International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2020, Vol. 15(1) 137-162

An Action Research on the Improvement of Writing Skill in Teacher Training

Üzeyir Süğümlü

pp. 137 - 162   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.236.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1911-26-0001.R1

Published online: March 24, 2020  |   Number of Views: 851  |  Number of Download: 706


Abstract

The aim of the research is to improve the writing skills of students with procedure-based gradual writing training practice by positively changing their writing perception, attitude and motivation, anxiety and fear, lack of education, writing difficulties, and writing process. The present research is considered to be significant in terms of affecting the writing perception, attitude and motivation, anxiety and fear, writing training and process as a result of performing the writing training with a gradual procedure. The research was conducted with action research model from the qualitative research designs. The study group consists of 15 first grade students, 7 male and 8 female, who were studying in the Turkish Teaching Program at the Faculty of Education in a university in the fall semester of 2018-2019 academic year. The criterion sampling method was used among the non-probability sampling methods in the determination of the study group. Data collection was performed with a semi-structured interview form. Two semi-structured interview form was used as before and after the application. The data of the research was collected in two stages from the students in the study group as before and after the application. The application consists of preparation, planning and forming a draft, writing, editing and reviewing, correction and presentation, and evaluation stages. The research data was analyzed with the content analysis technique. A code-category map of the obtained data was created by using a qualitative data analysis program, MAXQDA 12. Before the application, it was determined that students tried to write without planning, they were not willing to write and positive about writing, experienced writing anxiety and fear, their writing training was insufficient, they perceived writing as expressing emotions and thoughts, and didn’t know how to write. It was concluded that the writing perceptions of students were positively changed, their motivation increased and they were positive about writing, their writing anxiety and fear decreased/eliminated, they could write in a planned and prepared way, did not experience writing difficulties, their insufficiencies in writing training was eliminated and learned how to write.

Keywords: teacher training, writing skills, writing training, writing process, action research


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Sugumlu, U. (2020). An Action Research on the Improvement of Writing Skill in Teacher Training . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(1), 137-162. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.236.8

Harvard
Sugumlu, U. (2020). An Action Research on the Improvement of Writing Skill in Teacher Training . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 15(1), pp. 137-162.

Chicago 16th edition
Sugumlu, Uzeyir (2020). "An Action Research on the Improvement of Writing Skill in Teacher Training ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 15 (1):137-162. doi:10.29329/epasr.2020.236.8.

References
  1. Akyol, H. (2013). Türkçe öğretim yöntemleri (6th Edition) (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  2. Arıcı, A. & F.  Ungan, S. (2017). Yazılı anlatım el kitabı (4th Edition) (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  3. Baki, Y. & Karakuş, N. (2017). Perceptions of prospective teachers related to writing and challenges they experience during writing process: The RTEU case. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 18(1), 573-593. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bayat, N. (2014). The effect of the process writing approach on writing success and anxiety. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(3), 1123-1141. [Google Scholar]
  5. Boscolo, P. & Gelati, C. (2007). Best practices in promoting motivation for writing. In S. Graham, C. A, Macarthur and J. Fitzgerald (Eds.). Best practices in writing instruction (202-222). New York: The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bruning, R. & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25-37. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3501_4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (24th Edition) (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  8. Carter, C., Bishop, J. & Kravits, S. L. (2002). Key to effective learning. New Jersey: Printice Hall. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th Edition). New York, US: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. New York: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  11. Demirel, Ö. & Şahinel, M. (2006). Türkçe öğretimi (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  12. Deniz, H. & Demir, S. (2019). Teacher opinions on the applicability of process based writing approach. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 8(2), 457-486. doi: 10.14686/buefad.426785  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Elftorp, F. (2007). How to improve students? Writing and speaking skills. Sweden: Jönköping University. [Google Scholar]
  14. Erdoğan, T. & Kalaycı, D. (2017). Investigating the writing anxiety of primary education and Turkish language teacher candidates. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 16(64), 1480-1495.  [Google Scholar]
  15. Eryaman, M. Y. (2008). Writing, method and hermeneutics: Towards an existential pedagogy. Elementary Education Online, 7(1), 2-14. [Google Scholar]
  16. Göçer, A. (2010). The assessment with the component of the process approach to writing and the criterions relevant to text of written expression skills of the education faculty students (The sample of Niğde University). Kastamonu Education Journal, 18(1), 271-290. [Google Scholar]
  17. Göçer, A. (2010). Writing education in Turkish teaching. The Journal of International Social Research, 12(3), 178-195.  [Google Scholar]
  18. Göçer, A. (2017). Investigation of against writing skills attitude of Turkish student teachers in terms of certain variables. Kastamonu Education Journal, 25(3), 1025-1038. [Google Scholar]
  19. Graham, S. & Sandmel, K. (2011). The process writing approach: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(6), 396-407. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2010.488703 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Güneş, F. (2013). Türkçe öğretimi yaklaşımlar ve modeller (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  21. İşeri, K. & Ünal, E. (2012). Analysing the Turkish teacher candidates’ writing anxiety situations in terms of several variables. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 8(2), 67-76. [Google Scholar]
  22. Karatay, H. (2011). The Effect of 4+1 planned writing and evaluation model to develop the attitudes of preservice teachers as to written expression and their writing skills. Turkish Studies International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 6(3), 1029-1047. [Google Scholar]
  23. Karatay, H. (2013). Süreç temelli yazma modelleri: 4+1 planlı yazma ve değerlendirme modeli. M. Özbay (Ed.), Yazma eğitimi içinde (21-40) (3th Edition) (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.  [Google Scholar]
  24. Kurudayıoğlu, M. & Karadağ, Ö. (2010). Examining the written expressions of primary school graders as regard to their choice of topics. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 7(13), 192-207.  [Google Scholar]
  25. Lüle-Mert, E. (2013). Analysis of perception of prospective Turkish teacher about four basic language skills through metaphors. The Journal of International Social Research, 6(27), 357-372. [Google Scholar]
  26. Merriam, S. B. (2013). Qualitative research a guide to desing and implementation (Translation from the 3rd Edition). S. Duman (Translation Ed.), Ankara: Nobel Yayınları. [Google Scholar]
  27. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Nitel veri analizi (Book in Turkish) (Trasnlation from the 2nd Edition) S. Akbaba Altun and A. Ersoy (Translation Eds.), Ankara: Pegem Akademi.  [Google Scholar]
  28. Nauman, A. D. (2007). Writing in the primary grades: Tapping young children’s enthusiasm to help them become good writers. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 35(4), 16-28. [Google Scholar]
  29. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri (Book in Turkish) (Translation from the 3rd Edition) . M. Bütün and S. B. Demir (Translation Eds.), Ankara: Pegem Akademi.  [Google Scholar]
  30. Pilav, S. (2014). Yazma ve öğretimi. Türkçe ilkokuma ve yazma öğretimi içinde (85-107) (Book in Turkish). M. Elkatmış (Ed.), Ankara: Maya Akademi.  [Google Scholar]
  31. Pilav, S. (2018). Turkish language and literature teachers’ perceptions for writing ability. ZfWT, 10(1), 109-125. [Google Scholar]
  32. Robson, C. (2017). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri gerçek dünya araştırması (Book in Turkish). Ş. Çınkır and N. Demirkasımoğlu (Translation Eds.), Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.  [Google Scholar]
  33. Tağa, T. & Ünlü, S. (2013). A review on the problems faced in the writing instruction. International Periodical For The Languages , Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(8), 1285-1299.  [Google Scholar]
  34. Tekşan, K. (2012). Analysis of writing anxiety of secondary school students according to several variables. Educational Research and Reviews,  7(22), 487-493.  [Google Scholar]
  35. Tekşan, K. (2013). Yazma eğitimi (Book in Turkish). İstanbul: Kriter Yayıncılık.  [Google Scholar]
  36. Temizkan, M. (2008). A research on the correction and evaluation dispersions writing practices of teacher candidates. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 9(3), 49-61.  [Google Scholar]
  37. The Australian Curriculum (2012). English. ACARA: Australia. [Google Scholar]
  38. The Ontario Curriculum (2006). Language. The Ministry of Education: Canada. [Google Scholar]
  39. Troia, G. A., Harbaugh, A. G., Shankland, R. K., Wolbers, K. A., & Lawrence, A. M. (2013). Relationships between writing motivation, writing activity, and writing performence: effects of grade, sex, and ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26(1), 17-44. doi: 10.1007/ s11145-012-9379-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  40. Ungan, S. (2007). Develepment of and importance of writing skills. Erciyes University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 23, 461-472.  [Google Scholar]
  41. Ürün Karahan, B. (2017). The Relationship between writing anxieties and writing habits of Turkish teacher candidates. Journal of the Human and Social Science Researches , 6(5), 3065-3075. [Google Scholar]
  42. Yıldız, C., Okur, A., Arı, G. & Yılmaz, Y. (2013). Türkçe öğretimi (4th Edition) (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.  [Google Scholar]
  43. Yıldız, M. (2018). Yazma öğretiminde temel kavramlar. Kuramdan uygulamaya yazma öğretimi içinde (2-28) (Book in Turkish). H. Akyol ve M. Yıldız (Eds.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  44. Yılmaz, M. (2018). Yeni gelişmeler ışığında Türkçe öğretimi (Book in Turkish). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]