Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

BİLGİSAYAR DESTEKLİ YABANCI DİL ÖĞRETİMİNİN İNGİLİZCE DERSLERİNDE ÖĞRENCİLERİN ERİŞİLERİNE VE DERSE YÖNELİK TUTUMLARINA ETKİSİ

Yıl 2011, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 44 - 65, 29.03.2011

Dok. Öğr. Gökhan Baş

Öz

Problem (amaç): Bilim ve teknolojideki hızlı gelişmeler, dünyada pek çok kurumu ve süreci etkilediği gibi, okulu ve eğitim sürecini de derinden etkilemiştir. Bu gelişmeler, öğrenme-öğretme sürecine önemli değişiklikler getirmekle beraber, bu süreci de bilgisayar ve internet tabanlı bir boyuta taşımıştır. Bilgisayar ve internetin öğrenme-öğretme sürecine girmesi, öğretim yöntem ve tekniklerini de beraberinde değiştirerek, bu süreçte bilgisayardan daha fazla yararlanılmaya başlanmıştır. Bilgisayarın eğitimde kullanılmaya başlanması ile pek çok derste bilgisayar destekli uygulamalara geçilmiştir. Bu derslerden birini ise İngilizce dersleri teşkil etmektedir. İngilizce derslerinde bilgisayarın kullanılmaya başlanması ile bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretimi gündeme gelmiş ve bu yöntemle ilgili yazılım programları geliştirilmiş, internette de pek çok çevrimiçi program bu amaçla kullanıma açılmıştır. Özellikle yurt dışında bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretimi konusunda ciddi çalışmalar yapılmasına rağmen, ülkemizdeki bu çalışmaların sayısının oldukça az olduğu görülmektedir. Bu amaçla, ülkemizde bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretim yönetiminin etkililiğini gösterecek daha fazla çalışmaya ihtiyaç bulunduğu belirtilmektedir. Bu bağlamda bu araştırmanın amacı, bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretiminin 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin İngilizce dersindeki akademik başarılarına ve derse yönelik tutumlarını incelemektir.
Yöntem: Araştırma, 2009-2010 eğitim-öğretim yılında Niğde'de bir ilköğretim okulunda gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmaya, bu okulun iki farklı sınıfından toplam 40 adet 6. sınıf öğrencisi katılmıştır. Araştırmada ön test-son test kontrol gruplu araştırma modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada veri toplamak için “akademik başarı testiâ€? ile “ilköğretim İngilizce dersine yönelik tutum ölçeğiâ€? kullanılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında elde edilen veriler, SPSS 15.0 istatistik paket programı yardımı ile çözümlenmiştir. Her grup için aritmetik ortalama ve standart sapma hesaplanmış, gruplar arasındaki farklılığı test etmek amacıyla da bağımsız gruplar t-testi ile ilişkili gruplar t-testi ve Mann Whitney-U testi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada anlamlılık düzeyi .05 olarak alınmıştır.
Bulgular: Araştırmanın sonuçları, grupların derse yönelik tutumları arasında anlamlı deney grubu öğrencileri lehine farklılıklar saptanmıştır. Ayrıca, deney ve kontrol gruplarındaki öğrencilerin dersteki akademik başarıları arasında da yine deney grubundaki öğrencilerin lehine anlamlı farklılıklar saptanmıştır. Araştırmanın sonunda, bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretimi ile öğretim yapılan deney grubundaki öğrencilerin kontrol grubundaki öğrencilere nazaran akademik başarılarının ve tutumlarının da daha yüksek düzeyde olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.
Öneriler: Bu çalışmanın sonuçlarına bakarak, İngilizce öğretmenlerinin bu yöntemi derslerinde mümkün olduğunca kullanmaları ve bu yöntem hakkında bilgisi olmayan öğretmenlerin ise hizmet-içi eğitime tabi tutulması önerilmektedir. Bir başka taraftan, ülkemizde ilköğretimde İngilizce derslerinin haftalık sayılarının oldukça sınırlı olması, ders saatlerinin artırılmasını ve mevcut ilköğretim İngilizce öğretim programının bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretim yöntemi ile bütünleştirilmesini gerekli kılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil öğretimi İngilizce öğretimi ilköğretim

Kaynakça

  • Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). Educational technology in Turkey: Past, present and future. Educational Media International, 39(2), 165-174.
  • Al-Jarf, R. S. (2005). The effects of online grammar instruction on low proficiency EFL college students’ achievement. Asian EFL Journal, 7(4), 166-190.
  • Alkan, B. (1997). The investigation of the comparision of computer-assisted English language learning and teacher-centred English language teaching. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Alkan, C. (1996). Eğitim teknolojisi. (4th ed.). Ankara: Atilla Kitabevi.
  • Almekhlafi, A. G. (2006). The effect of computer assisted language learning (CALL) on United Arab Emirates English as a foreign language (EFL) school students’ achievement and attitude. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 121-142.
  • Ateş, A., Altunay, U. & Altun, E. (2006). The effects of computer assisted English instruction on high school preparatory students’ attitudes towards computers and English. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 2(2), 97-112.
  • Aytürk, N. (1999). Bilgisayar destekli öğretimin öğrencilerin İngilizce başarısına, İngilizce ve bilgisayara yönelik tutumlarına olan etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Baş, G. (2010). Evaluation of DynED courses used in elementary schools from the views of teachers in Turkey. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 6(1), 14-39.
  • Baş, G. & Kuzucu, O. (2009). Effects of CALL method and DynED language programme on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards the lesson in English classes. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(7), 31-44.
  • Baturay, M. H. (2007). Effects of web-based multimedia annotated vocabulary learning in context model on foreign language vocabulary retention of intermediate level English language learners. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara.
  • Bintaş, J. & Barut, A. (2008). The effect of classic and web based educational application, applied for turbo pascal lesson on student success level. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(4), 92-99.
  • Bitner, N. & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 90-98.
  • Chapelle, C. A. (1990). The discourse of computer-assisted language learning: Toward a context for descriptive research. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 199-225.
  • Chapelle, C. & Jamieson, J. (1986). Computer-assisted language learning as a predictor of success in acquiring English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 27-46.
  • Chun, D. M. & Plass. J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 183-212.
  • Crompton, P. M. (1999). Integrating internet-based CALL materials into mainstream language teaching. CALL & the learning community. Exeter: Elm Bank Publications.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2006). Öğretme sanatı: Planlamadan değerlendirmeye. (10th ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2005). Eğitimde program geliştirme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. (5th ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Dugard, P. & Toldman, J. (1995). Analysis of pre-test – post-test control group designs in educational research. Educational Psychology, 15(2), 181-198.
  • Dunkel, P. (1990). Implications of the CAI effectiveness for limited English proficient learners. Computers in the Schools, 7(1-2), 31-52.
  • Ehsani, F. & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language learning: Strenghts and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 45-60.
  • Erdoğan, Y., Bayram, S. & Deniz, L. (2008). Factors that influence academic achievement and attitudes in web based education. International Journal of Instruction, 1(1), 31-48.
  • Eskil, M., Özgan, H. & Balkar, B. (2010). Students’ opinions on using classroom technology in science and technology lessons: A case study for Turkey (Kilis city). The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 165-147.
  • Fein, G. G. (1981). Pretend play in childhood: An integrative review. Child Development, 52, 1095-1118.
  • Ford, B. & Klicka, M. A. (1994). The effectiveness of computer assisted instruction supplemantal to classroom instruction on achievement growth in courses of basic and intermediate algebra. Bucks County Community College, Newtown, PA.
  • Furstenberg, G. (1997). Teaching with technology: What is at stake? ADFL Bulletin, 28(3), 21-25.
  • Greenfield, R. (2003). Collaborative e-mail exchange for teaching secondary ESL: A case study in Hong Kong. Language Learning and Technology, 7(1), 46-70.
  • Groff, J. & Mouza, C. (2008). A framework for addressing challenges to classroom technology use. AACE Journal, 16(1), 21-46.
  • Hainline, D. (1987). Computers in language instruction: Trends and possibilities. Hainline, D. (Ed.). New developments in computer-assisted language learning. Beckenham, Kent: Croom Helm Ltd.
  • Hamerstorm, H., Lipton, G. & Suter, S. (1985). Computers in the foreign language classroom: No longer a question. CALICO Journal, 3(1).
  • Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tighman, S. M. & Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304, 521-522.
  • Hardisty, D. & Windeatt, S. (1989). CALL: Resource books for teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Harlen, W. (2000). Teaching, learning and assessing science. (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
  • Kaplan, U. (2002). The effectiveness of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in grammar instruction to vocational high school EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Gaziantep.
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. (15th ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Kazancı, E. & Okan, Z. (2009). Evaluating English language teaching software for kids: Education or entertainment or both? The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(3), 30-38.
  • Kerlinder, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Kinzie, M. (1990). Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self- regulation, and continuing motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1),
  • Kinzie, M., Sullivan, H. & Berdel, R. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computerassisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 299-303.
  • Knowles, L. (2004). On the cusp: New developments in language teaching. ESL Magazine, 40, July/August.
  • Koç, M. (2005). Implications of learning theories for effective technology integration and pre-service teacher training: A critical literature review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 2(1), 2-18.
  • Koçak, N. C. (1997). The effectiveness of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in vocabulary instruction to Turkish EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences, Ankara.
  • Kumar, N., Raduan, C. R., Jeffrey, L. & D’Silva, A. (2008). Teachers’ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, 21(4), 603-616.
  • Kurubacak, G. (2000). Online learning: A study of students’ attitudes towards web-based instruction. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Cincinnati Graduate School, Cincinnati.
  • Laufer, B. & Hill, M. (2000). What lexical information do L2 learners select in a CALL dictionary and how does it affect word retention? Language Learning and Technology, 3(2), 58-76.
  • Lee, K. W. (2000). English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal. [Online]: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html.
  • LeLoup, J. W. & Porterio, R. (1997). Internet technologies for authentic language learning experiences. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
  • Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL: Dimensions: options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Liang, M. & Bonk, C. J. (2000). Interaction in blended EFL learning: Principles and practice. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1), 3-15.
  • Liddell, P. (Ed.). (1995). CALL: Theory and application. Victoria, BC.: University of Victoria Press.
  • Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L. & Lee, S. (2002). A Look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from 1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.
  • Liu, M. (1994). Hypermedia assisted instruction and second language learning: A semantic network- based approach. Computers in the Schools, 10(3-4), 293-312.
  • Makaracı, M. (2004). İlköğretim 2. kademe İngilizce dersinde gramer öğretiminin bilgisayar destekli öğretimle yapılmasının akademik başarıya ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
  • Malone, T. W. (1982). What makes computer games fun? Computers in Schools, 7, 14-21.
  • Manson, E. J. & Bramble, W. J. (1997). Research in education and the behavioral sciences: Concepts and methods. Los Angeles: A Time Mirror Company.
  • Okan, Z. (2003). Edutainment: Is learning at risk? British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 255- 564.
  • Plumm, K. (2008). Technology in the classroom: Burning the bridges to the gaps in gender-biased education? Computers & Education, 50, 1052-1068.
  • Step-Greany, J. (2002). Students’ perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millenium. Language Learning and Technology, 6(1), 165-180.
  • Sullivan, N. & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer- assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29(4), 491-501.
  • Şahan, H. H. (2005). İnternet temelli öğrenme. Demirel, Ö. (Ed.). Eğitimde yeni yönelimler. (2nd ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Şahin, İ. (2009). Eğitsel internet kullanım özyeterliği inançları ölçeğinin geçerliği ve güvenirliği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21, 461-471.
  • Şahin, İ. & Toy, S. (2009). Experiences of Turkish student teachers in pedagogy and educational technology during an internship program in the US. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(4), 16-20.
  • Şahin, T. Y. & Yıldırım, S. (1999). Student teachers’ perceptions of instructional technology: Developing materials based on a constructivist approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1),
  • Teo, T. (2009). Assessing the factorial validity of the computer attitude scale (CAS) using a Singaporean sample: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(2), 297-306.
  • Tozcu, A. & Coady, J. (2004). Successful learning of frequent vocabulary through CALL also benefits reading comprehension and speed. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(5), 473-495.
  • Traynor, P. L. (2003). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on different learners. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(2), 137-143.
  • Tuzcuoğlu, U. (2000). Teachers’ attitudes towards using computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the foreign languages department at Osmangazi university. Unpublished master’s thesis. Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences, Ankara.
  • Uzunboylu, H. (2004). The effectiveness of web assisted English language instruction on the achievement and attitude of the students. World conference on educational multimedia hypermedia and telecommunications, 1, 727-733.
  • Warschauer, M. & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
  • Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-481.
  • Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction. Fotos, S. (Ed.). Multimadia language teaching. Tokyo: Logos International.
  • Yalçınalp, S., Geban, Ö. & Özkan, I. (2006). Effectiveness of using computer-assisted supplementary instruction for teaching the mole concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1083- 1095.
  • Yalçınalp, S. (1993). Effects of computer assisted instruction on students’ chemistry achievement, attitude toward CAI and chemistry and their perception about the CAI environment at the secondary school level. Unpublished master’s thesis. Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara.
  • Yusuf, M. O. & Afolabi, A. O. (2010). Effects of computer assisted instruction (CAI) on secondary school students’ performance in biology. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 62-69.
  • Yılmaz, H. (1998). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. (3rd ed.). Konya: Mikro Yayınları.
  • Zehir-Topkaya, E. (2010). Pre-service English language teachers’ perceptions of computer self-efficacy and general self-efficacy. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 143-156.

EFFECTS OF COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING IN ENGLISH CLASSES ON STUDENTS' ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE LESSON

Yıl 2011, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1, 44 - 65, 29.03.2011

Dok. Öğr. Gökhan Baş

Öz

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) on students' achievement levels and attitudes towards the lesson in the 6th grade students' English lesson. The research was carried out in 2009-2010 education-instruction year in an elementary school in Nigde, Turkey. Totally 40 students in two different classes in the 6th grade of this school participated in the study. The pre/post-test control group research model was used in this study. The data obtained in the study were analysed by the statistical software SPSS 15.0. The arithmetic means and standard deviations were calculated for each group. In order to test the significance between the groups, the t-test and Mann Whitney-U test were used. The significance level was taken as .05. The results of the research showed a significant difference between the attitude scores of the experimental group and the control group in favour of the experimental group. It was also found out that the CALL was more effective in the positive development of the students' achievement levels. At the end of the research, it was revealed that the students who were educated by CALL were more successful and had a higher motivation than the students who were educated by the traditional language instruction methods.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Computer assisted language learning English teaching elementary education

Kaynakça

  • Akkoyunlu, B. (2002). Educational technology in Turkey: Past, present and future. Educational Media International, 39(2), 165-174.
  • Al-Jarf, R. S. (2005). The effects of online grammar instruction on low proficiency EFL college students’ achievement. Asian EFL Journal, 7(4), 166-190.
  • Alkan, B. (1997). The investigation of the comparision of computer-assisted English language learning and teacher-centred English language teaching. Unpublished master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Alkan, C. (1996). Eğitim teknolojisi. (4th ed.). Ankara: Atilla Kitabevi.
  • Almekhlafi, A. G. (2006). The effect of computer assisted language learning (CALL) on United Arab Emirates English as a foreign language (EFL) school students’ achievement and attitude. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 121-142.
  • Ateş, A., Altunay, U. & Altun, E. (2006). The effects of computer assisted English instruction on high school preparatory students’ attitudes towards computers and English. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 2(2), 97-112.
  • Aytürk, N. (1999). Bilgisayar destekli öğretimin öğrencilerin İngilizce başarısına, İngilizce ve bilgisayara yönelik tutumlarına olan etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Baş, G. (2010). Evaluation of DynED courses used in elementary schools from the views of teachers in Turkey. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 6(1), 14-39.
  • Baş, G. & Kuzucu, O. (2009). Effects of CALL method and DynED language programme on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards the lesson in English classes. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(7), 31-44.
  • Baturay, M. H. (2007). Effects of web-based multimedia annotated vocabulary learning in context model on foreign language vocabulary retention of intermediate level English language learners. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara.
  • Bintaş, J. & Barut, A. (2008). The effect of classic and web based educational application, applied for turbo pascal lesson on student success level. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(4), 92-99.
  • Bitner, N. & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 90-98.
  • Chapelle, C. A. (1990). The discourse of computer-assisted language learning: Toward a context for descriptive research. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 199-225.
  • Chapelle, C. & Jamieson, J. (1986). Computer-assisted language learning as a predictor of success in acquiring English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 27-46.
  • Chun, D. M. & Plass. J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 183-212.
  • Crompton, P. M. (1999). Integrating internet-based CALL materials into mainstream language teaching. CALL & the learning community. Exeter: Elm Bank Publications.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2006). Öğretme sanatı: Planlamadan değerlendirmeye. (10th ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2005). Eğitimde program geliştirme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. (5th ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Dugard, P. & Toldman, J. (1995). Analysis of pre-test – post-test control group designs in educational research. Educational Psychology, 15(2), 181-198.
  • Dunkel, P. (1990). Implications of the CAI effectiveness for limited English proficient learners. Computers in the Schools, 7(1-2), 31-52.
  • Ehsani, F. & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language learning: Strenghts and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 45-60.
  • Erdoğan, Y., Bayram, S. & Deniz, L. (2008). Factors that influence academic achievement and attitudes in web based education. International Journal of Instruction, 1(1), 31-48.
  • Eskil, M., Özgan, H. & Balkar, B. (2010). Students’ opinions on using classroom technology in science and technology lessons: A case study for Turkey (Kilis city). The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 165-147.
  • Fein, G. G. (1981). Pretend play in childhood: An integrative review. Child Development, 52, 1095-1118.
  • Ford, B. & Klicka, M. A. (1994). The effectiveness of computer assisted instruction supplemantal to classroom instruction on achievement growth in courses of basic and intermediate algebra. Bucks County Community College, Newtown, PA.
  • Furstenberg, G. (1997). Teaching with technology: What is at stake? ADFL Bulletin, 28(3), 21-25.
  • Greenfield, R. (2003). Collaborative e-mail exchange for teaching secondary ESL: A case study in Hong Kong. Language Learning and Technology, 7(1), 46-70.
  • Groff, J. & Mouza, C. (2008). A framework for addressing challenges to classroom technology use. AACE Journal, 16(1), 21-46.
  • Hainline, D. (1987). Computers in language instruction: Trends and possibilities. Hainline, D. (Ed.). New developments in computer-assisted language learning. Beckenham, Kent: Croom Helm Ltd.
  • Hamerstorm, H., Lipton, G. & Suter, S. (1985). Computers in the foreign language classroom: No longer a question. CALICO Journal, 3(1).
  • Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tighman, S. M. & Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304, 521-522.
  • Hardisty, D. & Windeatt, S. (1989). CALL: Resource books for teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Harlen, W. (2000). Teaching, learning and assessing science. (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
  • Kaplan, U. (2002). The effectiveness of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in grammar instruction to vocational high school EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Gaziantep.
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. (15th ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Kazancı, E. & Okan, Z. (2009). Evaluating English language teaching software for kids: Education or entertainment or both? The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(3), 30-38.
  • Kerlinder, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Kinzie, M. (1990). Requirements and benefits of effective interactive instruction: Learner control, self- regulation, and continuing motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1),
  • Kinzie, M., Sullivan, H. & Berdel, R. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computerassisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 299-303.
  • Knowles, L. (2004). On the cusp: New developments in language teaching. ESL Magazine, 40, July/August.
  • Koç, M. (2005). Implications of learning theories for effective technology integration and pre-service teacher training: A critical literature review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 2(1), 2-18.
  • Koçak, N. C. (1997). The effectiveness of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in vocabulary instruction to Turkish EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis. Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences, Ankara.
  • Kumar, N., Raduan, C. R., Jeffrey, L. & D’Silva, A. (2008). Teachers’ readiness to use technology in the classroom: An empirical study. European Journal of Scientific Research, 21(4), 603-616.
  • Kurubacak, G. (2000). Online learning: A study of students’ attitudes towards web-based instruction. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Cincinnati Graduate School, Cincinnati.
  • Laufer, B. & Hill, M. (2000). What lexical information do L2 learners select in a CALL dictionary and how does it affect word retention? Language Learning and Technology, 3(2), 58-76.
  • Lee, K. W. (2000). English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal. [Online]: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html.
  • LeLoup, J. W. & Porterio, R. (1997). Internet technologies for authentic language learning experiences. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
  • Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Levy, M. & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL: Dimensions: options and issues in computer-assisted language learning. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Liang, M. & Bonk, C. J. (2000). Interaction in blended EFL learning: Principles and practice. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1), 3-15.
  • Liddell, P. (Ed.). (1995). CALL: Theory and application. Victoria, BC.: University of Victoria Press.
  • Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L. & Lee, S. (2002). A Look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from 1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.
  • Liu, M. (1994). Hypermedia assisted instruction and second language learning: A semantic network- based approach. Computers in the Schools, 10(3-4), 293-312.
  • Makaracı, M. (2004). İlköğretim 2. kademe İngilizce dersinde gramer öğretiminin bilgisayar destekli öğretimle yapılmasının akademik başarıya ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
  • Malone, T. W. (1982). What makes computer games fun? Computers in Schools, 7, 14-21.
  • Manson, E. J. & Bramble, W. J. (1997). Research in education and the behavioral sciences: Concepts and methods. Los Angeles: A Time Mirror Company.
  • Okan, Z. (2003). Edutainment: Is learning at risk? British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 255- 564.
  • Plumm, K. (2008). Technology in the classroom: Burning the bridges to the gaps in gender-biased education? Computers & Education, 50, 1052-1068.
  • Step-Greany, J. (2002). Students’ perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millenium. Language Learning and Technology, 6(1), 165-180.
  • Sullivan, N. & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer- assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29(4), 491-501.
  • Şahan, H. H. (2005). İnternet temelli öğrenme. Demirel, Ö. (Ed.). Eğitimde yeni yönelimler. (2nd ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Şahin, İ. (2009). Eğitsel internet kullanım özyeterliği inançları ölçeğinin geçerliği ve güvenirliği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21, 461-471.
  • Şahin, İ. & Toy, S. (2009). Experiences of Turkish student teachers in pedagogy and educational technology during an internship program in the US. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(4), 16-20.
  • Şahin, T. Y. & Yıldırım, S. (1999). Student teachers’ perceptions of instructional technology: Developing materials based on a constructivist approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1),
  • Teo, T. (2009). Assessing the factorial validity of the computer attitude scale (CAS) using a Singaporean sample: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 18(2), 297-306.
  • Tozcu, A. & Coady, J. (2004). Successful learning of frequent vocabulary through CALL also benefits reading comprehension and speed. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(5), 473-495.
  • Traynor, P. L. (2003). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on different learners. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(2), 137-143.
  • Tuzcuoğlu, U. (2000). Teachers’ attitudes towards using computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the foreign languages department at Osmangazi university. Unpublished master’s thesis. Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences, Ankara.
  • Uzunboylu, H. (2004). The effectiveness of web assisted English language instruction on the achievement and attitude of the students. World conference on educational multimedia hypermedia and telecommunications, 1, 727-733.
  • Warschauer, M. & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
  • Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-481.
  • Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction. Fotos, S. (Ed.). Multimadia language teaching. Tokyo: Logos International.
  • Yalçınalp, S., Geban, Ö. & Özkan, I. (2006). Effectiveness of using computer-assisted supplementary instruction for teaching the mole concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1083- 1095.
  • Yalçınalp, S. (1993). Effects of computer assisted instruction on students’ chemistry achievement, attitude toward CAI and chemistry and their perception about the CAI environment at the secondary school level. Unpublished master’s thesis. Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Ankara.
  • Yusuf, M. O. & Afolabi, A. O. (2010). Effects of computer assisted instruction (CAI) on secondary school students’ performance in biology. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 62-69.
  • Yılmaz, H. (1998). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. (3rd ed.). Konya: Mikro Yayınları.
  • Zehir-Topkaya, E. (2010). Pre-service English language teachers’ perceptions of computer self-efficacy and general self-efficacy. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 143-156.
Toplam 77 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Eğitim Üzerine Çalışmalar
Bölüm Eğitim Bilimleri ve Alan Eğitimi Bilimleri
Yazarlar

Dok. Öğr. Gökhan Baş

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Mart 2011
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2011Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Baş, D. Ö. G. (2011). EFFECTS OF COMPUTER ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING IN ENGLISH CLASSES ON STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE LESSON. E-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 44-65.
 Kapak Resmi İndir

Creative Commons Lisansı
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)


[email protected]        http://www.e-ijer.com       Adres: Ege Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi  Bornova/İzmir