Dersin Adı Dersin Seviyesi Dersin Kodu Dersin Tipi Dersin Dönemi Yerel Kredi AKTS Kredisi Ders Bilgileri
İNGİLİZCE ÖĞRENİMİNDE SINIF İÇİ ETKİLEŞİM ANALİZİ İkinci Düzey İDÖ 515 Seçmeli 1 8.00 8.00 Yazdır
   
Dersin Tanımı
Ön Koşul Dersleri
Eğitimin Dili İngilizce
Koordinatör DR. ÖĞR. ÜYESİ UFUK GİRGİN
Dersi Veren Öğretim Eleman(lar)ı Dr. Öğr. Üyesi Ufuk GİRGİN
Yardımcı Öğretim Eleman(lar)ı
Dersin Veriliş Şekli Yüz yüze
Dersin Amacı This module aims to equip students with a relatively new perspective into Second Language (L2) English classroom interaction. In this module, students will be introduced the key principles and interactional features of the methodology, Conversation Analysis (CA), and recent studies on multimodal micro analysis and L2 English classroom interaction will be covered. Students will gain the necessary skills in analysing L2 English classroom interaction, especially L2 English teacher talk, thus being knowledgeable in the features of teacher talk such as constructing and obstructing learning in the L2 English classroom. They will also gain the necessary skills in developing their own L2 English Classroom Interactional Competence (Girgin & Brandt, 2020; Sert, 2015; Walsh, 2011).
Dersin Tanımı This module aims to equip students with a relatively new perspective into Second Language (L2) English classroom interaction. In this module, students will be introduced the key principles and interactional features of the methodology, Conversation Analysis (CA), and recent studies on multimodal micro analysis and L2 English classroom interaction will be covered. Students will gain the necessary skills in analysing L2 English classroom interaction, especially L2 English teacher talk, thus being knowledgeable in the features of teacher talk such as constructing and obstructing learning in the L2 English classroom. They will also gain the necessary skills in developing their own L2 English Classroom Interactional Competence (Girgin & Brandt, 2020; Sert, 2015; Walsh, 2011).

Dersin İçeriği
1 Explanations of course objectives and procedures Why micro-analysis?
2 Conversation Analysis (CA) Methodology
3 CA and some basics of interaction: Adjacency pairs Exchanges
4 Some basics of interaction Turn-taking practices
5 Some basics of interaction Topic management
6 The Architecture of L2 classroom interaction
7 The Architecture of L2 classroom interaction: Turn-Taking
8 The Architecture of L2 classroom interaction: Repair
9 Midterms
10 Collecting and transcribing data for analysis
11 L2 Classroom Interaction
12 L2 Classroom Interaction
13 L2 Classroom Interaction
14 L2 Classroom Interaction
15 L2 Classroom Interaction
16 L2 Classroom Interaction
17
18
19
20

Dersin Öğrenme Çıktıları
1 Students will gain the necessary skills in analysing L2 English classroom interaction, especially L2 English teacher talk, thus being knowledgeable in the features of teacher talk such as constructing and obstructing learning in the L2 English classroom.
2 They will also gain the necessary skills in developing their own L2 English Classroom Interactional Competence (Girgin & Brandt, 2020; Sert, 2015; Walsh, 2011).
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

*Dersin Program Yeterliliklerine Katkı Seviyesi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Yıldızların sayısı 1’den (en az) 5’e (en fazla) kadar katkı seviyesini ifade eder

Planlanan Öğretim Faaliyetleri, Öğretme Metodları ve AKTS İş Yükü
  Sayısı Süresi (saat) Sayı*Süre (saat)
Yüz yüze eğitim 15 3 45
Sınıf dışı ders çalışma süresi (ön çalışma, pekiştirme) 3 20 60
Ödevler 3 20 60
Sunum / Seminer hazırlama 2 10 20
Kısa sınavlar 0 0 0
Ara sınavlara hazırlık 0 0 0
Ara sınavlar 0 0 0
Proje (Yarıyıl ödevi) 1 20 20
Laboratuvar 0 0 0
Arazi çalışması 0 0 0
Yarıyıl sonu sınavına hazırlık 0 0 0
Yarıyıl sonu sınavı 0 0 0
Araştırma 0 0 0
Toplam iş yükü     205
AKTS     8.00

Değerlendirme yöntemleri ve kriterler
Yarıyıl içi değerlendirme Sayısı Katkı Yüzdesi
Ara sınav 2 100
Kısa sınav 0 0
Ödev 1 100
Yarıyıl içi toplam   200
Yarıyıl içi değerlendirmelerin başarıya katkı oranı   0
Yarıyıl sonu sınavının başarıya katkı oranı   0
Genel toplam   0

Önerilen Veya Zorunlu Okuma Materyalleri
Ders kitabı
Yardımcı Kaynaklar Aslan, T. (2017). A micro-analytic study of gossip in elderly talk. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Newcastle Üniversitesi, Newcastle Upon Tyne, İngiltere. Atar, C. (2016). The sequential organization and management of teachers’ other-initiation of clarification in second language classroom contexts. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Newcastle Üniversitesi, Newcastle Upon Tyne, İngiltere. Atar, C. (2017). Konuşma çözümlemesi ve uygulamalı dilbilim. Medeniyet Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 17-25. Badem, F. (2018). Interactional resources for restoring understanding of teachers’ instructions in an EFL classroom. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Badem-Korkmaz, F. & Balaman, U. (2020). Third position repair for resolving troubles in understanding teacher instructions. Linguistics and Education, 20. Balaman, U. (2018). Embodied Resources in a Repetition Activity in a Preschool L2 Classroom Novitas-ROYAL (Research on Youth and Language) 12(1), 27-51 Balaman, U. (2019). Sequential organization of hinting in online task-oriented L2 interaction. Text & Talk, 39(4), 511-534. Bozbıyık, M. (2017). The implementation of VEO in an english language education context: a focus on teacher questioning practices. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Button, G. (1987). Answers as interactional products: Two sequential practices used in interviews. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2), 160-171. doi: 10.2307/2786749 Can Daşkın, N. (2015). Shaping learner contributions in an EFL classroom: Implications for L2 classroom interactional competence. Classroom Discourse, 6, 33-56. Can Daşkın, N. (2017). A conversation analytic investigation into L2 classroom interaction and informal formative assessment. ELT Research Journal, 6, 4-24. Can Daşkın, N., & Hatipoğlu, Ç. (2019a). Reference to a past learning event as a practice of informal formative assessment in L2 classroom interaction. Language Testing. Can Daşkın, N., & Hatipoğlu, Ç. (2019b). Reference to a past learning event in teacher turns in an L2 instructional setting. Journal of pragmatics, 142, 16-30. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press. Czyzewski, M. (1995). ‘Mm hm’ tokens as interactional devices in psychotherapeutic in-take interview. In P. ten Have & G. Psathas (Eds.). Situated order: Studies in the social organisation of talk and embodied activities (pp. 73-89). Lanham: University Press of America. Çimenli, B. (2017). Rolling the ball back: Topic maintenance in computer mediated English as a lingua franca interactions. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Nimet Çopur, Cihat Atar & Steve Walsh (2021): Humour as a pedagogical tool in teacher-initiated repair sequences: the case of extreme case formulations and candidate hearing, Classroom Discourse, DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2021.1910051 Demir, D. (2020). „Was Heisst X?": Eine konversationsanalytische untersuchung zu kontingenten lehrerfragen im universitären Deutschsprachigen l2-unterricht. Yayınlanmamış Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Erciyes University Micro Analysis Reseach Group, (ERUMARG) (2020), “Kesit 2 -Kelime zenginliği- (37.07- 45.00)”, Mendeley Data, V1, doi: 10.17632/f62prjgrz8.1 Fitzgerald, P., & Leudar, I. (2010). On active listening in person-centred, solution-focuse psychotherapy. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3188-3198. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.007 Girgin, U. (2018). Reconsidering the uses of a minimal ‘non-lexical’ response token through ‘embodiment’: A second language teacher’s deployment of ‘Mm hm’ as a third-turn receipt. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Newcastle Üniversitesi, Newcastle Upon Tyne, İngiltere. Girgin, U., & Brandt, A. (2020). Creating space for learning through ‘Mm hm’ in a L2 classroom: Implications for L2 classroom interactional competence. Classroom Discourse, 11(1), 61-79. doi: 10.1080/19463014.2019.1603115 Girgin, U., Acar, Y., Akbaş, E., Yavuz, E., Altan, A. E., Boran, M., ..., & Moralı, G. (2020). Conversation analysis methodology: Validity, reliability, and ethical ıssues in data collection and analysis procedures. Hacettepe University Journal of Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2020063458 Hellermann, J. 2003. “The Interactive Work of Prosody in the IRF Exchange: Teacher Repetition in Feedback Moves.” Language in Society 32: 79–104. doi:10.1017/S0047404503321049. Hellermann, J. 2005. “Syntactic and Prosodic Practices for Cohesion in Series of Three-part Sequences in Classroom Talk.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (1): 105–130. Hepburn, A., & Bolden, B. G. (2017). Transcribing for Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. Heritage, J. (1984a). A change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299-345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Heritage, J. (1984b). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Heritage, J. (1995). Conversation analysis: Methodological aspects. In U. Quasthof (Ed.), Aspects of oral communication (pp. 391-418). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. Heritage, J., & Atkinson, J. M. (1984). Introduction. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 1-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge: Polity. Mika Ishino (2021): Teachers’ embodied mitigation against allocating turns to unwilling students, Classroom Discourse, DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2021.1918194 Jefferson, G. (1973). A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica, 9(1), 47-96. Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 219-48). New York: Academic Press. Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kääntä, L. (2012). Teachers’ embodied allocations in instructional interaction. Classroom Discourse, 3(2), 166-186. doi: 10.1080/19463014.2012.716624 Kardaş İşler, N. (2019). İlkokul sosyal bilgiler dersinde öğrenci başlatımları ve öğrenme fırsatları: Bir konuşma çözümlemesi çalışması. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Kardaş İşler, N., Şahin, A.E., ve Balaman, U. (2019). Öğrenci katılımına zemin hazırlayan etkileşimsel bir kaynak: Eksik tasarlanmış sözceler. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 45, 376-396. doi: 10.9779/PUJE.2018.238 Kardaş İşler, N., & Can Daşkın, N. (2020). Reference to a shared past event in primary school setting. Linguistics and Education, 57(100815), 1-13. Kasper, G. (2009). Categories, context and comparison in CA. In H. Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.), Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp. 1-28). Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Center. Tuncay Koç, Kadriye Dilek Bacanak & Hatice Ergül (2021): Gaze and other non-verbal resources in student clarification requests: a micro-analytic investigation, The Language Learning Journal, DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2021.1933142 Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lee, Y. A. 2007. “Third Turn Position in Teacher Talk: Contingency and the Work of Teaching.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 180–206. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2006.02.004. Liddicoat, A. J. (2007). An introduction to conversation analysis. Great Britain: Athenaeum. Markee, N. (2000). Conversation analysis. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Markee, N. (2013). Emic and etic in qualitative research. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell. Mondada, L. (2013). The conversation analytic approach to data collection. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 32–56). Chichester: Blackwell publishing. Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of sociolinguistics, 20(3), 336-366. Mondada, L. (2019). Conventions for multimodal transcription. [Çevrim-içi: https://344cc026-c96f-49aa-b4bc- 071b454d3061.filesusr.com/ugd/ba0dbb_986ddd4993a04a57acf20ea06e2b9a34.pdf], Erişim tarihi: 22.09.2020. Mortensen, K. (2008). Selecting next-speaker in the second language classroom: How to find a willing next-speaker in planned activities. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 55- 79. Mortensen, K. (2012). Conversation analysis and multimodality. In J. Wagner & K. Mortensen (Eds.), Conversation analysis and applied linguistics: The encyclopaedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1061-1068). Oxford, UK: Wiley- Blackwell. Muntigl, P., & Zabala, H. L. (2008). Expandable responses: How clients get prompted to say more during psychotherapy. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 187-226. doi: 10.1080/08351810802028738 Park, Y. 2014. “The Roles of Third-Turn Repeats in Two L2 Classroom Interactional Contexts.” Applied Linguistics 35 (2): 145–167. Psathas, G. (1994). Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. Sage Publications. Sacks, H. (1974). An analysis of the course of a joke''s telling in conversation. In R. Baumann & I. Sherzer (Eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking (pp. 337-353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. doi: 10.2307/412243 Sacks, H. (1984). Notes on methodology. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp.21-27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sacks, H. (1992a). Lectures in conversation. Vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwell. Sacks, H. (1992b). Lectures in conversation. Vol. 2. Oxford: Blackwell. Santos, M. G., & Shandor, A. (2011). The role of classroom talk in the creation of safe spaces in adult ESL classrooms. In P. Vinogradov & M. Bigelow (Eds.), Proceedings from the 7th annual LESLLA (Low Educated Second Language and Literacy Acquisition) symposium (pp. 111-135). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Schegloff, E. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70(6), 1075-1095.Schegloff, E. (1972). Sequencing in conversational openings. In J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 346-380). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Schegloff, E. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 23-78). New York: Irvington. Schegloff, E. (1991). Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure (pp. 44-70). Cambridge: Polity Press. Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schegloff, E., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8, 289-327. Seedhouse, P. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Seedhouse, P. (2005). Conversation analysis as research methodology. In K. Richards & P. Seedhouse (Eds.), Applying conversation analysis, (pp. 251-266). Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan. Seedhouse, P. (2009). The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom. Bellaterra: Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature Vol. 1, No. 1, November 2009, 1-13. Seedhouse, P., & Walsh, S. (2010). Learning a second language through classroom interaction. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh & C. Jenks (Eds), Conceptualising learning in applied linguistics, (pp. 127-46). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Atar, C., & Rafi, A. S. M. (2024). Classroom interaction in an online context: A translanguaging informed conversation analysis perspective. International Journal of Educational Development, 105, 102970. Zuo, M., & Walsh, S. (2023). Translation in EFL teacher talk in Chinese universities: a translanguaging perspective. Classroom Discourse, 14(2), 128-146. Kargar Dahr, S., Yaqubi, B., Pouromid, S., & Dehqan, M. (2024). Teaching vocabulary through invoking conceptually accessible epistemic domains. Classroom Discourse, 1-20. Van Compernolle, R. A., & Smotrova, T. (2017). Gesture, meaning, and thinking-for-teaching in unplanned vocabulary explanations. Classroom Discourse, 8(3), 194-213. Waring, H. Z., Creider, S. C., & Box, C. D. (2013). Explaining vocabulary in the second language classroom: A conversation analytic account. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(4), 249-264. Sert, O. (2011). A micro-analytic investigation of claims of insufficient knowledge in EAL Classrooms. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Newcastle Üniversitesi, Newcastle Upon Tyne, İngiltere. Sert, O. (2013). “Epistemic status check” as an interactional phenomenon in instructed learning settings. Journal of Pragmatics, 45(1), 13-28. Sert, O., & Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27(6), 542– 565. Sert, O. (2015). Social interaction and L2 classroom discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Sert, O., & Balaman, U. (2015). Çevrimiçi görev-temelli etkileşimde ortaklaşa bilgi yapılandırmasının konuşma çözümlemesiyle incelenmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, MEUDED, 12(2), 45-72. Sert, O., Bozbıyık, M., Elçin M., & Turan, S. (2015a). Standart hasta-tıp öğrencisi etkileşiminde ön bilgi iddiaları ve etkileşimsel sorunlar. Mersin Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, 12(2), 73-94. Sert, O., Balaman, U., Can Daşkın, N., Büyükgüzel, S., & Ergül, H. (2015b). Konuşma çözümlemesı̇ yöntemi. Mersin Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, 12(2), 1-43. Paul Stone (2019) Repair sequences in ‘off-task’ conversations in an EFL university classroom in Japan: Japanese language resources and learning opportunities, Classroom Discourse, 10:2, 188-208, DOI: 10.1080/19463014.2018.1538886 Suchman, L., & Jordan, B. (1990). Interactional troubles in face-to-face survey interviews. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85, 232-241. doi: 10.2307/2289550 Sumruk, H. (2019). Yabancı dil olarak Türkçe öğretiminde etkileşim ve konuşma çözümlemesi yöntemiyle kelime öğretimi: A2 düzeyi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Şardağ, M. (2019). Argümantasyon tabanlı bilim eğitiminde biçimlendirici değerlendirme: Bir konuşma çözümlemesi araştırması. Yayınlanmamış Doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversational analysis: A practical guide. London: Sage. Ulutaş Deniz, E. (2018). Eczane içi etkileşimlerin konuşma çözümlemesi yoluyla incelenmesi: Uzmanlık bilgisi gösterimi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. Waring, H. Z. (2008). Using explicit positive assessment in the language classroom: IRF, feedback, and learning opportunities. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 577–594. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00788.x Tai, K. W., & Wei, L. (2021). Constructing playful talk through translanguaging in English medium instruction mathematics classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 42(4), 607-640.

Ders İle İlgili Dosyalar