Author :
Abstract
This study seeks to determine how students, aiming at becoming teachers of Turkish Language and Literature, define classics and their knowledge of classics; to shed light on the question of how classics, as the basis of language, literature and culture, can be adapted in line with the needs of present day for better public visibility. The purposeful sampling method was utilized in this study which was prepared based on the ‘’World Literature’’ course included in the junior year curriculum at the Department of Turkish Language and Literature, Faculty of Science and Letters. A chronological order was followed for the course ‘’World Literature’’ which covered works from Old Greek Literature to Modern Western Literature, and an anthology was compiled from globally acclaimed works. This chronology aims at demonstrating the reflection of social and cultural life on literature by means of literary periods. At the end of each lecture, Turkish classics were construed through the comparison of a globally acclaimed work and its equivalents in Turkish literature. 50 students were directed open-ended questions in relation to their definition of classics, and in-class discussions, descriptive compositions were created based on the resulting data. Certain themes, shedding light on the restructuring of the teaching of classics, were determined by means of the general inductive approach. Consequently, the conclusion part covers the assessment of these themes.
Keywords
Abstract
This study seeks to determine how students, aiming at becoming teachers of Turkish Language and Literature, define classics and their knowledge of classics; to shed light on the question of how classics, as the basis of language, literature and culture, can be adapted in line with the needs of present day for better public visibility. The purposeful sampling method was utilized in this study which was prepared based on the ‘’World Literature’’ course included in the junior year curriculum at the Department of Turkish Language and Literature, Faculty of Science and Letters. A chronological order was followed for the course ‘’World Literature’’ which covered works from Old Greek Literature to Modern Western Literature, and an anthology was compiled from globally acclaimed works. This chronology aims at demonstrating the reflection of social and cultural life on literature by means of literary periods. At the end of each lecture, Turkish classics were construed through the comparison of a globally acclaimed work and its equivalents in Turkish literature. 50 students were directed open-ended questions in relation to their definition of classics, and in-class discussions, descriptive compositions were created based on the resulting data. Certain themes, shedding light on the restructuring of the teaching of classics, were determined by means of the general inductive approach. Consequently, the conclusion part covers the assessment of these themes.
Keywords
- Adorno, T.W. (2004). Edebiyat yazıları (Noten zur literatur I-IV & prismen). (S. Yücesoy & O. Koçak, Trans.) İstanbul: Metis Eleştiri . (Eserin orjinal basım tarihi 1992).
- Aydemir, Y. (Kış 2006). Divan edebiyatı öğretiminde karşılaşılan sıkıntılar ve zihniyet problemi. Milli Eğitim, Eğitim ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 34(169), 134-141.
- Bakhtin, M. M. (2002). Speech genres & other late essays. (Vern W. McGee, Trans.) Austin: University of Texas Press. (Original work published 1986)
- Baş, B. (2011). İlköğretim yüz temel eserin türkçe dersi öğretim programındaki temalar açısından analizi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(15), 175-200.
- Bauman, Z. (2006). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Bilkan, A. F. (Kış 2006) Liselerde divan edebiyatı öğretimi, Milli Eğitim, Eğitim ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 34(169), 142-152.
- Calvino, I. (1999). Why read the classics? New York: Vintage Books.
- Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Eagleton, T. (2011). Kültür yorumları (The idea of culture). (Ö. Çelik, Çev.) İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları (Orijinal basım tarihi 2000).
- Eagleton, T. (2005). The English novel an introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
- Eroğlu, F. (2004). Davranış bilimleri. İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
- Fuery, P. & Mansfield, N. (2000). Cultural studies and critical theory. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
- Genç, İ. (Fall 2007). Klâsik Türk edebiyatı metinlerini anlamada modern yaklaşımlar. Turkish studies international periodical for the languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 2(4), 393-404. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.181.
- Günay, V. D. (Winter 2006). Liselerdeki yazın eğitimine yeni bir yaklaşım. Milli Eğitim, Eğitim ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 34 (169), 8-17.
- Güvenç, B. (1971). İnsan ve kültür. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
- Güvenç, B. (1985). Kültür konusu ve sorunlarımız. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
- Hofstede, G. (1997). Culture and organizations software of the mind intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. New York: McGraw – Hill.
- Holland, D. & Lave, J. (2009). Social practice theory and the historical production of persons. Actio: An International Journal of Human Activity Theory 2, 1-15.
- İsen Durmuş, T. (2011). Türk edebiyatında klâsik algısı üzerine düşünceler (Ideas on the perceptions of classics in Turkish literature. Milli Folklor, 12(90), 37-48.
- İspirli, S. A. & Gülbahçe, A. (Kış 2009). Gençlerimiz ve divan edebiyatı öğretimi Erzurum ili örneği (Teaching of classical Turkish literature and our young population –The Case of Erzurum), Turkish Studies, International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 4(2), 654-671. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.642.
- Jago, C. (2004). Classics in the classroom designing accessible literature lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Portsmouth.
- Kalfa, M. (2013). Klâsik eserler ve klâsik eserlerin eğitsel işlev. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 17(1), 105- 112.
- Karatay, H. (Winter 2011). Karakter eğitiminde edebi eserlerin kullanımı (Using literary works in character education). Turkish Studies, International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 6(1), 1439-1454. doi: 10.7827/Turkish Studies.2191.
- Mengi, M. (2006). Divan edebiyatı öğretiminin sorunları ve bazı çözüm önerileri. Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim, 7, 77-78.
- Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
- Milner, A. (1996). Literature culture & society. London: UCL Press.
- Moran, B. (1990). Türk romanına eleştirel bir bakış Ahmet Mithat’tan A.H. Tanpınar’a. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
- Öğün, S. S. (2006). Gündelik hayatın kültürel yansımaları. Bursa: Alfa Aktüel.
- Özcan, N. (2012). Eğitim açısından edebiyat ve Behiştî’nin “Heşt Behişt” Mesnevisi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 28, 135-146.
- Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Polat, T. (Kış 2006). Okur odaklı bir yaklaşımla yazın eğitimi. Milli Eğitim, Eğitim ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 34 (169), 18-24.
- Sağlık, Ş. (2004). İletişim kavramı açısından “Popüler Romanlar” ve “Estetik Romanlar”. Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim, Popüler Kültür ve Gençlik Özel Sayı, 5(57), 30-37.
- Stokes, M. (2011). Aşk cumhuriyeti Türk popüler müziğinde kültürel mahrem (The republic of love: Cultural intimacy in Turkish popular music). (H. Doğrul, Trans) İstanbul: Koç University.
- Thomas, D.R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246. doi: 10.1177/1098214005283748.
- Williams, R. (1983). Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society. Revised Edition New York: Oxford University Press.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological functions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.