes and text quality: When and how? Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), 103-123.
  8. British Council (2015). The State of English in Higher Education in Turkey. A Baseline Study. Retrieved August, 2016, from http://www.britishcouncil.org.tr/sites/default/files/he_baseline_study_book_web_- _son.pdf Brunstein, J. C., & Glaser, C. (2011). Testing a path-analytic mediation model of how selfregulated writing strategies improve fourth graders’ composition skills: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), 922–938. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024622
  9. Clachar, A. (2000). Opposition and Accommodation: "An Examination of Turkish Tea