REPUBLIC OF TURKEY

ÇUKUROVA UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING DEPARTMENT

FROM PREP CLASS TO FIRST YEAR: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE

TRANSITIONAL EFFECTS OF A ONE-YEAR ENGLISH PREPARATORY

CONTINUUM ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AND

UNIVERSITY ADJUSTMENT

Nermin ARIN

MASTER OF ARTS

ADANA, 2010

REPUBLIC OF TURKEY

ÇUKUROVA UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING DEPARTMENT

FROM PREP CLASS TO FIRST YEAR: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE

TRANSITIONAL EFFECTS OF A ONE-YEAR ENGLISH PREPARATORY

CONTINUUM ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AND

UNIVERSITY ADJUSTMENT

Nermin ARIN

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Zuhal OKAN

MASTER OF ARTS

ADANA, 2010

To Çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences

We certify that this thesis is satisfactory for the award of the degree of Master of

Arts in the Department of English Language Teaching.

Chairperson: Assoc. Prof. Zuhal OKAN

(Supervisor) Member of Examining Committee: Assist. Prof. Hasan BEDİR Member of Examining Committee: Assist. Prof. M. Oğuz KUTLU I certify that this thesis conforms to the formal standards of the Institute of Social

Sciences. …./…./….

Prof. Dr. Azmi YALÇIN

Director of Institute

PS: The uncited usage of reports, charts, figures and photographs in this thesis, whether or

original quoted from other sources, is subject to the Laws of Works of Art and Thought

NO:5846.

NOT: Bu tezde kullanılan özgün ve başka kaynaktan yapılan bildirişlerin, çizelge, şekil ve

fotoğrafların kaynak gösterilmeden kullanımı, 5846 Sayılı Fikir ve Sanat Eserler Kanunu‘ndaki

hükümlere tabidir.

ii

ÖZET

HAZIRLIK SINIFINDAN BİRİNCİ SINIFA: BİR YILLIK İNGİLİZCE

HAZIRLIK SÜRECİNİN DİL YETERLİĞİ VE ÜNİVERSİTEYE UYUM

SAĞLAMA ÜZERİNDEKİ GEÇİŞSEL ETKİLERİNİN ARAŞTIRILMASI

Nermin ARIN

Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İngiliz Dili Eğitimi Anabilim Dalı

Danışman: Doç. Dr. Zuhal OKAN

Ağustos 2010, 122 sayfa

Bu çalışmanın esas amacı, bir yıllık İngilizce hazırlık sürecinin dil yeterliği ve

üniversiteye uyum sağlama üzerindeki geçişsel etkilerini araştırmaktır. Bu amaçla,

çalışma iki farklı katılımcı grup olarak toplam 150 İngilizce Öğretmenliği bölümü

birinci sınıf öğrencileri ile yürütülmüştür. Gruplardan biri, 2008-2009 akademik yılında

İngilizce hazırlık eğitimi alıp daha sonra birinci sınıfa geçiş yapan 75 öğrenciden

oluşmaktadır. Geriye kalan 75 katılımcı ise hazırlık sınıfından muaf olup bundan dolayı

direkt olarak birinci sınıfa kabul edilen öğrencilerden oluşmaktadır.

Veriler Dil Yeterlik Anketi, Üniversiteye Uyum Anketi ve yarı yapılandırılmış

görüşmeler aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Anketler ön-anket ve son-anket olarak hem

akademik yılın başında hem de sonunda uygulanmıştır. Anketlerden toplanan nicel veri

SPSS bilgisayar programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir ve görüşmeler sonucunda elde

edilen nitel verinin analizi ise içerik analizi yönteminden yararlanılarak yapılmıştır.

Çalışmanın sonuçları, bir önceki yıl hazırlık programında eğitim gören

öğrencilerle, programdan muaf tutulan öğrenciler arasında dil yeterliği açısından

anlamlı bir farkın olmadığını göstermiştir. Öte yandan, bu iki farklı öğrenci grubunun

üniversiteye uyum süreci açısından istatiksel olarak birbirinden farklılık gösterdikleri

saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Geçiş, Hazırlık Programı, Birinci Sınıf Öğrencileri, Dil Yeterliği,

Üniversiteye Uyum Sağlama

iii

ABSTRACT

FROM PREP CLASS TO FIRST YEAR: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE

TRANSITIONAL EFFECTS OF A ONE-YEAR ENGLISH PREPARATORY

CONTINUUM ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY AND

UNIVERSITY ADJUSTMENT

Nermin ARIN

Master of Arts, English Language Teaching Department

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Zuhal OKAN

August 2010, 122 pages

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the transitional effects of a one-

year English preparatory continuum on language proficiency and university adjustment.

To this end, the study was carried out with 150 first-year ELT students in total as two

separate participant groups. One of the groups consisted of 75 students who had already

attended preparatory class in the academic year of 2008-2009 and then made a transition

to the freshman year. The remaining 75 participants comprised the students who were

exempted from the preparatory class and therefore directly admitted to the first-year.

The data were collected through the Language Proficiency Questionnaire, the

Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The

questionnaires were administered both at the beginning and end of the academic year as

pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire. The quantitative data gathered from

questionnaires were analyzed using SPSS computer program and the analysis of the

qualitative data obtained via interviews was realized utilizing content analysis

procedure.

The results of the study showed that there was no significant difference between

the students who took preparatory education in the previous year and the others that

were exempted from it in terms of language proficiency. On the other hand, it was

found that these two types of students statistically differed from each other with respect

to university adjustment.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ÖZET………………………………………………………………...……………….…ii

ABSTRACT………………………………………………………..………………….iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………….....….v

LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………..……......ix

LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………..xi

LIST OF APPENDICES…………………………………………………………….xii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction………………………………………………………....... ………….…1

1.2. Background to the Study……………………………………………………...….…1

1.3. Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………….. …….2

1.4. Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………..3

1.5. Research Questions……………………………………………………………….…3

1.6. Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………….……4

1.7. Abbreviations………………………………………………………………….…….4

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………... …….5

2.2. Definitions of Transition……………………………………………………………5

2.3. Transition to University……………………………………………………… …….7

2.4. Models of Transition………………………………………………………………..8

2.4.1. Schlossberg’s Transition Model……………………………………………...8

2.4.2. Bridges’ Transition Model……………………………………………………9

2.4.3. Tinto’s Theory of Student Departure and Retention………………..………11

2.4.4. Astin’s Theory of Involvement……………………………………………...13

2.5. Definition of Adjustment……………………………………………………….....14

vii

2.6. Adjustment to University………………………………………………………….15

2.7. Domains of Adjustment………………………………………………………..….16

2.7.1. Academic Adjustment……………………………………………...……….16

2.7.2. Social Adjustment……………………………………………………..……17

2.7.3. Personal-Emotional Adjustment……………………………………………19

2.7.4. Institutional (Attachment) Adjustment………………………….………….21

2.8. Preparatory Schools…………………………………………………………….…22

2.8.1. The Objectives of English Preparatory Program………………...…………23

2.8.2. The Structure of English Preparatory Program in ELT Department……….23

2.9. Foreign Language Proficiency…………………………………………………….24

2.9.1. Views on Foreign Language Proficiency…………………………………...25

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………....…..27

3.2. Research Design………………………………………………………….......……27

3.3. Participants……………………………………………………………………..….28

3.4. Instrumentation……………………………………………………………………29

3.4.1. Questionnaires………………………………………………………...…….29

3.4.1.1. Language Proficiency Questionnaire………………………………29

3.4.1.2. Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire………………….......30

3.4.1.3. Piloting of the Questionnaires……………………………………...32

3.4.2. Interviews…………………………………………………………………...32

3.5. Data Collection Procedures………………………………………………………..33

3.6. Data Analysis……………………………………………………………………....34

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

4.1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………..…38

4.2. Findings from the Questionnaires………………………………………………….38

4.2.1. Findings from the Language Proficiency Questionnaire……………………38

4.2.1.1. Descriptive Results………………………………………………....38

viii

4.2.1.2. The Results of ANOVA……………………………………………62

4.2.2. Findings from the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire…………...64

4.2.2.2. The Results of ANCOVA…………………………………………..64

4.3. Findings from the Interviews………………………………………………………65

4.3.1. Group A Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency……………….66

4.3.2. Group B Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency……………….70

4.3.3. Group A Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment……………...76

4.3.4. Group B Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment……………...81

4.3.5. Effects of Preparatory Education on Language Proficiency………………..86

4.3.6. Effects of Preparatory Education on University Adjustment……………….92

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………..95

5.2. Discussions and Conclusions……………………………………………………....95

5.3. Implications of the Study…………………………………………………………105

5.4. Suggestions for Further Studies………………………………………………..…107

REFERENCES…………………………………..………………………………......108

APPENDICES……………………………………..…………………………….......115

CURRICULUM VITAE……………………………………………………………121

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 3.1. Item Intervals of the Subscales in Language Proficiency Questionnaire......30

Table 3.2. Names of Subscales in Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

with Their Item Numbers………………………………………………..…31

Table 3.3. Independent Sample t-Test Results of Language Proficiency

Questionnaire…………………………………………………………..........35

Table 3.4. Independent Sample t-Test Results of Student Adaptation to College

Questionnaire…………………………………………………………….....36

Table 4.1. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Listening Subscale for

Group A……..................................................................................................39

Table 4.2. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Listening Subscale for

Group B……………………………………………………………..............41

Table 4.3. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Reading Subscale for

Group A………………………………………………………..….…..….....47

Table 4.4. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Reading Subscale for

Group B………………………………………………………..….…..…......48

Table 4.5. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Writing Subscale for

Group A………………………………………………………………….......51

Table 4.6. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Writing Subscale for

Group B………………………………………………………………….…..52

Table 4.7. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Speaking Subscale for

Group A……………………………………………………………...…........57

Table 4.8. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Speaking Subscale for

Group B……...................................................................................................58

Table 4.9. A Mixed Between-Within Subjects Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Results of Language Proficiency Questionnaire……………………….....63

Table 4.10. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) Results of Student Adaptation

to College Questionnaire…………………………………………….........64

Table 4.11. Themes Appearing in Group A Participants’ Perceptions of Language

Proficiency…………………………………………………………….......67

Table 4.12. Themes Appearing in Group B Participants’ Perceptions of Language

x

Proficiency…………………………………………………………….......71

Table 4.13. Themes Appearing in Group A Participants’ Perceptions of University

Adjustment……………………………………………………………......76

Table 4.14. Themes Appearing in Group B Participants’ Perceptions of University

Adjustment……………………………………………………………......81

Table 4.15. Themes Appearing in Participants’ Perceptions of Effects of Preparatory

Education on Language Proficiency…………………………………........86

Table 4.16. Themes Appearing in Participants’ Perceptions of Effects of Preparatory

Education on University Adjustment…………………………………......92

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1. The Individual in Transition……………………………………………......9

Figure 2.2. The Bridges’ Transitional Model………………………………….............11

Figure 2.3. Tinto’s Model of Student Retention/Dropout……………………………..13

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix 1: Language Proficiency Questionnaire ………………………………….115

Appendix 2: Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire……………………….....117

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

This introductory chapter presents background of the study, statement of the

problem, purpose of the study, research questions and operational definitions followed

by the limitations of the study.

1.2. Background to the Study

Human beings, by their nature, have to go through a wide range of stages in life

such as passage from infancy to childhood, from high school to university and transition

from pupilage to career. Every stage in question calls for living significant transitional

experiences within different contexts like psychological, physical, social or educational.

Each phenomenon taking place in transition process might be an indicator of how well

the adaptation to that new situation is realized.

In the relevant literature, a great emphasis is put on the transition made to

university. If the fact that entering a university seems to come through a door opened to

the various dimensions of life is taken into account, this is not surprising at all. The

freshmen find themselves in an environment, which is full of social, academic and

individual challenges and opportunities at the same time. Therefore, as Jackson et al.

(2000) suggest, stepping into the university comes to be a crucial life transition which

tests people’s strength in adjustment.

Due to the fact that transition to university is a challenging process and brings

about the issue of adaptation with itself, the factors influencing adjustment to college

environment constitute a hot topic for a number of research. For instance, Jackson et al.

(2000) examined the association between the nature of students’ expectations about

university and the adjustment to university. They specified four expectation types as

optimistic, prepared, fearful and complacent. According to their findings, students with

fearful expectations demonstrated poorer university adjustment than the participants

with other types of expectations, in particular, with prepared expectation.

2

On the other hand, Bernier et al. (2004) investigated the direct and indirect

relations between attachment state of mind and adjustment to college. Their study put

forward that being inclined to be preoccupied with attachment referred to poor

adjustment at the end of the first year and to a general decline in adjustment and in

grades during the first year. The study also laid stress on the no-relationship between

dismissing attachment inclinations and freshmen’s college adaptation.

In addition to specific factors that have impact on adaptation, researchers also

focus on such programs arranged with the intention of making a direct contribution to

adjustment as;

• Preparation and Adjustment for College Entrance Program (PACE) (Hicks,

2005)

• Academic Advancement Program (AAP) (Arredondo, 1999)

• Academic Counseling Program (ACP) (Werther, 2009)

• Transition Workshop (Dalziel & Peat, 1998)

According to the implementations prior to or subsequent to enrolling, these

programs make the transition and adjustment to college life easier. They principally

raise students’ awareness of how to get involved in and be successful at academic

environment, which emphasizes the importance of those practices.

In line with the same purpose, there is another model of program serving

indirectly to ease the adjustment to university life: a year-long English preparatory

program. The common goal of English prep education offered by most colleges is to

help students not only enhance their language proficiency but acquire necessary

academic preparedness for their freshman classes and eventually make a smooth

transition to first year, as well.

1.3. Statement of the Problem

English preparatory education in colleges has been a great interest to researchers

for a long time with different perspectives such as the achievement level of its

objectives (Heper, 1998); evaluation of the curriculum (Vural, 2004); motivational

3

factors (Çiftci, 2005) and language learning strategies used by prep class students

(Yalçın, 2006).

According to Lahn (1971, p.2), “Systematic study of special college preparatory

program should serve three functions: determine if the objectives of the program have

been attained, suggest ways improving the program, and provide information about the

characteristics of participating students”. However, the relevant literature is lacking in

research that reveals whether English preparatory education really contributes to

language proficiency and university adjustment in the process of transition to first year.

For that reason, this study takes a bit more different perspective and rather than give a

report of program evaluation, it focuses on reflections and outcomes of prep continuum

on freshmen within ELT context.

1.4. Purpose of the Study

The main concern of this study is to investigate to what extent the first-year ELT

students who stepped directly into the first year and those already taking prep education

differ from each other in terms of experiences they live with respect to language

proficiency and university adaptation. Additionally, the study aims to identify the

students’ perceptions of the role of preparatory program in language proficiency and

college adaptation.

1.5. Research Questions

The following questions constitute the basis of the study:

1. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. listening ability?

b. reading ability?

c. writing ability?

d. speaking ability?

2. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. academic adjustment?

4

b. social adjustment?

c. personal adjustment?

d. institutional (attachment) adjustment?

3. Does one-year preparatory continuum contribute to students’ transition process

in terms of their English academic achievement and adjustment to university?

1.6. Limitations of the Study

The questionnaires were administered to 150 first-year ELT students and the

interviews were realized with 20 participants. Therefore, with more participants it may

be possible to obtain more generalisable results. Additionally, the data were analyzed

descriptively and no attempt was made to search the correlation between variables,

which would most probably offer detailed interpretation of the results.

1.7. Abbreviations

The abbreviations used in the study are as follows:

ELT: English Language Teaching

EPP: English Preparatory Program

LPQ: Language Proficiency Questionnaire

SACQ: Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Sciences

ANOVA: Analysis of Variance

ANCOVA: Analysis of Covariance

5

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1. Introduction

In this chapter, the literature about the meanings of transition and adjustment,

transition and adjustment to university, transition models, and domains of adjustment

are presented. Furthermore, the general framework of preparatory schools with their

objectives is explained. Additionally, the concept of foreign language proficiency

including the views on it is presented, as well.

2.2. Definitions of Transition

The current literature indicates that transition has been a genuine interest to

researchers, theorists, and professors of education for so long. Therefore, it bountifully

presents numerous definitions in ways to describe this prevailing concept:

• Tao et al. (2000): In the study of how social support affects coping strategies

and adjustment of Chinese during the transition to university, Tao et al. define

transition as a change occurring in the person or the environment or both. They mean

that transitions are accompanied by changes and these changes can embody either

individual or environmental effects or two spheres of influences together.

• Parkes (1971): Parkes employs the term “process of change” within its all

ongoing effects to describe transition. He argues that this period of change leads one

to deter from the way how he perceives the world and the point of his presence.

Additionally, it is claimed to make the adoption of new methods necessary to keep

up with a modified life space essential.

• Bridge (1991): Bridge places a particular emphasis on the distinctive nature of

transition which differs it from the notion of change. According to him, “Transition

is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with the new

situation” (p.3). This definition comes to mean that transition is internal whereas

change is suggested to mean something which is situational or external to an

individual.

6

• Schlossberg, Waters & Goodman (1995): They put forward that a transition

can be either an event or a non-event and it is possible to result in changes on

relationships, routines, assumptions or roles. They also add that a transition may

possess not only positive but also negative sides.

• Tinto (1994): From Tinto’s point of view, transition refers to “a period of

passage between the old and the new” (p.93). He intends to mean by “passage” that

there is a line between the complete adjustment of new concepts or models of

behavior and the preparation for giving up those which belong to the past.

• Spencer & Adams (2003): Like Tinto; Spencer and Adams make use of the

term “passage” in their definition of transition. With their own words, “Transition is

the passage of adjustment from one situation to another” (p.9). It can be caused by

such any life events as a divorce, a house move, a change at work or the birth of a

child, which makes adjustment necessary.

• Chick & Meleis (1986): It is possible to encounter the common word “passage”

in the description of transition suggested by Chick and Meleis since they regard it as

“a passage from one life phase, condition, or status to another” (p.238). Additionally,

they assert that transition occurs not only in the course of complicated person-

environment interactions but also at the end of it as an outcome.

• Golan (1981): According to Golan, transition means stepping from one

definiteness to another. Besides accuracy, it also contains vagueness and alteration

between two certain occasions, which may come from the fact that the person knows

where to go but does not know what is in store in the new destination.

• Murphy (1990): Murphy benefits from some common themes while presenting

the definition of transition. He specifies these widely-used points as disruption in

routine, emotional upheaval, and adjustment which requires individuals to undergo

life changes.

• Tyhurst (1957): Transition is identified by Tyhurst as either a passage or a

change. He also claims that this passage or change grows up between two places,

states, behaviours or circumstances.

• Hudson (1991): Hudson considers transition as “a natural process of

disorientation and reorientation” (p.96). He believes that during this process the

perception of self and world goes through a change and the assumptions along with

behaviors need to be altered, as well.

7

• Brammer (1991) : From the perspective of Brammer, transition is like a journey

made towards something unknown. What is expected from a person during this

journey is that s/he should have enough courage to take a risk and be skilled in

getting over misgiving.

Taking the definitions given above into consideration, it is seen that transition

requires to experience a change and adjust to that unfamiliar situation. The success one

shows during adaptation depends on one’s own personal qualities. Huon and Sankey

(2000, p.1) make an explanation of this individual case as;

Transitions can be challenging, because changes are often expected from

their physical, psychological and social environments. Individuals differ in

the degree to which they are able to successfully meet the challenge, largely

because of differences in their level of preparedness, and in their ability to

identify and to mobilise personal resources to adapt to those changes.

In the face of transition, it is necessary to attempt to get familiar with the new

environment and the new identity to be undertaken. Because the identification of the

ambiance and the role beforehand can ease the way for adjustment. According to Tao et

al., adjustment is the reflection of association between the person and the environment.

Therefore, the transition and adjustment to it need to be perceived through the analysis

of environment and the efforts made to adjust within it (2000).

2.3. Transition to University

Transition to university amounts to being involved in a new social and academic

environment. By some students, at least in the first days of transition, entering

university is regarded as an exciting and fabulous life event since it offers an important

opportunity to develop both socially and academically. On the other hand, for most

students, transition process grows into an uphill battle in which a set of social, academic

and personal difficulties are confronted. Hence, adaptation to university life proves to be

more stressful and challenging process than anticipated. As Dalziel & Peat point out, in

accordance with whether the outcome of this challenging process is positive or negative,

8

students experience an achievement, or a failure in adjustment to university life and

drop out of the university (1998).

The challenges of transition period faced by first-year college students include

moving away from home, making new friendships and dealing with arduous academic

tasks. The ability of student in managing to become adjusted possibly depends on such

psychosocial factors as coping, social support, self-esteem, and health related

behaviours (Hudd et al., 2000; Kohn&Veres, 2001; Lamothe et al., 1995). Actually,

adaptive coping, adequate social support, high self-esteem, and health increasing

behaviours might assist students to be successful across various domains during the

process of transition to university (Bray&Kwan, 2006; Hudd et al., 2000; Kohn&Veres,

2001; Lamothe et al., 1995).

2.4. Models of Transition

In addition to a great number of definitions of transition, the relevant literature

also presents various transition models or theories that make the issue of transition

process more transparent. The following models serve as the prominent ones shedding

light on the nature of transition.

2.4.1. Schlossberg’s Transition Model

This transition theory, developed by Nancy K. Schlossberg in 1981 and later

revised by Schlossberg, Waters, and Goodman in 1995, aims to provide an

understanding of individuals in transition and the way how to deal with the challenges

of this process. Schlossberg’s theory presents “insights into factors related to the

transition, the individual, and the environment that are likely to determine the degree of

impact a given transition will have at a particular time” (Evans, Forney & Guido-

DiBrito, 1998, p.107). From another perspective, Schlossberg’s theory was not initially

planned to explain development of university student and is categorized under adult

development, however; the elements comprising this theory are applicable to college

students and their experiences (Evans et al., 1998).

As it is stated before, Schlossberg (1981, p.5) defined transition as having grown

up “If an event or nonevent results in a change in assumptions about oneself and the

9

world and thus requires a corresponding change in one’s behavior and relationships.”

Examples of events can be given as graduating from high school or getting a new job

and non-events include the loss of a career aspiration or expecting a job promotion that

is never achieved. Within its general framework, this model consists of three phases of

transition and also four elements that are required to be handled for people in transition.

The stages of the model comprise:

• The Moving In stage involves orientating students to an event and expectations.

Here students learn how to balance competing demands and understand the culture.

• The Moving Through stage is characterized by confusion and second-guessing.

• The Moving Out stage requires students develop strategies to cope with their

new roles.

As for the factors of the model, Schlossberg et al. (1995) suggested four arenas

that determine a person's ability to cope with a transition: Situation, Self, Support, and

Strategies (see Figure 2.1). They are known as the “4 S’s” and they all explain the

differences in how individuals cope with transition and distinguish “potential assets

and/or liabilities” and why “different individuals react differently to the same type of

transition and why the same person reacts differently at different times” (p.47). These

four major sets of factors consist of:

Figure 2.1. The Individual in Transition (Schlossberg, 1995)

10

• Situation: During the assessment of Situation, a person should take into

consideration these crucial points: the triggering factor for transition, timing of

transition, holder of control, possibility of changing roles, duration of transition,

possibility of undergoing the similar transition process before, existence of other

stressors, who or what is responsible for the transition, effects of transition on the

person’s behavior.

• Self: According to Schlossberg et al. (1995), every person has a unique

personality and has experienced unique life issues. The factor of Self refers to the

person’s personal and demographic characteristics, such as socioeconomic status,

age, gender, stage of life, level of health, and ethnicity. Additionally, it covers the

person’s psychological resources, such as ego development, self-efficacy,

commitment and values.

• Support: Every individual has varying options and support systems. Within this

factor, the person’s types of social support, such as family, networks, community;

functions of social support, such as aid, affirmation, honest feedback; and

measurement, such as the level of role dependency, whether supports are changing

or are stable should be considered.

• Strategies: Every individual steers through transitions in different ways. It refers

to balancing assets and liabilities. In the course of Strategies factor, a person is

supposed to take into account these issues: whether the person modifies the

situation, controls the meaning of the problem, and/or manages stress in the

aftermath. The coping mode used should be considered as well: informing seeking,

direct action, inhibition of action, or intra-psychic behavior.

2.4.2. Bridges’ Transition Model

As it was stated before, Bridges focuses on the difference between transition and

change and makes definition of transition accordingly. According to Bridges (1991,

p.3), “Transition is the psychological process people go through to come to terms with

the new situation.” This means that transition refers to something psychological or

internal whereas change points to something situational or external. Bridges’ model

(1991) is also based on the distinction between these two concepts and involves a three-

phase process of transition as can be seen from Figure 2.2:

11

Figure 2.2. The Bridges’ Transitional Model (Bridges, 1991)

• Ending, Losing, Letting Go: The first phase in the transition process starts with

an ending which means that one thing must finish in order to give a start to

something else. Therefore, the ending stage is one of letting go of the past and often

identified with feelings of disengagement, misidentification, disenchantment, and

disillusionment. From educational perspective, this can be exemplified by the fact

that students do not admit their undergraduate careers’ coming to end and thus

abstain from taking any steps toward preparing for life after graduation.

• Neutral Zone: The next stage, neutral zone, is regarded as the core of transition

process and a confusing in-between state. Because people are neither in the past nor

completely in the new beginning. It is usual to feel a sense of confusion and

uncertainty about future. Bridges (1991) warns that this phase is critical since it

contains the risk of prematurely moving out of it. However; the neutral zone is also a

place of promise and opportunity and serves a great chance for creativity and

renewal.

• New Beginning: The last stage is coming out of the transition and making a new

beginning. It refers to the time when anxieties turn into excitement about new

opportunities, the new identities develop and the new energy is experienced. Bridges

(1991) suggests that people in this stage need to keep up their goals and be open to

the possibility of making a change on their plans in the face of unexpected events.

2.4.3. Tinto’s Theory of Student Departure and Retention

Tinto’s model of student departure is one of the most widely dwelled on and

explored issues in the higher education literature. Within the framework of this theory,

Tinto (1994) puts forward that the process of becoming integrated into the academic and

12

social communities of a university occurs when students successfully go through the

stages of separation, transition, and incorporation:

• Separation: In this stage, individuals move away from their familiar

environment, primary role, and past associations like friends, families, high school or

other social ties and enter different atmosphere to which they are supposed to adjust.

• Transition: Following the process of separation phase which is somewhat

traumatic, individuals experience the stage of transition. This is the time when they

learn appropriate behavior for the new stage they enter. The transition stage is also

the situation in which individuals feel that they neither belong to their old

environments nor find their place of belonging in new environments. Tinto (1994,

p.93) describes this as “a period of passage between the old and the new, before the

full adoption of new norms and patterns of behavior, and after the onset of separation

from old ones.”

• Incorporation: The last phase, incorporation, happens when individuals achieve

new patterns of interaction with members of the new group and full membership in

that community. By this stage, they have completed their movement from the past

and become fully integrated into the culture of the new group.

From Tinto’s educational point of view (1975), the essential components of the

incorporation process include the social and academic involvement of students into the

university life (see Figure 2.3). The level of this integration depends on to what extent

students feel themselves as a part of the academic and social networks of the college. In

turn, the retention of the students is rooted in the degree to which students show a

positive integration within their institutional environment both socially and

academically.

13

Figure 2.3. Tinto’s Model of Student Retention/Dropout (Tinto, 1975)

As it is understood from the figure above that illustrates Tinto’s model of student

retention, students enter colleges with a range of family and individual attributes,

personal skills, financial resources, and various educational experiences (1975). The

interaction between these existing attributes and the members of the academic and

social systems of the college plays an effective role in students’ departure or

persistence. Because their intentions and commitments are perpetually modified by their

experiences in those systems and the relevant experiences are affected by academic as

well as social integrations. Should an individual live positive experiences, this

strengthens his/her intentions and commitments to the goal of university graduation and

to the institution. On the other hand; the negative experiences lead the intentions and

commitments to weaken and they also increase the likelihood of dropping out.

2.4.4. Astin’s Theory of Involvement

Astin’s Involvement Theory (1984) proposed that students learn and develop

when they take on an active role in their college experiences. With his own words,

“Students learn by becoming involved” (1985, p.133). As for the concept of

involvement, Astin (1984, p.297) defined it as “the amount of physical and

psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience.” In

14

accordance with the findings of the studies, the researcher concluded that there is a

relationship between students’ persistence in college and the factors having an impact

on their involvement in college life. In the same vein, the factors causing students to

leave school are related to their non-involvement.

Astin (1985, p.136) lists the basic principles of his theory as:

a. involvement requires the investment of psychological and physical energy in

objects,

b. involvement is a continuous concept – different students will invest varying

amounts of energy in different objects,

c. involvement has both quantitative and qualitative features,

d. the amount of learning or development is directly proportional to the quality and

quantity of involvement,

e. educational effectiveness of any policy or practice is related to its capacity to

induce student involvement.

As can be perceived from the principles given above, in the process of

involvement the students are not the passive agents; rather they are expected to actively

benefit from the opportunities presented by the environment. Additionally, they play a

crucial role in determining the amount and nature of development which will arise out

of the quality of effort or involvement with the resources ensured by the institution.

2.5. Definition of Adjustment

Throughout the present study, the term “adjustment” was used interchangeably

with the word “adaptation” to infer successful transition to college. According to

Schlossberg (1981), adaptation grows up when an individual is able to integrate

transition into his/her life. Zea, Jarama, and Bianchi (1995) defined successful

adaptation to college as “being socially integrated with other students, participating in

campus activities, responding to academic requirements, and being attached and

committed to the educational institution” (p.511). College adjustment, as identified by

Hurtado, Carter, and Spuler (1996), includes the resolution of psychological distress and

transitional trauma. In the current study, adjustment was determined by Baker and

15

Siryk’s (1999) Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ) which defines

adjustment based on four subscales including academic, social, personal-emotional, and

institutional (attachment) adjustment.

2.6. Adjustment to University

One of the factors having an impact on adjusting to university is the contradiction

between the student’s expectations before enrollment to the university and their actual

experience after their university life gets started. Research on this subject provided a

chance to find out whether the early assumptions about university life were eligible and

to make a comparison between those prejudgments and the responses attained after they

gained more experience at university.

King and Walsh (1972) compared freshmen’s expectations and perceptions with

those of a group of third-year students. The findings revealed that the first-year students

initially remarked higher expectations from university life and perceptions of the

environment than the third-year students reported. However, within the year, the

perceptions of the first-year students scaled down and remained lower than the

perceptions reported by their third-year counterparts. The results of this study suggested

that the experiences gained during the first-year had an influence on student perceptions

of the environment. Baker, McNeil, and Siryk (1985) supported this result and added

that differences between expectations of students from the university life and

perceptions of university environment were pertinent to various behavioral criteria

including acquiring academic honors, being aware of the psychological services center

and graduating on time.

By means of a longitudinal study, carried out by Berdie (1968), the extent to

which relative perceptions of the university changed during the first two university

years was investigated. It was found that the campus was considered as a less socially

structured institution, that students supposed more responsibility for their own social

and interpersonal behavior, and that the faculty and administration brought less power

into play than the students had originally expected. Furthermore, the campus was not as

exciting as the students had anticipated.

16

It was claimed by some researchers (Pancer, Hunsberger, Pratt, & Alisat, 2000)

that even though a great number of students may have unrealistic expectations from

university, not all sorts of expectation were negative. The researchers classified the

expectations into two groups as integrative complexity and simple or one-dimensional.

The students who had integrative complexity expectations were liable to demonstrate

higher levels of adjustment than the students having simple expectations concerning

university.

2.7. Domains of Adjustment

In the relevant literature, there exists four main areas of adjustment:

2.7.1. Academic Adjustment

Academic adjustment refers to the ability of students in dealing with the various

educational demands related to attending university life. The state of being academically

adjusted to college is perceived from positive attitudes toward academic goals as well as

academic work, eagerness to learn, and taking pleasure in academic environment (Baker

& Siryk, 1999).

When looked into the findings of studies carried out on the effect of developing

relationship with faculty staff, it is well understood that initiating interaction with

academic community helps students achieve academic adjustment, as well. For instance,

the study conducted by Terenzini and Pascarella (1977) showed that the students who

went on their education with second-year had a significantly higher level of personal

contact with faculty than those dropping out of the university at the end of the first-year.

Astin (1993) carried out an investigation into a different aspect that is effective

with a good student-faculty interaction. The researcher found a moderate positive

association between students’ coming in contact with their instructors and being pleased

with college. According to the results, a kind of faculty consisting of members who deal

with students’ problems, commit themselves to the university and who are there for

interactions with them enable students to be satisfied with where they get education.

17

Another study reveals that collaborative teaching methods employed by the

instructors help students feel themselves as a part of the learning environment and take

the responsibility of their own learning. Students also get more supported and can take

risks in teaching and learning setting. It is believed that this collaboration between

students and their lecturers not only makes a contribution to students’ academic success

but also strengthens the relationship between them. Additionally, it eases the way of

developing better academic adjustment to university (Anderson & Carta-Falsa, 2002).

Besides relationships with faculty, some researchers emphasize the role student

motivation plays in affecting academic adjustment. The findings of the research

administered by Cote and Levine (2000) indicate that students keen on attending

university with the aim of achieving a better professional and personal development are

inclined to gain better academic performance than those having higher intelligence level

and enrolling in university just because of their parents’ insistence. Furthermore, the

latter group of students own negative motivation for entering university and do not

consider their university experiences as positive. They are prone to manage less

successful academic adjustment, as well.

Deciding on a major field of study is considered as an indicator of academic

adaptation like motivation and student-faculty interaction. Titley and Titley’s (1980)

findings reveal that most of the new freshmen experience some form of uncertainty or

undecideness. According to Lokitz and Sprandel (1976), such factors as dealing with

courses in which there are no right answers like philosophy or being unable to establish

a balance between academic work and social circle can be put forward to interpret this.

However; when students make their mind about their majors or become certain about

them, they succeed in showing a better academic performance compared to indecisive

or less certain ones (Kramer, 1980).

2.7.2. Social Adjustment

The first year of university is a challenging time for many students since they are

surrounded by the difficulties of both academic and social facets of university life. In

terms of social aspect, whereas some of them experience the feeling of loneliness as

they leave from their family for the first time, some experience the fear of being

18

supposed to live in unfamiliar environment. Even if it seems to be hard, students are

expected to get over their negative thoughts as soon as possible and somehow develop

close relationships with their peers and the members of faculty. Because this is what is

required in general terms by a successful social adjustment. To give a more clear

explanation of it, as Baker & Siryk (1999) define, social adjustment refers to students’

ability to cope with the interpersonal-societal demands of the college experience and

also their success in social involvement on campus.

According to Astin (1993), the students who are involved in the campus activities

organized for them are more inclined to stay in college than those showing a lesser

degree of involvement in social organizations. It is also asserted by the researcher that

students displaying active participation in student clubs and organizations possess

greater pleasure with university and they make progress in their leadership as well as

interpersonal abilities. Regarding the same issue, Cope and Hannah (1975, p.27) made

an analysis of responses gathered from a group students leaving a large university and

they drew a conclusion that pressures from academic concerns were not related to

students' psychological stress. Instead, emotional upset mostly stemmed from social

concerns including “disappointments about friendships, meeting students with different

standards, and not being accepted by the social group”.

Johnson’s study (1954), carried out on the relationship between social integration

and great point average including the variable of gender, points out that the male

students going on their education after first-year had a higher GPA score and

demonstrated greater social involvement than their fellows leaving college at the end of

the first-year. In the same vein, the female students who did not drop out of university

were successful in both being adjusted socially and getting better grades in the course

first-year education in comparison to those who did not remain at university.

From Timmons’s point of view (1978), unresolved separation from family has an

impact on social integration of students. Because of excessive dependence on family,

some students either feel too insecure to discover their new surroundings and never

move out or they cling to their peers. As Timmons (1978, p.166) states “… a sense of

involvement develops out of a feeling that one is a separate person in one’s own right

and is responsible for one’s own choices and actions”. Therefore; in order to be a part of

19

the university, which is a core unit of college adjustment process, it is necessary for an

individual to manage at the outset a sense of separation and being independent from the

family.

In addition to the extreme dependence on family, lack of interpersonal

competency also affect adaptation to college. In particular, the fact that students fail to

show empathy towards each other and do not have enough communicative abilities lead

them to experience insufficiency of social support among themselves. As a result of

this, as Vitalo (1974, p.34) indicates:

The inability of students to function effectively as social agents for their

fellow students and as helpers for themselves in times of need creates a

human environment typified by lack of meaningful involvement in which

(a) relationships are maintained at superficial levels, (b) difficulties

emerge between individuals and between groups that are neither necessary

nor resolvable, (c) the tendency is to avoid or put down the feelings and

needs of others rather than confront and meet them, and (d) the inability to

deal with one's own personal problems leaves the individual vulnerable to

upset and disorder.

As can be understood from the excerpt above, a person who is not

interpersonally effective can help neither him/herself nor the people around. This

breakdown related to peer social support system, in turn, plays a key role in

determining his/her not only social but also psychological adjustment in the school

setting.

2.7.3. Personal-Emotional Adjustment

The definition of personal-emotional adjustment is presented by Baker & Siryk

(1999) in the relevant literature as the level of general psychological distress a student

experiences during university adjustment process. In accordance with what Sanford

(1962) claims, this tension occurring in the first few weeks of college can cause

maladaptive responses which end up with leaving university in the freshman year.

20

Personal-emotional adjustment is one of the dimensions of overall college

adjustment that requires students to learn new life skills which are mostly stressful and

challenging. This kind of adaptation has relations with attachment and separation from

parents, problem coping strategies and the need for counselling services which are

explained through following sample studies.

Even if separation seems to be a common part of the transition process, it is

considered to have significant effects on adaptation of students to college. For instance,

in their investigation into the impact of parental attachment on emotional strain, Berman

and Sperling (1991) concluded that male students having high levels of parental

attachment in the beginning had an attitude towards displaying high levels of depressed

mood at the end of the first semester. However; this relationship was not valid for

female students. As can be perceived from the study, in particular separation from

family has serious implications for personal-emotional adjustment of freshmen. If

students deter from their parent-dependent behaviors and accept themselves as an adult,

they are more liable to help themselves emotionally. They begin to search for people

with whom they develop close relationships. However; as some research (Astin,1975;

Baker&Siryk,1980; Lokitz&Sprandel,1976; Scherer&Wygant,1982) state, this search

may get obstructed because of:

(a) the amount of time they feel should be allotted for studying; (b)

entrenchment within a circle of friends formed in their residence hall floor

which offers support but may not be filling all of their needs or

expectations; (c) feeling the pressure to make the "right" decision in

choosing friends or in deciding what organization(s) to join since time is

so very limited; (d) insufficient reading and writing skills to successfully

compete with those who possess such skills; and (e) forming career goals

(Martin, 1988, p.27).

How students approach towards other issues may be predictive of being

academically successful or emotionally adjusted to new environment. That is, the

reaction given to a social case possibly have impact on personal-emotional or academic

transition.

21

The effectiveness of coping strategies, another facet of personal-emotional

adjustment, is determined by the attachment style of individuals. A study of first year

university students remarked that adult attachment style had a significant impact on

problem coping style. Namely, the students with certain secure attachment patterns

indicated fewer problems and less depression than insecurely attached students. On the

contrary, the students having insecure attachment styles reported more family conflict

and employed more passive methods in problem solving. This may come from the fact

that students with problem coping styles experienced considerably more stress arising

out of developmental problems in good relations and efforts to achieve distance and

intimacy in relationships (Lopez & Gormley, 2002).

Other studies administered on personal-emotional adjustment put forward that

students who look for counseling services established at university are not as good at

adjusting as students who do not look for university counseling services. DeStefano,

Mellott, & Petersen (2001) found that the students who were in need of getting

counselling help lived through more trouble dealing with a wide range of interpersonal,

academic, and societal demands of college experience. They experienced general

psychological tension and related physical problems. However; the study also explored

that those students who took advantage of counselling service achieved more successful

adjustment in the end.

2.7.4. Institutional (Attachment) Adjustment

Setting and pursuing a certain academic goal, giving importance to university

education, showing determination in holding a degree of a particular field of study are

suggested as the indicators of institutional attachment by Baker & Siryk (1999). They

define attachment and goal commitment in a way that it refers to satisfaction with being

in college in general and at the preferred college in particular. Satisfaction is defined by

Astin (1977) within this context as “…the student's subjective experience during the

college years and perceptions of the value of the educational experience” (p.164).

Bean (1985, p.54) put emphasis on "goodness of fit" hypothesis with respect to

the university environment and reveals that there is a strong connection between

academic integration and institutional fit. His study indicates the level of institutional fit

22

has a considerable effect on the dropout rate among first-year students. Furthermore, the

researcher asserts that even if academic integration highly affects institutional fit, social

life has the greatest effect on it implying that fitting in at school develops out of

interaction with peer groups. Thus, the finding of the study suggests that the main

agents of socialization for university students are their peers.

According to Tinto (1975), the higher level of integration a person manages into

the college system, the greater his/her commitment to the relevant institution and the

goal of college graduation will be. For that reason, satisfaction with university

preference comes to play a major role in persistence and academic performance of

individuals. Tinto (1975) also claims that when students enter a college, they bring

different backgrounds with themselves. These various personal backgrounds invite them

to establish different relationships with the institutional environment and to develop

different levels of involvement in social and academic systems of institution

respectively. The crucial point of this cycle is the fact that the greater the student’s level

of social and academic involvement, the less likely he/she experiences withdrawal.

2.8. Preparatory Schools

Today, English is regarded as an international language by many people since it is

used both in a global sense for international communication between countries and in a

local sense as a language of wider communication within multilingual societies. In other

words, the feature of being an international language stems from the fact that not only it

is the most widely spoken native language in the world, but also a growing number of

speakers are acquiring some familiarity with English as their second or third language

(McKay, 2002). In particular, in the past few years, globalization and world events

make the need for individuals with skills in the world’s widely spoken language

essential in order to connect with people from different countries for trade, diplomacy,

security or scientific advancement. As a result of the tremendous need to use English

internationally in variety of fields, it becomes inevitable to provide intensive courses for

English language learning. Today, this duty is fulfilled through English preparatory

programs at most of the universities.

23

The major goal of intensive instruction at preparatory schools is near native oral

command of a language by adult learners. Apart from this, it is also developed for a

variety of purposes and audiences such as:

1. Intensive courses that stress specific isolated skills (listening, speaking, reading,

and writing) or that address a particular level (elementary, intermediate, and

advanced).

2. Intensive courses for language teachers who utilize them as a means of review or

for purposes of continuous education.

3. Intensive courses for specific groups: a) for engineers; c) for business and

industry and so on.

4. Intensive study on the high school level (Benseler and Schulz, 1978).

2.8.1. The Objectives of English Preparatory Program

The main objectives of English Preparatory Program (EPP) can be listed as (Toker,

1999):

• To teach the students how to read and understand so they can easily follow their

courses,

• To learn the necessary writing skills so they will be able to take notes and write

reports,

• To be able to listen and speak in order to follow their lectures,

• To be able to ask questions to their lecturers when they go to their departments.

Preparatory education serves multiple purposes considering the goals it sets for

students. It not only helps students to acquire efficiency in four basic skills of language,

but prepares them for the classes in their departments, as well. In this sense, EPP takes a

facilitator role to make way for a smooth transition to first-year as a next step.

2.8.2. The Structure of English Preparatory Program in ELT Department

English Preparatory Program constitutes a core unit of ELT department as in

many other faculties at colleges. Basically, the program provides intensive English for

newcomers whose background in English is found to be unsatisfactory through English

24

Proficiency Examination. Within the scope of the program, students are trained in four

basic language skills - reading, writing, listening and speaking – as well as linguistic

components – vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. - At the end of the preparatory

year, those students are admitted to freshman class and allowed to go on their university

study. If students prove their proficiency in English on the examination, they have a

right to make a direct entry into first-year.

Preparatory education aims to provide students with many advantages. As Turhan

(2007) suggests, in addition to effective English language learning skills, students have

a chance to engage in some additional academic skills such as conducting research,

making presentations, listening to lectures and taking notes, and writing academic

papers before starting to deal with difficult subjects of coming years. Therefore; the

prep program is considered to form both academic and professional bases students may

resort during their further studies or career.

2.9. Foreign Language Proficiency

Theorists, researchers and practitioners have been seeking the most satisfactory

answer to the question how they can help learners of foreign language become as

proficient as possible in target language since the early beginning of the studies on

language teaching and learning. The answers suggested on this question have been used

as the major components of organization and implication of the language teaching

activities (Omaggio, 1986).

In advance of conducting their studies on the ways how to make the highest

language proficiency achievable in learning and teaching settings, theorists, researchers

and practitioners tried to reach the most appropriate definition of the foreign language

proficiency and they presented some definitions which describe language proficiency

“as a somewhat idealized level of competence and performance, attainable by experts

through extensive instructions” (Omaggio, 1986, p.2); “as the ability and/or internalized

knowledge that enables a person to function communicatively in a foreign language”

(Sasaki, 1996, p.12); or as defined by Bialystok (2001) “the ability to function in a

situation that is defined by specific cognitive and linguistic demands, to a level of

performance indicated by either objective criteria or normative standards (p.18).

25

As can be understood from the definitions given above, foreign language

proficiency may be defined in various ways. The reason for the variability of the

definitions of language proficiency is considered to stem from the different views on it

and the proficiency levels expected from the learners with regard to for what purpose,

where and how the language will be used. In other words, the function, content, context

and the expected accuracy level of the foreign language may be determinants of what is

thought about foreign language proficiency.

2.9.1. Views on Foreign Language Proficiency

The notion of foreign language proficiency and how to give a way to proficiency

in foreign language classrooms has been a crucial issue in ELT studies. Different ideas

have been introduced by the researchers. Their views on foreign language proficiency

show differences in accordance with which aspects of language they lay weight on.

Some of the views focus on the importance of structural aspects of language while the

others emphasize the communicative function of it. In recent years, studies on foreign

language and foreign language proficiency or instruction have concentrated their

attention on the development of verbal skills (Omaggio, 1986).

It is still possible to encounter differences in unfolding the nature of language

proficiency within even the ideas that regard foreign language proficiency as

communicative language ability in spite of the common inclination to approach

language learning in terms of communicative goals. In this sense, the American Council

of the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) presenting the different approaches

from several prominent foreign language researchers and practitioners sets an example

for the studies on foreign language proficiency (Birdsong, 1989; Galloway, 1987;

Omaggio, 1986; Sasaki, 1996). ACTFL guidelines represent a hierarchy of global

characterizations of integrated performance in speaking, listening, reading and writing

(Sasaki, 1996). How learners and acquirers of second languages function along the

whole range of possible levels of competence is described through the explanations of

proficiency in these guidelines.

The guidelines progressive in nature can be utilized in the course of organizing

instruction. Getting to know what will be learnt at the next level can help foreign

26

language teachers arrange materials and decide on the activities that will enable learners

to achieve the goals identified at the beginning of the instructional process. It can be

possible to know what to teach, when, and what students have to know in order to

perform at a given level of competence (Omaggio, 1986).

The traditional view on proficiency is presented by some researchers as a

multiple-dimensional four-skill matrix (Carroll, 1965; Gardner & Lambert, 1965; Lado,

1961). This matrix involves four representative language proficiency skills (speaking,

listening, reading and writing) and their various linguistic components (phonology,

morphology, syntax and lexicon) (Sasaki, 1996, p.13). From this point of view,

language proficiency is divisible and different skills of language can develop

independently from the others at the different levels.

This study adopts a four-skill matrix approach to language proficiency and it

therefore seeks an answer to whether all four representative language proficiency skills

as well as university adaptation are affected by English preparatory program.

27

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1. Introduction

This chapter elucidates the methodological approach followed in the conduct of

the research. It deals primarily with the description of research design and the

participants involved in the study. Then, it respectively presents the instruments used to

obtain the data and the explanation of the procedures utilized for data collection and

analysis.

3.2. Research Design

The design of the study is descriptive in nature since it describes an existing

situation without making any change on it. As Best & Kahn (2006, p.118) define it “a

descriptive study is concerned with conditions or relationships that exist, opinions that

are held, processes that are going on, effects that are evident, or trends that are

developing.” Within its own context, the purpose of this study is to identify the possible

transitional effects of a one-year preparatory program on language proficiency and

university adjustment of first-year ELT students. In more explicit terms, it aims to

investigate to what extent the freshmen stepping directly into the first year and those

already taking prep education differ from each other in terms of experiences they live

regarding the abovementioned aspects. In addition, the students’ perceptions of the role

of preparatory program in language proficiency and college adaptation is also the

concern of this study.

With regard to the data collection process, the study adopts a combination of

qualitative and quantitative methods. Berg (2007) emphasizes the difference between

qualitative and quantitative approaches in a way that qualitative research is based on the

meanings, concepts, definitions, characteristics, metaphors, symbols, and descriptions

of things. On the other hand, quantitative research deals with counts and measures of

things. In this study, the quantitative data were gathered through two separate

questionnaires measuring particular variables. In order to obtain further data and gain a

detailed account of the questionnaire results, interviews were conducted with some

28

members of the whole population sample and the results were analyzed qualitatively. As

Patton (2002) suggests, through the use of qualitative method it was intended to insert

depth and detail in the study where statistical results were also presented by means of

quantitative analyses.

3.3. Participants

In total 150 first-year students in ELT department at Çukurova University

participated in the study. The selection of the participants was done using purposive

sampling strategy which gives researchers an opportunity to build up a sample that is

satisfactory to their specific needs (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007). Since the main

concern of this study was to seek the possible differences in transitional experiences

regarding students’ language proficiency and college adjustment process as a result of

taking one-year prep education, half of the entire sample size consisted of the freshmen

who had already received prep education in the academic year of 2008-2009. The

remaining 75 participants were those exempted from the prep class and admitted to

first-year.

The former participant group refers to the students who took a language

proficiency examination when they first entered the university and then required to

attend preparatory class due to the low score they had. Throughout their prep training,

the students took twenty-four hours of English per week, each six hours of which were

devoted to one basic language skill: Reading, Writing, Listening & Speaking, and

Grammar. The latter group of participants represent the students making a direct

transition from high school to first year of university education without the need for

attending prep class because of the success they achieved in language proficiency test.

It should be also stated in this section that throughout the study the students who

took preparatory education in the academic year of 2008-2009 and then stepped into the

first year were referred to as “Group A”. On the other hand, the participants exempted

from preparatory program and making a direct transition to the first year were named as

“Group B”.

29

3.4. Instrumentation

The instruments employed in this research for data collection involve Language

Proficiency Questionnaire, Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire and interview

protocols.

3.4.1. Questionnaires

Questionnaires are one of the widely used strategies of researchers for gathering

useful data. As Ruane (2005) states, despite not permitting as much personal touch as

interview does, the self-sufficiency of questionnaire enables it to become a favourable

data collection instrument.

In the present study, Language Proficiency and Student Adaptation to College

Questionnaires constitute the primary means of data collection process. They both come

from the type of self-administered questionnaire completed in the presence of the

researcher (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007) and consist of closed-ended, namely

fixed-choice, questions that require the participants to decide on a range of responses

provided beforehand. (Singleton & Straits, 1998).

3.4.1.1. Language Proficiency Questionnaire

The Language Proficiency Questionnaire (LPQ) is made up of four subscales,

each of which contains items asking about one particular English language ability. The

items were adapted and modified from Weir & Roberts (1994). These categorical

variables were measured based on a four-point Likert-type scale, ranging from “a lot of

difficulty”, “some difficulty”, “little difficulty” to “no difficulty”. The questionnaire

was generated in approximately its original form with some modification according to

the context of the study. It was implemented both at the beginning and end of the

research to determine if there were possible changes on the language proficiency level

of the participant groups.

The first section of the tool involves 11 items to determine how much difficulty

the participants have in listening to and understanding spoken English. In the next part

of the questionnaire, they are provided with 7 items to elicit their troubles in relation to

30

reading and summarizing written material. Writing ability, the third section, is

composed of 12 variables to investigate to what extent writing in English is hard for the

participants. The last part consisting of 10 items aims to determine the competency of

the participants in speaking English. The item intervals of each subscale are illustrated

as follows:

Table 3.1. Item Intervals of the Subscales in Language Proficiency Questionnaire

3.4.1.2. Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ), developed by Baker &

Siryk (1999), was firstly conducted in the fifth week of 2009-2010 academic year to

find out to what extent first-year students adapted to the university life and if there was

any difference between the students getting prep education and those who did not

concerning college adjustment. The same tool was administered at the end of the study

again to identify whether the participant groups showed any alteration in terms of the

same aspect.

The questionnaire is composed of 67 self-rating items and each item on the

SACQ involves a statement to which participants responded using a nine-point scale

ranging from “applies very closely to me” on the left to “doesn’t apply to me at all” on

the right. They were required to indicate the degree to which the statement applied to

them at the time they completed the instrument. The possible total score, which can be

obtained from SACQ, changes between 67 and 603. High scores indicate a better level

of adjustment to university. However; since a high number of the participants did not

give any response to the item 26 (i.e. I enjoy living in a college dormitory) and item 33

(i.e. I am getting along very well with my roommates at college), they were excluded

Subscale Names Item Numbers

Listening Ability 1-11 items

Reading Ability 12-18 items

Writing Ability 19-30 items

Speaking Ability 31-40 items

31

from the analysis of the data. Therefore, the full scale score attained from the

questionnaire changed between 65 and 585.

Before the calculation, 30 items of the questionnaire were also reversed as they were

negatively worded.

The instrument at issue contains four subscales measuring domains of academic,

social, personal, and institutional (attachment) adjustment. The academic adjustment

subscale consists of 24 items intended to measure how successful a student is at getting

through educational demands concerning the college experience. The second subscale,

social adjustment, has 20 items that are considered to address interpersonal-societal

demands of college. The personal adaptation subscale comprises 15 items and it is

structured to determine how the students feel both psychologically and physically. The

last subscale, institutional (attachment) adjustment, contains 15 items eight of which

merely belong to this category while the rest seven items overlap with social subscale.

The items in general are designed to assess the students’ satisfaction with the college

experience and the college itself. The four subscales each of which covers specific items

respectively are presented with the item numbers in the table below:

Table 3.2. Names of Subscales in Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire with

Their Item Numbers

Subscale Names Item Numbers

Academic Adjustment

3, 5, 6, 10, 13, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29,

32, 36, 39, 41, 43, 44, 50, 52, 54, 58, 62,

66.

Social Adjustment

1, 4, 8, 9, 14, 16, 18, 22, 26, 30, 33, 37,

42, 46, 48, 51, 56, 57, 63, 65.

Personal/Emotional Adjustment

2, 7, 11, 12, 20, 24, 28, 31, 35, 38, 40, 45,

49, 55, 64.

Institutional (Attachment) Adjustment

1, 4, 15, 16, 34, 42, 47, 53, 56, 57, 59, 60,

61, 65, 67.

The reliabilities of the SACQ are reported in .92 to .95 ranges, with Cronbach's

alphas for the four constituent domains ranging from .81 to .90 for academic

32

adjustment, .83 to .91 for social adjustment, .77 to .86 for personal adjustment, and .85

to .91 for institutional attachment (Baker & Siryk, 1999).

3.4.1.3. Piloting of the Questionnaires

Piloting instruments before applying them in final data collection has great

importance to all methods (Weir & Roberts, 1994). According to Singleton and Straits

(1998, p.266), “the basic reason of conducting a pretest is to determine whether the

instrument serves the purposes for which it was designed or whether further revision is

needed.”

In this study, piloting stage was undertaken to identify any possible problem

concerning the design of the questionnaires. In particular, via the pilot study, it was

aimed to check the clarity and comprehensiveness of the items. The questionnaires were

piloted with 27 ELT freshmen students chosen in accordance with convenience

sampling strategy. On the basis of the feedback gained through the participants’ request

for the explanation of a bit complexity in wording, some revisions were made. The

vocabulary items too difficult to understand were replaced with more familiar ones.

3.4.2. Interviews

Ruane (2005, p.148) clears up interview as “a purposeful conversation wherein

the interviewer has a set research agenda – i.e., key points or questions that must be

addressed.” What it is meant specifically by the purposeful conversation here is to

gather detailed information from the participants.

According to Bogdan and Biklen (2007), interviews can be utilized in two

different ways. They may constitute the prominent component of data collection or they

may be used in connection with other forms of data such as participant observation or

questionnaire. Moreover, Bogdan and Biklen (2007) state that in all these

circumstances, the interview provides the researcher with descriptive data as a way of

gaining insights on how subjects understand their world. In this present study, the

participants were asked questions with the intention of finding out how they perceived

prep education in terms of college adjustment and language proficiency. Additionally,

33

the interview following the questionnaires was employed to clarify and complete

possible gaps regarding the filled-in questionnaires.

In choosing who was to be interviewed the age, gender, social and cultural

backgrounds of the participants were not taken into consideration. 20 participants were

selected from the entire participant group using purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002),

which lays stress on sampling for information-rich cases. While 10 of the interviewees

consisted of those having taken prep education in previous academic year, the other half

represents the ones who were exempted from it. The application type of the interview

was based on that of semi-structured interview comprising open-ended questions. As

McDonough and McDonough (2004) indicates within an overall structured framework,

the semi-structured nature of the interview enables more flexibility like changing the

sequence of questions or asking extensive follow-up questions depending on responses.

Taking the advantage of extending questions in semi-structured interview style helped

the present research gain details about participants’ transitional experiences in stepping

into the first-year with or without attending one-year preparatory class and their

perceptions of the program’s effectiveness in foreign language proficiency as well as

school adjustment.

3.5. Data Collection Procedure

Following the piloting stage, the data was first collected through questionnaires in

the 5th week of the fall semester to find out the students’ both college adaptation and

language proficiency levels. Before receiving the questionnaires, the participants were

provided with a brief explanation about the purpose and scope of the study. The same

questionnaires were reapplied to the same participants in the 12th week of the spring

semester, that is, toward the end of 2009-2010 academic year to check up on whether

they showed any change in the rate of their school adjustment and language

competency.

In addition to the questionnaires, interviews made contribution to the data

collection process, as well. The central purpose of the interviews, which were held at

the end of the second semester, was to engage in face-to-face dialogue with a group of

participants to elicit their perceptions of transitional experiences and the role of

34

preparatory education in the above-mentioned independent variables of the relevant

research. The interviews were semi-structured with open-ended questions allowing for

explicit expression of perspectives and experiences. They lasted from fifteen to twenty

minutes and all were recorded.

3.6. Data Analysis

“An essential part of research is analyzing the collected data as a means of

constructing concepts, testing hypotheses, explaining relationships, calculating

measurements, and making forecasts” (Cargan, 2007, p.259). In this study; the analysis

of the data, gathered by way of the questionnaires and the interviews, was performed

making use of both qualitative and quantitative analysis techniques. The quantitative

data provided by the questionnaires were analyzed grounding on SPSS 15.0 (Statistical

Package for Social Sciences) computer program. Since the instrument used for

collecting quantitative data was a Likert-type scale, every response given by the

participants to each item was entered into the program with numeric values.

With respect to the analysis of the Language Proficiency Questionnaire,

descriptive statistics was used and as a result, descriptive information was obtained

comprising the frequencies and percentages of each variable on the questionnaire. Later

on, the results were converted into tables and what the tables illustrated was written out.

In order to check if there was any statistically significant difference between the pre-

questionnaire scores of Group A and Group B in terms of language proficiency, an

independent-samples t-test was used. As Pallant (2005) suggests this type of t-test is

utilized when it is necessary to compare the mean score on some continuous variable for

two different groups of participants. The table below shows the output generated from

the t-test procedure:

35

Table 3.3. Independent Sample t-Test Results of Language Proficiency Questionnaire

As it is seen from the table, t value of total score and each subscale ranges from

0,70 to 1,25. Since this value is above the required cut-off (p>0,05), we can conclude

that there is not a statistically significant difference between the mean language

proficiency scores of Group A and Group B. Being based upon the statistical closeness

between the pre- questionnaire scores of both groups, it was found appropriate to make

the analysis of the questionnaire using mixed between-within subjects ANOVA. A

mixed between-within subjects analysis of variance allows the researcher to measure

different subjects at different points of time or under different situations (Pallant, 2005).

In other words, it was conducted to test for differences between two or more

independent groups while exposing participants to repeated measures. In this study;

while Group A and Group B refer to between-subject variable or independent groups,

the reapplication of the questionnaire as pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire comes

to mean within-subjects variable or repeated measures. Through this analysis technique,

it was aimed to reveal whether there was a significant difference in the way that Group

A and Group B rated their language proficiency at the beginning and end of the first

year.

As it was applied for the LPQ, the independent-samples t-test was also carried out

for the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire to test whether the pre-

questionnaire scores of Group A and Group B significantly differed from each other in

Subscales Type of

Group

N

Mean

Std. Dev.

F

df

t

p

Listening

Group A 75 30,28 8,45 ,055 148 1,250 ,213

Group B 75 28,57 8,26

Reading

Group A 75 20,60 5,29 ,233 148 ,714 ,477

Group B 75 20,00 4,99

Writing

Group A 75 35,55 9,22 ,440 148 1,165 ,246

Group B 75 33,72 9,96

Speaking

Group A 75 26,11 7,59 ,019 148 ,706 ,481

Group B 75 25,23 7,66

TOTAL

Group A 75 112,53 30,37 ,011 148 1,005 ,317

Group B 75 107,52 30,71

36

terms of university adjustment. The outcome obtained from the use of t-test is provided

in the following table:

Table 3.4. Independent Sample t-Test Results of Student Adaptation to College

Questionnaire

When looked into the table, it is clearly understood that t value of total score and

each subscale ranges from 3,98 to 36,65. Considering that this value is less than the

required cut-off (p<0,05), we can infer that there is a statistically significant difference

between the mean university adaptation scores of Group A and Group B. Owing to this

difference, the scores on the pre-questionnaire were treated as covariate and in an effort

to find out if the post-questionnaire scores of Group A and Group B differred from each

other, ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) technique was used for the analysis.

According to Field (2006), it is possible to encounter unmeasured variables that may

influence the dependent variable and in such cases, so as to remove the effect of these

variables, ANCOVA can be employed and via this procedure, the likelihood of

detecting a significant difference between participant groups increases. In this study, the

pre-questionnaire scores of both groups were controlled for the post-questionnaire and it

was intended to reveal whether the state of being a first year student with or without

taking preparatory education had any effect on university adjustment.

As for the qualitative data gathered through interviews, it was analyzed with the

help of content analysis. Singleton and Straits (1998, p.383) define content analysis as

“a set of methods for analyzing the total content of a communication rather than just a

Subscales Type of

Group

N

Mean

Std. Dev.

F

df

t

p

Academic

Group A 75 118,87 10,37 9,449 148 3,987 ,000

Group B 75 110,81 14,08

Social

Group A 75 124,44 15,60 4,724 148 23,453 ,000

Group B 75 73,32 10,61

Personal

Group A 75 87,72 18,78 ,019 148 6,612 ,000

Group B 75 67,75 18,21

Institutional

Group A 75 107,72 10,26 58,843 148 32,552 ,000

Group B 75 67,75 2,79

TOTAL

Group A 75 438,75 20,03 ,086 148 36,652 ,000

Group B 75 319,63 19,77

37

single technique”. They put forward that the rationale behind content analysis is to

decrease the whole content of a document to a group of categories which symbolize

what the research matters to some extent. In the relevant study, the responses emerging

more than one time were identified as themes and these themes were organized into

certain categories for two of total four interview questions since they have sub-units

within themselves. For the remaining two questions, no categorization was applied; the

recurrent answers were merely given under the head of “theme” again.

In this chapter the research design, participants, instrumentation of the study and

the pilot administration of the questionnaires were presented. Following this, the data

collection procedure and the techniques used for analyzing the data were explained. In

the next chapter, the results acquired from both qualitative and quantitative data

collection processes will be given in details in a tabulated form.

38

CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1. Introduction

This chapter of the study presents the analysis of the data gathered from

questionnaires and interviews. The questionnaires used in the study were analyzed with

the help of the computer program SPSS 15.0 (Statistical Package for Social Sciences).

The responses given by the participants during the interview sessions were analyzed

qualitatively through content analysis and the frequency rates of the recurring themes

were calculated, as well.

Prior to the presentation of the results, it is important to remind herein that the

students who took preparatory education in the academic year of 2008-2009 and then

moved to the first year were referred to as “Group A”. On the other hand, the

participants exempted from preparatory program and making a direct transition to the

first year were named as “Group B”.

4.2. Findings from the Questionnaires

4.2.1. Findings from the Language Proficiency Questionnaire

The analysis of the LPQ was realized by means of descriptive statistics at first.

Later on, a mixed between-within subjects ANOVA was run in accordance with the

results gained from the independent t-test as it was stated in the methodology chapter of

the research above.

4.2.1.1. Descriptive Results

This section presents the frequencies and percentages that arose out of the self-

assessment of the participants concerning their language proficiency on the pre-

questionnaire and post-questionnaire.

39

Table 4.1. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Listening Subscale for

Group A

GROUP A-LISTENING

A Lot of

Difficult

y

Some

Difficulty

Little

Difficult

y

No

Difficult

y

Total

Pre

item 1 N 4 22 40 9 75

% 5,3 29,3 53,3 12,0 100

item 2 N 5 26 36 8 75

% 6,7 34,7 48,0 10,7 100

item 3 N 7 33 23 12 75

% 9,3 44,0 30,7 16,0 100

item 4 N 2 15 33 25 75

% 2,7 20,0 44,0 33,3 100

item 5 N 6 21 35 13 75

% 8,0 28,0 46,7 17,3 100

item 6 N 2 7 23 43 75

% 2,7 9,3 30,7 57,3 100

item 7 N 6 24 36 9 75

% 8,0 32,0 48,0 12,0 100

item 8 N 6 23 31 15 75

% 8,0 30,7 41,3 20,0 100

item 9 N 10 33 24 8 75

% 13,3 44,0 32,0 10,7 100

item 10 N 11 34 23 7 75

% 14,7 45,3 30,7 9,3 100

item 11 N 4 14 32 25 75

% 5,3 18,7 42,7 33,3 100

Total N 63 252 336 174 825

% 84 336 448,1 231,9 1100

40

Table 4.1. (Continuation)

Post

item 1 N 3 20 38 14 75

% 4,0 26,7 50,7 18,7 100

item 2 N 3 23 33 16 75

% 4,0 30,7 44,0 21,3 100

item 3 N 4 30 27 14 75

% 5,3 40,0 36,0 18,7 100

item 4 N 1 14 31 29 75

% 1,3 18,7 41,3 38,7 100

item 5 N 2 17 38 18 75

% 2,7 22,7 50,7 24,0 100

item 6 N 2 6 25 42 75

% 2,7 8,0 33,3 56,0 100

item 7 N 0 26 39 10 75

% 0 34,7 52,0 13,3 100

item 8 N 3 19 35 18 75

% 4,0 25,3 46,7 24,0 100

item 9 N 6 30 27 12 75

% 8,0 40,0 36,0 16,0 100

item 10 N 9 29 25 12 75

% 12,0 38,7 33,3 16,0 100

item 11 N 3 12 28 32 75

% 4,0 16,0 37,3 42,7 100

Total N 36 226 346 217 825

% 48 301,4 461,3 289,3 1100

41

Table 4.2. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Listening Subscale for

Group B

GROUP B-LISTENING

A Lot of

Difficult

y

Some

Difficulty

Little

Difficult

y

No

Difficult

y

Total

Pre

item 1 N 13 38 22 2 75

% 17,3 50,7 29,3 2,7 100

item 2 N 7 18 45 5 75

% 9,3 24,0 60,0 6,7 100

item 3 N 10 36 21 8 75

% 13,3 48,0 28,0 10,7 100

item 4 N 3 16 36 20 75

% 4,0 21,3 48,0 26,7 100

item 5 N 4 39 20 12 75

% 5,3 52,0 26,7 16,0 100

item 6 N 3 8 24 40 75

% 4,0 10,7 32,0 53,3 100

item 7 N 6 36 25 8 75

% 8,0 48,0 33,3 10,7 100

item 8 N 3 32 27 13 75

% 4,0 42,7 36,0 17,3 100

item 9 N 13 35 20 7 75

% 17,3 46,7 26,7 9,3 100

item 10 N 10 38 25 2 75

% 13,3 50,7 33,3 2,7 100

item 11 N 7 17 29 22 75

% 9,3 22,7 38,7 29,3 100

Total N 79 313 294 139 825

% 105,1 417,5 392 185,4 1100

42

Table 4.1 and 4.2 above show respectively the results that were obtained from

Group A and Group B students’ rating their language competency in terms of

“listening”. The “listening” subscale is made up of eleven items: understanding spoken

description and narrative (Item 1), understanding spoken instructions (Item 2),

understanding informal language (Item 3), understanding what’s being talked about

(Item 4), recognising individual words in what is being said (Item 5), recognising where

Table 4.2. (Continuation)

Post

item 1 N 8 24 36 7 75

% 10,7 32,0 48,0 9,3 100

item 2 N 4 21 39 11 75

% 5,3 28,0 52,0 14,7 100

item 3 N 6 31 25 13 75

% 8,0 41,3 33,3 17,3 100

item 4 N 1 12 28 34 75

% 1,3 16,0 37,3 45,3 100

item 5 N 3 33 22 17 75

% 4,0 44,0 29,3 22,7 100

item 6 N 0 5 29 41 75

% 0 6,7 38,7 54,7 100

item 7 N 4 29 28 14 75

% 5,3 38,7 37,3 18,7 100

item 8 N 1 26 29 19 75

% 1,3 34,7 38,7 25,3 100

item 9 N 6 31 27 11 75

% 8,0 41,3 36,0 14,7 100

item 10 N 4 27 35 9 75

% 5,3 36,0 46,7 12,0 100

item 11 N 5 15 31 24 75

% 6,7 20,0 41,3 32,0 100

Total N 42 254 329 200 825

% 60,0 338,7 438,6 266,7 1100

43

sentences end and begin (Item 6), understanding what the speaker is saying and linking

this to what he has said earlier (Item 7), recognising what is important and worth noting

(Item 8), being able to write down quickly and clearly (Item 9), thinking of and using

suitable abbreviation (Item 10), and organising the notes taken down to understand them

when reading later (Item 11).

In the light of the figures shown for Item 1 in Table 1.2, it is clearly seen that

more than half of the students in Group A (53,3%) had ‘little difficulty’ in

understanding spoken description and narrative at the beginning of the study. In the

post-questionnaire, they did not display a significant difference and centered upon the

same alternative of ‘little difficulty’ with roughly the same proportion (50,7%). As for

Group B, a large number of the participants (38) indicated that they had ‘some

difficulty’ concerning spoken description and narrative. However; this number

decreased at the end of the study and 36 of total 75 responses for item 1 gathered around

the title of ‘little difficulty’.

Item 2, which aims to measure how difficult understanding spoken instructions is

for the participants, reveals in the pre-questionnaire that most of the students in Group

A (48,0%) found it ‘little difficult.’ In the post-questionnaire, the number of those who

preferred ‘little difficulty’ went down relatively (44,0%) whereas that of the participants

being in the belief that there was ‘no difficulty’ in perceiving spoken instructions

doubled and eventually became 16. Similarly, without making a significant change on

their choice after the pre-questionnaire (60,0%), an overwhelming majority of the

students in Group B (52,0%) pointed out in the post-questionnaire that it was ‘little

difficult’ to pick out the instructions given verbally.

As can be concluded from the results above, there is an agreement between Group

A and Group B with regard to Item 3. Because not only at the beginning of the term but

also at the end of it, a good number of the students in both groups claimed that they had

‘some difficulty’ in understanding informal language. However; it should be also stated

that the percentages of the students in Group A indicating their thoughts on the same

item as ‘some difficulty’ (40,0%) and ‘little difficulty’ (36,0%) were approximate to

each other in the post-questionnaire.

44

According to the percentages arising out of the responses given to Item 4 by the

students in Group A, it can be revealed that the difficulty they experienced in

understanding what is being talked varied between ‘little’ and ‘no difficulty.’ In the pre-

questionnaire, 33 students chose ‘little difficulty’ while 25 of them preferred ‘no

difficulty.’ The frequency distributions of the two options were very close to each other

in the post-questionnaire, that is, 31 students supported the idea that it was ‘little

difficult’ to comprehend the thing which is being uttered whereas 29 students thought

that it was not hard at all. As for Group B, in the beginning, 48,0% of the students

favored it as ‘little difficult.’ In the end, with almost the same percentage but centering

on the different alternative, they expressed that they had ‘no difficulty’ regarding the

comprehension of what is being said.

The Item 5 seeks the level of difficulty the students encountered in the face of

recognising individual words in what is being said. As Table 4.1 illustrates, a vast

majority of the freshmen in Group A (46,7% à 50,7%) thought in both

implementations that it was not completely easy to distinguish an individual word in

oral expressions; they experienced ‘little challenge’ while listening. In comparison with

Group A, more than half of the participants of Group B (52,0%) noted that they had not

little but ‘some difficulty’ about the same issue. In the post-questionnaire, they largely

supported the relevant item under the same title but with a less rate (44,0%).

When the figures that belong to Item 6 are analyzed, it can be understood that the

frequency distributions of four alternatives did not show a remarkable change in the

second implementation of the questionnaire for the first-year students in Group A. As in

the beginning, only 2 of the total participants indicated in the post-questionnaire that

recognising where sentences end and begin involved ‘a lot of difficulty’ and for a great

number of the participants again (56,0%) it did not seem to be difficult at all. As for

Group B, none of the students made a mention of having a lot of difficulty in

distinguishing the beginning and end of utterances in the post-questionnaire whereas 3

of them addressed ‘much difficulty’ in the first implementation. Additionally, in both

administrations of the questionnaire, most of the freshmen of Group B (53,3% à

54,7%) closed a deal on the idea that there was ‘no complexity’ in achieving this.

45

It is clear from the numeral information given for Item 7 in Table 1.2 that

according to a good many of the students in Group A (48,0%) understanding what the

speaker is saying and linking this to what he has said earlier was ‘somewhat difficult.’

In the post- questionnaire, they kept the same view with a bit higher percentage (52,0%)

and the number of those who experienced ‘a lot of difficulty’ fell from 7 to none.

Compared to the other group participants, 36 participants of Group B were at first in the

belief that while listening, understanding the thing the speaker is saying and the

connection he makes between his sentences was not so easy; it could create ‘some

difficulty.’ However; towards the end of the study, they changed their mind and reached

an approximately the same rate under the heads of ‘some difficulty’ (38,7%) and ‘little

difficulty’ (37,3%).

When looked into the results attained from Table 1.2, it can be concluded that

most of the students in Group A come together for Item 8 at the level of ‘little

difficulty.’ During both the pre (41,3%) and post (46.7%) questionnaires they claimed

that recognising what is important and worth noting in the course of listening was not

entirely easy. From the perspectives of the students in Group B, identifying and taking

down the important parts of what is being said was not as hard as before; it was ‘a bit

difficult’ for them. This comes from the fact that their opinion changed from ‘some

difficulty’ (42,7%) to ‘little difficulty’ (38,7%) in the end.

Item 9 aims to reveal to what extent the students are able to write down quickly

and clearly. 33 freshmen of Group A claimed that they managed this with ‘some

difficulty’ in the beginning, and as obvious from the figures, at the end of the study the

difficulty level did not undergo a significant change since 30 of them still responded to

this item using the same alternative. Similarly, pertaining to the issue of note-taking

during listening, 46,7% of the students in Group B indicated that it caused ‘some

difficulty’ for them. In the post- questionnaire, while this ratio fell to 41,3%, the

proportion of ‘little difficulty’ option increased noticeably from 26,7% to 36,0%.

The responses given to Item 10 by the participants of Group A presented that

thinking of and using suitable abbreviation was not so easy for many of them (45,3%).

However; at the end of the term, it did not appear to be as difficult as before due to the

fact that there was not a huge rational difference between ‘some difficulty’ (38,7%) and

46

‘little difficulty’ (33,3%) alternatives. With regard to the same item, the students in

Group B experienced an important transition from the level of ‘some difficulty’ (50,7%)

to ‘little difficulty’ (46,7%). In this respect, it can be stated that Group B made a better

process than Group A.

As a last item of the listening section, Item 11 seeks how difficult to organize the

notes the students take down so that they can understand them when they read later. In

Group A, 32 participants encountered ‘some difficulty’ in the beginning and then the

same number of the students (32) pointed out in the post-questionnaire that it did not

mean any difficulty for them. As for Group B, the level of difficulty did not change a

lot, that is, in the first implementation while 38,7% of them found it ‘a bit difficult’, in

the second phase 41,3% of the students still regarded it as ‘a little hard.’

Subsequent to the listening domain, how Group A and Group B participants

responded to the statements involved in “reading” section is numerically presented in

Table 4.3 and 4.4. The “reading” subscale consists of seven items: reading carefully to

understand all the information in a text (Item 12), reading to get the main information

from a text (Item 13), search reading to get information specifically required for

assignments (Item 14), critical reading to establish and evaluate the author’s position on

a particular topic (Item 15), reading quickly (Item 16), making notes from textbooks

(Item 17), and reading texts where the subject matter is very complicated (Item 18).

47

Table 4.3. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Reading Subscale for Group A

GROUP A-READING

A Lot of

Difficulty

Some

Difficulty

Little

Difficulty

No

Difficulty

Total

Pre

item 12 N 2 12 27 34 75

% 2,7 16,0 36,0 45,3 100

item 13 N 4 11 25 35 75

% 5,3 14,7 33,3 46,7 100

item 14 N 5 28 32 10 75

% 6,7 37,3 42,7 13,3 100

item 15 N 3 23 34 15 75

% 4,0 30,7 45,3 20,0 100

item 16 N 6 14 29 26 75

% 8,0 18,7 38,7 34,7 100

item 17 N 0 8 38 29 75

% 0 10,7 50,7 38,7 100

item 18 N 7 35 27 6 75

% 9,3 46,7 36,0 8,0 100

Total N 27 131 212 155 525

% 36 174,8 282,7 206,7 700

Post

item 12 N 2 9 22 42 75

% 2,7 12,0 29,3 56,0 100

item 13 N 1 5 26 43 75

% 1,3 6,7 34,7 57,3 100

item 14 N 3 26 29 17 75

% 4,0 34,7 38,7 22,7 100

item 15 N 2 18 38 17 75

% 2,7 24,0 50,7 22,7 100

item 16 N 2 12 27 34 75

% 2,7 16,0 36,0 45,3 100

item 17 N 1 5 36 33 75

% 1,3 6,7 48,0 44,0 100

item 18 N 4 28 34 9 75

% 5,3 37,3 45,3 12,0 100

Total N 15 103 212 195 525

% 20 137,4 282,7 260 700

48

Table 4.4. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Reading Subscale for Group B

GROUP B-READING A Lot of Difficult

y

Some Difficulty

Little Difficult

y

No Difficult

y

Total

Pre

item 12

N 1 14 26 34 75

% 1,3 18,7 34,7 45,3 100 item 13

N 2 9 35 29 75

% 2,7 12,0 46,7 38,7 100 item 14

N 3 36 30 6 75

% 4,0 48,0 40,0 8,0 100 item 15

N 5 37 29 4 75

% 6,7 49,3 38,7 5,3 100 item 16

N 2 15 34 24 75

% 2,7 20,0 45,3 32,0 100 item 17

N 2 13 35 25 75

% 2,7 17,3 46,7 33,3 100 item 18

N 6 39 22 8 75

% 8,0 52,0 29,3 10,7 100 Total N 21 163 211 130 525

% 28,1 217,3 281,4 173,3 700

Post

item 12

N 1 11 24 39 75

% 1,3 14,7 32,0 52,0 100 item 13

N 1 5 31 38 75

% 1,3 6,7 41,3 50,7 100 item 14

N 2 32 36 5 75

% 2,7 42,7 48,0 6,7 100 item 15

N 3 30 35 7 75

% 4,0 40,0 46,7 9,3 100 item 16

N 1 12 33 29 75

% 1,3 16,0 44,0 38,7 100 item 17

N 2 11 33 29 75

% 2,7 14,7 44,0 38,7 100 item 18

N 5 28 36 6 75

% 6,7 37,3 48,0 8,0 100 Total N 15 129 228 153 525

% 20 172 304 204 700

49

Item 12, the first statement taking place in the reading scale, is based on the

ability of reading carefully to understand all the information in a text. In accordance

with the figures presented in the table above, it appears that there is an overall

agreement among participants of Group A. In the pre-questionnaire, 34 of them thought

that they suffered ‘no difficulty’ in reading a text carefully to make it out and

increasingly 42 students of the same group supported this item with ‘no difficulty’

alternative again in the end. In the same manner, a high percentage of the participants in

Group B (45,3% à 52,0%) did not express any trouble with the relevant item during

both the pre and post questionnaires.

The numeral data provided for Item 13 shows that almost half of the students in

Group B (46,7%) at first had the opinion that reading to get the main information from a

text was ‘a bit arduous’ task. But, in the post-questionnaire their opinion changed and

38 of them stepped into the idea that it did not contain any complexity. On the other

hand, the views of the freshmen in Group A did not alter extremely after the first

application of the questionnaire; more than half of them (43) kept their belief in ‘no

difficulty’ option regarding Item 13.

By taking the findings of Item 14 obtained from Table 4.3 into account, we can

obviously see that the frequency distributions of ‘some difficulty’ (28) and ‘little

difficulty’ (32) responses given by the participants of Group A were very close to each

other in the beginning. It is also possible to mention the same closeness in the post-

questionnaire since 26 students considered that searching reading to get information

specifically required for assignments contained ‘some difficulty’ and 29 of them found

it only ‘little difficult.’ As for Group B, the students showed the same density (48,0%)

around the title of ‘little difficulty’ in the second phase of the study as they did for the

‘some difficulty’ option of the pre-questionnaire. The purpose of Item 15 is to measure the students’ ability in critical reading to

establish and evaluate the author’s position on a particular topic. In both the first

(45,3%) and second (50.7%) practices of the questionnaire, a good number of the

participants in Group A believed that they experienced a slight problem with critical

reading. Likewise, most of the students in Group B (46,7%) pointed to ‘little difficulty’

concerning reading critically whereas they (49,3%) largely concentrated on the

50

alternative of ‘some difficulty’ in the pre-questionnaire. With respect to reading quickly,

Item 16 suggests, the responses of the students in Group A varied predominantly

between ‘little’ (38,7%) and ‘no difficulty’ (34,7%) in the first administration of the

questionnaire. In the post-questionnaire, even if it was possible to mention a close rate

between the two levels again, there was a bit higher majority around the level of ‘no

difficulty’ (45,3%). Pertaining to Item 16, the other group showed much the same

frequency in the pre (34) and post (33) questionnaires. The general run of Group B

population expressed that while reading quickly they encountered ‘little difficulty’. As

can be understood from Table 4.3, none of the students in Group A favored Item 17 as

‘a lot of difficulty’ in the pre-questionnaire. A significant percentage of them (50,7%)

reported that they suffered ‘a small amount of difficulty’ when they were required to

make notes from textbooks. In the second phase, while the number of those who

preferred ‘little difficulty’ amounted to 48,0%, that of others choosing ‘no difficulty’

rose from 29 to 33. A kind of similar increase occurred on the side of Group B; the

percentage of the first-year students deciding on ‘no difficulty’ went from 33,3% to

38,7%. However; 44,0% of the students still claimed that they had’ little difficulty’ in

jotting down from textbooks.

The objective of Item 18, the last item of the reading section, is to shed light on

how much difficulty the students live through while reading texts where the subject

matter is very complicated. At first, the greater part of the students in Group A (46,7%)

reported that if the text included a complex subject matter, it caused ‘some difficulty’

for them. But in the post-questionnaire, they (45,3%) mostly had the opinion that a

complicated subject matter brought about not some but ‘little difficulty.’ Like Group A,

in the first implementation of the survey, 52,0% of the participants in Group B

supported the idea that if the main theme of the text was complicated, they experienced

‘some difficulty.’ On the other hand, in the second phase, 48,0% of them were in the

belief that this could create ‘a bit difficulty.’

The percentages and frequencies of each item included in “writing” part,

following the reading section, are provided in Table 4.5 for Group A and Table 4.6 for

Group B. The “writing” subscale embraces twelve items: writing grammatically correct

sentences (Item 19), using a variety of grammatical structures (Item 20), using

appropriate grammatical structures (Item 21), using appropriate vocabulary (Item 22),

51

using a wide range of vocabulary (Item 23), the subject matter (Item 24), expressing

what you want to say clearly (Item 25), arranging and developing written work (Item

26), spelling (Item 27), punctuation (Item 28), handwriting (Item 29), and tidiness (Item

30).

Table 4.5. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Writing Subscale for Group A GROUP B-WRITING

A Lot of

Difficulty

Some Difficulty Little Difficulty No

Difficulty

Total

Pre

item 19 N 4 15 31 25 75

% 5,3 20,0 41,3 33,3 100

item 20 N 2 23 31 19 75

% 2,7 30,7 41,3 25,3 100

item 21 N 3 18 29 25 75

% 4,0 24,0 38,7 33,3 100

item 22 N 9 36 22 8 75

% 12,0 48,0 29,3 10,7 100

item 23 N 13 31 22 9 75

% 17,3 41,3 29,3 12,0 100

item 24 N 11 30 28 6 75

% 14,7 40,0 37,3 8,0 100

item 25 N 6 14 32 23 75

% 8,0 18,7 42,7 30,7 100

item 26 N 8 34 21 12 75

% 10,7 45,3 28,0 16,0 100

item 27 N 9 14 22 30 75

% 12,0 18,7 29,3 40,0 100

item 28 N 7 17 31 20 75

% 9,3 22,7 41,3 26,7 100

item 29 N 4 15 30 26 75

% 5,3 20,0 40,0 34,7 100

item 30 N 3 6 29 37 75

% 4,0 8,0 38,7 49,3 100

Total N 79 253 328 240 900

% 105,3 337,4 437,2 320 1200

Post

item 19 N 2 13 32 28 75

% 2,7 17,3 42,7 37,3 100

item 20 N 1 16 33 25 75

% 1,3 21,3 44,0 33,3 100

item 21 N 2 13 32 28 75

% 2,7 17,3 42,7 37,3 100

item 22 N 5 33 31 6 75

% 6,7 44,0 41,3 8,0 100

item 23 N 8 27 28 12 75

% 10,7 36,0 37,3 16,0 100

item 24 N 7 32 29 7 75

% 9,3 42,7 38,7 9,3 100

item 25 N 4 9 36 26 75

% 5,3 12,0 48,0 34,7 100

item 26 N 5 19 37 14 75

% 6,7 25,3 49,3 18,7 100

item 27 N 7 11 20 37 75

% 9,3 14,7 26,7 49,3 100

item 28 N 5 13 34 23 75

% 6,7 17,3 45,3 30,7 100

item 29 N 3 10 32 30 75

% 4,0 13,3 42,7 40,0 100

item 30 N 1 4 31 39 75

% 1,3 5,3 41,3 52,0 100

Total N 50 200 375 275 900

% 66,7 266,5 500 366,6 1200

52

Table 4.6. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Writing Subscale for Group B

GROUP A-WRITING

A Lot of

Difficulty

Some Difficulty Little Difficulty No

Difficulty

Total

Pre

item 19 N 3 9 35 28 75

% 4,0 12,0 46,7 37,3 100

item 20 N 4 14 35 22 75

% 5,3 18,7 46,7 29,3 100

item 21 N 3 12 33 27 75

% 4,0 16,0 44,0 36,0 100

item 22 N 6 28 32 9 75

% 8,0 37,3 42,7 12,0 100

item 23 N 10 25 33 7 75

% 13,3 33,3 44,0 9,3 100

item 24 N 5 23 37 10 75

% 6,7 30,7 49,3 13,3 100

item 25 N 4 13 34 24 75

% 5,3 17,3 45,3 32,0 100

item 26 N 2 16 30 27 75

% 2,7 21,3 40,0 36,0 100

item 27 N 1 9 24 41 75

% 1,3 12,0 32,0 54,7 100

item 28 N 8 26 34 7 75

% 10,7 34,7 45,3 9,3 100

item 29 N 3 11 33 28 75

% 4,0 14,7 44,0 37,3 100

item 30 N 4 9 25 37 75

% 5,3 12,0 33,3 49,3 100

Total N 53 195 385 267 900

% 70,6 260 513,3 355,8 1200

Post

item 19 N 2 7 34 32 75

% 2,7 9,3 45,3 42,7 100

item 20 N 3 10 32 30 75

% 4,0 13,3 42,7 40,0 100

item 21 N 1 8 30 36 75

% 1,3 10,7 40,0 48,0 100

item 22 N 4 18 42 11 75

% 5,3 24,0 56,0 14,7 100

item 23 N 6 22 39 8 75

% 8,0 29,3 52,0 10,7 100

item 24 N 3 14 41 17 75

% 4,0 18,7 54,7 22,7 100

item 25 N 2 10 34 29 75

% 2,7 13,3 45,3 38,7 100

item 26 N 2 12 31 30 75

% 2,7 16,0 41,3 40,0 100

item 27 N 0 8 29 38 75

% 0 10,7 38,7 50,7 100

item 28 N 4 20 38 13 75

% 5,3 26,7 50,7 17,3 100

item 29 N 2 9 34 30 75

% 2,7 12,0 45,3 40,0 100

item 30 N 0 5 29 41 75

% 0 6,7 38,7 54,7 100

Total N 29 143 413 315 900

% 38,7 190,7 550,7 420,2 1200

53

Item 19, with which the writing scale of the questionnaire starts, refers to the

ability of writing grammatically correct sentences. Regarding this item, 35 out of 75

students in Group A thought that they went through ‘little difficulty.’ At the end of the

study, the number of the participants maintaining this idea seemed to remain nearly the

same (34) whereas the percentage of those making reference to ‘no difficulty’ amounted

from 37,3% to 42,7%. In the same vein, most of the responses of the first-year students

in Group B (41,3%) got together under the title of ‘little difficulty’ in the pre-

questionnaire. But later on; even though it was not as high as that of the alternative

‘little difficulty’ (42,7%), the percentage of the option ‘no difficulty’ found in

producing correct grammatical sentences by the participants reached 37,3%.

The findings gathered from the answers given to Item 20 reveal that not only in

the pre-questionnaire but also in the post-questionnaire the majority of the freshmen in

Group A (46,7% à 42,7%) suffered a ‘bit difficulty’ in using a variety of grammatical

structures. Additionally, 40,0% of them had the opinion that achieving this involved ‘no

complexity’ at all. As for Group B, 31 of the participants reported that employing

various grammatical structures was not completely simple; it had ‘little difficulty.’

During the second administration of the survey, 33 of them used the same statement

whereas only 1 out of the total group put forward ‘a lot of difficulty’ related to this

ability.

When the percentage distributions composing under the each of four alternatives

for Item 21 are taken into consideration, it can be inferred that a large number of the

students in Group A (44,0%) considered they lived through few troubles with using

appropriate grammatical structures. In the post-questionnaire, the concentration on the

relevant alternative decreased (40,0%) and the responses mainly focused on ‘no

difficulty’ (48,0%). By most of the participants in Group B, using suitable grammatical

structures was said to be a ‘little hard’ work in the two administrations of the

questionnaire (38,7% à 42,7%) and the frequency rate of ‘no difficulty’ went from 25

to 28 in the end.

As can be understood from the figures shown for Item 22, there is a proportional

proximity between the number of students in Group A (28) preferring ‘some difficulty’

and that of the participants (32) who chose ‘little difficulty’ in the pre-questionnaire.

54

However; the number of them thinking that using appropriate vocabulary involved

‘little difficulty’ ran up dramatically and became 42 in the post-questionnaire.

Concerning the same item, Group B showed an important proportional difference

between the levels of ‘some difficulty’ (48,0%) and ‘little difficulty’ (29,3%) in the first

phase of the study. But then, a minor difference occurred owing to the increase in the

frequency of the students (22 à 31) reporting that they encountered few drawbacks

while using proper vocabulary items.

It is evident from the numeral data collected for Item 23 that a great many of the

respondents in Group A were in the belief during both the pre (44.0%) and post (52.0%)

questionnaires that they experienced ‘little difficulty’ in using a wide range of

vocabulary in the course of writing. From the perspective of the students in Group B,

the situation was a bit different because of the fact that using a large variety of

vocabulary in a writing task posed some problems for most of them (41,3%). But, at the

end of the term, they appeared to cope with a few of their problems since the frequency

rate of ‘some difficulty’ alternative declined from 31 to 27 and that of ‘little difficulty’

became 28.

When the participants of Group A evaluated their ability for Item 24, it is clearly

understood that nearly half of them (49,3%) implied few troubles in the pre-

questionnaire with the subject matter of a writing task. It is also seen from the results

that 54,7% of the freshmen sustained their idea in the post-questionnaire and the ones

choosing ‘no difficulty’ reached the percentage of 22,7%. As for the members of Group

B, in terms of their competence in the subject matter they did not demonstrate a

remarkable change at the end of the academic year. That is, in the second phase of the

study, a large number of them (42,7%) went on expressing that they went through not

little but ‘some difficulty’ in the main theme of what they wrote.

Item 25, the aim of which is to manifest to what extent the participant groups can

express what they want to say clearly, illustrates that with the same percentage and

centering on the same alternative, in both the first and second implementations of the

survey, many of the respondents of Group A (45,3%) believed that they got into ‘little

difficulty’ conveying what they wanted to say in written. Likewise, without making a

noteworthy change on their choice after the pre-questionnaire (32), an overwhelming

55

majority of the students in Group B (36) remarked in the post-questionnaire that it was

not very simple to reflect understandably what they had in their mind on a paper.

With respect to the ability in arranging and developing a written work, Item 26

presents, there is an approximate rate between the levels of ‘little difficulty’ and ‘no

difficulty’ on the side of the students in Group A. Namely; while 27 members of the

group thought that development and arrangement of a written task did not constitute any

trouble, 30 of them mentioned ‘little difficulty’ about the same task. In the post-

questionnaire results, it was seen that the rate between two levels was much more

approximate in that 31 students favored the item as ‘little difficult’ whereas 30 of them

agreed with the statement at the level of ‘no difficulty.’ Considering Item 26, the

students in Group B underwent an important transition from the alternative of ‘some

difficulty’ (45,3%) to ‘little difficulty’ (49,3%).

In the light of the figures provided for Item 27 in Table 4.5, it can be realized that

an overwhelming majority of the students in Group A (54,7%) did not have ‘any

difficulty’ in spelling part of a written work at the beginning of the study. In the end,

this proportion became 50,7% and surprisingly none of the participants pointed to a lot

of difficulty. Like Group A, during both the pre and post questionnaires, a high

percentage of the participants in Group B (40,0% à 49,3%) did not express ‘any

trouble’ with forming a word by writing the letters in a correct order.

Item 28 promotes the participants to judge how difficult using the appropriate

marks on a piece of writing is for themselves. 34 students in Group A reported during

the first phase that they suffered ‘little difficulty.’ The number of the respondents who

agreed with this statement of the questionnaire around the same alternative amounted to

38 in the second phase and also the frequency rate of those deciding on ‘no difficulty’

almost doubled and went from 7 to 13. Along the same line, the option of ‘little

difficulty’ comprised the dominant percentage rate on the side of Group B. In both the

pre (41,3%) and post (45,3%) questionnaires, most of the group participants claimed

that punctuation was ‘a bit complex’ matter of a writing task.

The responses given to Item 29 by the participants of Group A show that their

ability in handwriting varied overwhelmingly between ‘little’ (44,0%) and ‘no

56

difficulty’ (37,3%) in the first implementation of the questionnaire. In the post-

questionnaire, it was possible to mention a close rate between the two levels again in

that while 34 students had the opinion that they experienced ‘few problems’ with the

style of their own writing, 30 of them did not indicate ‘any difficulty’ about the same

issue. As for Group B, at first a large number of the participants (40,0%) were in the

belief that handwriting was not completely an easy feature of a written work. In the end,

the approximate rate between the levels of ‘little’ (42,7%) and ‘no difficulty’ (40,0%)

revealed that as many students as the ones finding handwriting ‘little difficult’ thought

that it was not difficult at all.

Item 30, the last item included in the writing scale, investigates the students’

ability in the tidiness element of a written work. 49,3% of the respondents in Group A

stated in the pre-questionnaire that they did not confront a problem with respect to

tidiness and this ratio amounted to 54,7% at the end of the study. Similarly, the answers

of many students in Group B (49,3%) concentrated on the alternative ‘no difficulty’ in

the beginning and in the second implementation of the questionnaire whereas only 1 of

the participants preferred ‘a lot of difficulty’, the percentage of those having ‘no

problem’ with tidiness reached 52,0%.

Table 4.7 and 4.8 below illustrate the answers provided right after the writing

category by the Group A and Group B students to the statements covered by “speaking”

domain. The “speaking” subscale comprises ten items: giving oral reports and short

talks (Item 31), asking teachers questions (Item 32), asking other students questions

(Item 33), answering questions asked by teachers (Item 34), answering questions asked

by other students (Item 35), working with other students using English to communicate

(Item 36), expressing one’s own opinions in discussions (Item 37), expressing one’s

opinions when they are not immediately understood in discussions (Item 38), expressing

counter-arguments to points raised by other students in discussions (Item 39), and

expressing counter-arguments to points raised by teachers in discussions (Item 40).

57

Table 4.7. Pre-questionnaire and Post-questionnaire Results of Speaking Subscale for Group A

GROUP A-SPEAKING

A Lot of

Difficulty

Some

Difficulty

Little

Difficulty

No

Difficulty

Total

Pre

item 31 N 8 34 28 5 75

% 10,7 45,3 37,3 6,7 100

item 32 N 5 31 35 4 75

% 6,7 41,3 46,7 5,3 100

item 33 N 4 13 32 26 75

% 5,3 17,3 42,7 34,7 100

item 34 N 6 33 27 9 75

% 8,0 44,0 36,0 12,0 100

item 35 N 4 24 28 19 75

% 5,3 32,0 37,3 25,3 100

item 36 N 5 15 31 24 75

% 6,7 20,0 41,3 32,0 100

item 37 N 3 37 29 6 75

% 4,0 49,3 38,7 8,0 100

item 38 N 8 28 31 8 75

% 10,7 37,3 41,3 10,7 100

item 39 N 10 26 33 6 75

% 13,3 34,7 44,0 8,0 100

item 40 N 12 32 27 4 75

% 16,0 42,7 36,0 5,3 100

Total N 65 273 301 111 750

% 86,7 363,9 401,3 148 1000

Post

item 31 N 6 32 30 7 75

% 8,0 42,7 40,0 9,3 100

item 32 N 3 29 35 8 75

% 4,0 38,7 46,7 10,7 100

item 33 N 2 8 31 34 75

% 2,7 10,7 41,3 45,3 100

item 34 N 6 28 29 12 75

% 8,0 37,3 38,7 16,0 100

item 35 N 2 19 29 25 75

% 2,7 25,3 38,7 33,3 100

item 36 N 4 13 32 26 75

% 5,3 17,3 42,7 34,7 100

item 37 N 2 30 34 9 75

% 2,7 40,0 45,3 12,0 100

item 38 N 7 23 32 13 75

% 9,3 30,7 42,7 17,3 100

item 39 N 4 22 37 12 75

% 5,3 29,3 49,3 16,0 99,9

item 40 N 5 29 33 8 75

% 6,7 38,7 44,0 10,7 100

Total N 41 233 322 154 750

% 54,7 310,7 429,4 205,3 1000

58

Table 4.8. Pre-questionnaire and Post- questionnaire Results of Speaking Subscale for Group B

GROUP B-SPEAKING

A Lot of

Difficulty

Some

Difficulty

Little

Difficulty

No

Difficulty

Total

Pre

item 31 N 13 38 21 3 75

% 17,3 50,7 28,0 4,0 100

item 32 N 9 34 28 4 75

% 12,0 45,3 37,3 5,3 100

item 33 N 3 15 30 27 75

% 4,0 20,0 40,0 36,0 100

item 34 N 11 34 25 5 75

% 14,7 45,3 33,3 6,7 100

item 35 N 5 18 29 23 75

% 6,7 24,0 38,7 30,7 100

item 36 N 6 19 29 21 75

% 8,0 25,3 38,7 28,0 100

item 37 N 10 34 27 4 75

% 13,3 45,3 36,0 5,3 100

item 38 N 12 32 28 3 75

% 16,0 42,7 37,3 4,0 100

item 39 N 8 27 35 5 75

% 10,7 36,0 46,7 6,7 100

item 40 N 9 33 30 3 75

% 12,0 44,0 40,0 4,0 100

Total N 86 284 282 98 750

% 114,7 378,6 376 130,7 1000

Post

item 31 N 10 33 26 6 75

% 13,3 44,0 34,7 8,0 100

item 32 N 5 33 32 5 75

% 6,7 44,0 42,7 6,7 100

item 33 N 2 8 33 32 75

% 2,7 10,7 44,0 42,7 100

item 34 N 7 32 30 6 75

% 9,3 42,7 40,0 8,0 100

item 35 N 2 14 34 25 75

% 2,7 18,7 45,3 33,3 100

item 36 N 3 15 30 27 75

% 4,0 20,0 40,0 36,0 100

item 37 N 6 31 31 7 75

% 8,0 41,3 41,3 9,3 100

item 38 N 8 28 34 5 75

% 10,7 37,3 45,3 6,7 100

item 39 N 5 24 37 9 75

% 6,7 32,0 49,3 12,0 100

item 40 N 4 30 35 6 75

% 5,3 40,0 46,7 8,0 100

Total N 52 248 322 128 750

% 69,4 330,7 429,3 170,7 1000

59

Considering the figures of Item 31, the first statement of the speaking domain, it

is seen that 45,3% of the freshmen in Group A referred to ‘some difficulty’ in giving

oral reports and short talks. As evident from the post-questionnaire, the percentages of

‘some difficulty’ and ‘little difficulty’ alternatives did not highly differ from each other.

While 42,7% of the students stated that they had some troubles with short talks and oral

reports, 40,0% of them remarked not some but ‘few problems’ with them. In the same

way, during both the first and second practices of the questionnaire, a majority of the

first-year students in Group B (50,7% à 44,0%) responded that giving brief speeches

or oral presentations was not a simple task; it contained ‘some difficulty.’

The aim of Item 32 is to find out whether the participant groups are faced with a

problem while they are asking teachers questions. According to the responses given by

the students in Group A, there was a close proportional amount between ‘some

difficulty’ and ‘little difficulty’ options in the pre-questionnaire. The alternative ‘some

difficulty’ was supported by 31 students and ‘little difficulty’ was chosen by 35 of the

total participants. The number of those preferring ‘little difficulty’ remained the same in

the end but that of the former fell from 31 to 29. On the other hand, the responses of

many participants in Group B (45,3%) gathered around the title of ‘some difficulty’ at

first. Later on, the students reached a close proportion between ‘some’ (44,0%) and

‘little difficulty’ (42,7%) alternatives. Furthermore, the number of the freshmen

thinking that asking teachers questions meant ‘a lot of difficulty’ for them became equal

to that of the students being beset with ‘no problem’ with it.

The numeral information which belongs to Item 33 offers that while asking their

fellows questions, the participant groups did not suffer as much difficulty as they did

when they asked questions to their teachers. In the pre-questionnaire, while 32 students

of Group A pointed to ‘little difficulty’, 26 of them responded that they experienced ‘no

problem’ about interacting with their peers through questions. For the previous item,

only 4 of the students chose this alternative regarding the interaction between

themselves and their teachers. As for the percentages comprising as a result of the post-

questionnaire, the number of the participants supported the idea that there was ‘no

difficulty’ in asking other students questions went from 26 to 34. Like Group A, only 4

of the participants of Group B considered in the previous item that addressing question

to teachers involved ‘no difficulty.’ However; in Item 33, relevant to the

60

communication with other students via questions, their number increased to 27 during

the first phase and then became 32 in the end.

When the students in Group A thought about their ability in answering questions

directed by teachers, which Item 34 presents, it is seen that 44,0% of the participants

remarked ‘some difficulty’ and the alternative ‘little difficulty’ was indicated by 36,0%

of them in the pre-questionnaire. As for the findings of the post-questionnaire regarding

the same item, the percentages of two options shared a particular similarity in terms of

the fact that 37,3% of the students still mentioned ‘some difficulty’ in responding their

teachers’ questions and 38,7% of the same group made reference to ‘little difficulty.’

Concerning Item 34, the freshmen in Group B mostly agreed with the level of ‘some

difficulty’ (45,3% à 42,7%) in both the applications of the questionnaire but it should

be also noted that in the second implementation, the ratio of ‘little difficulty’ (40,0%)

was as high as that of ‘some difficulty.’

In accordance with the frequency distributions coming out of the responses given

to Item 35 by the students in Group A, it can be revealed that the difficulty they

encountered in answering questions posed by other students varied between ‘some’

(32,0%) and ‘little difficulty’ (37,3%) in the pre-questionnaire. They demonstrated the

same kind of proportional similarity for the two alternatives in the second phase of the

study; while 29 students claimed that replying to the questions of other students came to

mean ‘a little challenge’, 25 of them considered that it did not constitute ‘any

difficulty.’ On the side of Group B, the relevant item was largely supported under the

title of ‘little difficulty’ in both phases of the study (38,7% à 45,3%).

Item 36 encourages the participant groups to think over whether they are able to

work with other students using English to communicate. When the findings of both the

pre and post questionnaires are taken into consideration, it can be understood that most

of the students in Group A achieved this with ‘little difficulty’ (41,3% à 42,7%). In

that vein, in the first administration of the questionnaire, 29 of the freshmen in Group B

reported that they faced ‘a bit difficulty’ in making contact with other students in

English while working together. This amount slightly rose and became 30 in the end;

while the number of the students claiming ‘no problem’ about communication with

others in English went from 21 to 27 at the same time.

61

As can be concluded from the results above, a vast majority of the respondents in

Group A (49,3%) at first agreed with what Item 37 suggests in a way that expressing

their opinion in discussions was ‘somewhat difficult’ for them. But later on, they

displayed a difference in their percentage distributions and mainly got together around

the alternative of ‘little difficulty’ with a proportion of 45,3%. Pertaining to the same

item, a large number of the students in Group B (34) indicated that they encountered

‘some difficulty’ when they wanted to express their own ideas in discussions. In the

post-questionnaire, this number decreased and the percentage of those choosing ‘some

difficulty’ (31) and that of the ones responding the item as ‘little difficulty’ (31) became

equal to each other.

There seems to be a minor difference between the number of the students in

Group A who favoured Item 38 as ‘some difficulty’ and ‘little difficulty.’ Because 28

students thought that expressing their opinions when they were not immediately

understood in discussions had some drawbacks and 3 more students than this number

(31) regarded it as only ‘little difficult.’ In the post-questionnaire, those preferring ‘little

difficulty’ outnumbered the others much more since the latter fell from 31 to 23 and the

former reached the number of 32. As for Group B, a huge number of the participants

(32) asserted that they confronted ‘some difficulty’ with respect to the expression of the

ideas if they were not understood. However; this number decreased at the end of the

study and 34 of total 75 responses for Item 38 gathered around the title of ‘little

difficulty’ like Group A.

When the percentage distributions forming under the each of four levels of

difficulty for Item 39 are taken into account, it can be inferred that a good number of the

students in Group A (44,0%) considered they went through ‘few troubles’ with

expressing counter-arguments to points raised by other students in discussions. In the

second phase, the responses continued focusing mainly on the same alternative (49,3%)

whereas the number of the students responded to the item as ‘some difficulty’ declined

from 26 to 22. Similarly, not only at the beginning of the term but also at the end of it, a

large number of the students in Group B (46,7% à 49,3%) remarked that they had

‘little difficulty’ in expressing their own opposing views to the points introduced by

other students.

62

Item 40, the last statement of the speaking scale as well as the whole

questionnaire, reveals in the pre-questionnaire that most of the students in Group A

(42,7%) found ‘some difficulty’ in expressing counter arguments to points raised by

teachers in discussions. On the post-questionnaire, the number of those who preferred

‘somewhat difficulty’ went down relatively (38,7%) while that of the participants being

in the belief that there was not some but ‘little difficulty’ in the same issue rose and

eventually became 44,0%. As for Group B, a vast number of the participants (33)

reported that they had ‘some difficulty’ concerning the expression of the counter views

to the points suggested by teachers. On the other hand; this number decreased in the

second administration of the survey and 35 of total 75 responses for Item 40 appeared

under the alternative of ‘little difficulty.’

4.2.1.2. The Results of ANOVA

The following table demonstrates the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire

mean scores and standard deviations of Group A and Group B that they attained from

each subscale of the Language Proficiency Questionnaire with their F values. As it was

understood before from the results of the independent t-test, there was not a

considerable difference in the pre-questionnaire mean scores of both groups, which was

also the same for the figures of post-questionnaire. However; since the aim of this

analysis technique was to find out whether there was a significant difference in the way

that Group A and Group B rated their language proficiency at the beginning and end of

the first year, the results were analyzed from this perspective.

63

Table 4.9. A Mixed Between-Within Subjects Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Results

of Language Proficiency Questionnaire

When the findings of each subscale are taken into consideration, it is seen that

there was a significant difference in the listening statistics scores: F=12,02, p<0,05.

Additionally, this significant increase appeared to be in favour of Group B because of

the fact that while the mean score of the group was 28,57 before, on the post-

questionnaire it went up to 31,16. With respect to the results of reading (F=2,45,

p>0,05), writing (F=0,01, p>0,05), and speaking (F=0,06, p>0,05) domains as well as

the total score (F=0,83, p>0,05), it can be concluded that there was no significant

difference for the two groups since p value of each was not less than the required cut-

off.

Subscales

Type of

Group

Pre-questionnaire

Ss

Post-questionnaire

Ss

F

Listening

Group A 30,28 8,45 31,92 8,20

12,02*

(p<0,05) Group B 28,57 8,26 31,16 8,29

Reading

Group A 20,60 5,29 21,83 4,96

2,45

(p>0,05)

Group B 20,00 4,99 20,92 4,78

Writing

Group A 35,55 9,22 37,52 8,38

0,011

(p>0,05)

Group B 33,72 9,96 35,67 9,17

Speaking

Group A 26,11 7,59 27,85 7,48

0,06

(p>0,05)

Group B 25,23 7,66 27,01 7,30

TOTAL

Group A 112,53 30,37 119,12 28,80

0,837

(p>0,05) Group B

107,52 30,71 114,76 29,28

64

4.2.2. Findings from the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

4.2.2.2. The Results of ANCOVA

Table 4.10, along with their F values, presents the pre-questionnaire and post-

questionnaire mean scores and standard deviations of Group A and Group B which they

gained from each category of the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire.

Table 4.10. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) Results of Student Adaptation to

College Questionnaire

When the findings shown in the table above are considered, it is seen that the two

groups did not differ significantly from each other in terms of academic adjustment

score: F=0,09, p>0,05. On the other hand; considering the results of social (F=78,70,

p<0,05), personal (F=301,52, p<0,05) and institutional (F=58,43, p<0,05) adjustment

subscales and the total score (F=86,77, p<0,05), it is highly possible to reveal that there

was a significant difference between the groups. What’s more, this difference is

understood to be in favour of Group B. Because, whereas the mean scores of these three

Subscales

Type of

Group

Pre-questionnaire

Ss

Post-questionnaire

Ss

F

Academic

Group A 118,87 10,37 134,68 5,26

0,093

(p>0,05) Group B

110,81 14,08 130,64 12,31

Social

Group A 124,44 15,60 129,00 15,75

78,70*

(p<0,05) Group B

73,32 10,61 116,16 12,58

Personal

Group A 87,72 18,78 89,68 18,59

301,52*

(p<0,05) Group B

67,75 18,21 86,53 18,64

Institutional

Group A 107,72 10,26 110,56 11,01

58,43*

(p<0,05) Group B

67,75 2,79 106,89 10,28

TOTAL

Group A 438,75 20,03 463,92 31,93

86,77*

(p<0,05) Group B

319,63 19,77 440,23 37,36

65

categories for the participants of Group B were respectively 73,32, 67,75, and 67,75 at

the beginning of the study, on the post-questionnaire these scores rose to 116,16, 86,53,

and 106,89. Furthermore, the total score of the group went significantly from 319,63 to

440,23.

4.3. Findings from the Interviews

Following the reapplication of the questionnaires, a semi-structured interview was

held with totally 20 students as 10 each from two participant groups. The interview

questions were formed on the basis of research questions and with the intention of

gaining more insights into the student experiences of university adaptation and language

proficiency lived through at the beginning and end of the academic year. It was also

intended to obtain students’ perceptions of preparatory education in terms of two

relevant aspects.

The interview questions asked to the participants were as follows:

1. Considering the beginning and end of the academic year, how do you perceive

your language proficiency in terms of;

a. listening skill?

b. reading skill?

c. writing skill?

d. speaking skill?

2. Considering the beginning and end of the academic year, how do you perceive

your university adjustment in terms of;

a. academic adjustment?

b. social adjustment?

c. personal-emotional adjustment?

d. institutional adjustment?

3. Does a one-year preparatory education affect language proficiency? If yes,

how?

4. Does a one-year preparatory education affect university adjustment? If yes,

how?

66

4.3.1. Group A Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency

In the first question, students were initially asked to evaluate the listening skill

aspect of their language proficiency taking the beginning and end of the academic year

into consideration. As can be seen from Table 4.11, the most recurring theme was

‘Being able to answer listening comprehension questions’. With a percentage of

41,66%, it suggests that in the beginning the students were already successful in giving

responses to the questions provided after listening. In the same positive manner,

according to 3 students out of 10, understanding the instructions uttered by their

lecturers was what they were able to manage concerning their listening ability.

However; there were other two themes with an equal emergence percentage of 16,67%

reflecting the problems they encountered while listening: ‘Making notes from spoken

language’ and ‘Understanding people when they talk quickly’. As for the current

situation, a large number of the interviewees (5) agreed with the idea that it was not

difficult for them to comprehend what a person is talking about. But, 2 students

indicated that they had some trouble making out the utterances of people in broadcast

media as they commonly speak fast. Unlike the beginning of the school year, 3 of the

participants reported that they were able to distinguish important parts of spoken

description and write them down. With the same frequency rate, 3 students seemed to

be capable of identifying grammatically incorrect structures while listening. On the

other hand, recognizing the errors made in pronunciation of words was another theme

claimed to be achieved by 2 out of 10 participants.

67

Table 4.11. Themes Appearing in Group A Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency

# Themes f %

LISTENING

Beg.

1 Being able to answer listening comprehension questions 5 41,66

2 Understanding instructions given by lecturers in classroom 3 25,00

3 Having difficulty in making notes from spoken language 2 16,67

4 Having problems understanding people when they talk quickly 2 16,67

TOTAL 12 100

End

1 Understanding easily what’s being talked about 5 33.34

2 Recognizing grammatical mistakes made by other students 3 20.00

3 Catching errors of other students in pronunciation 2 13.33

4 Recognizing highlights of spoken description and taking them down 3 20.00

5 Being faced with some difficulty in catching the drift of people in broadcast

media

2 13.33

TOTAL 15 100

READING

Beg.

1 Having a wide vocabulary knowledge 5 29.42

2 Reading quickly 4 23.52

3 Understanding what a text suggests 6 35.30

4 Reading just for understanding cause and effect relation within a text 2 11,76

TOTAL 17 100

End

1 Reading more academic texts 4 25,00

2 Understanding most of the information in a text 7 43,75

3 Reading texts with the intention of making a contribution to personal growth 2 12,50

4 Making an analysis of scientific articles 3 18,75

TOTAL 16 100

WRITING

Beg.

1 Getting to know about essay rules and particulars 8 44,44

2 Being familiar with types of essay 6 33,33

3 Expressing what to say clearly 4 22,23

TOTAL 18 100

End

1 Using more advanced vocabulary items 5 31,25

2 Constructing complex sentences 3 18,75

3 Producing better essays in different types 6 37,50

4 Becoming more motivated in writing through portfolio 2 12,50

TOTAL 16 100

SPEAKING

Beg.

1 Feeling self-confident explaining personal views 3 25,00

2 Making a presentation in front of class without much difficulty 5 41,66

3 Finding it hard to enter class discussions 2 16,67

4 Forgetting what to say in the course of speaking 2 16,67

TOTAL 12 100

End

1 Expressing comments on a film or song 4 33,34

2 Gaining more fluency 3 25,00

3 Talking straightforwardly without hesitation 5 41,66

TOTAL 12 100

68

The following excerpt is a good illustration of some of the themes included in this

subscale:

Excerpt 1:

“Last year when I was in preparatory class, I had much difficulty in listening.

When we listened to something on the tape recorder or watched a movie, I could

not understand the language spoken there. It seemed to be not English but French

or German. Since I was unable to make anything out of what I listened to, I could

not answer the questions the instructor asked about it. But, as the time passed, my

listening ability developed a lot. For example, in the beginning of the previous

semester, I could respond to comprehension questions and follow our instructor’s

talking. Now, I am also able to understand easily whoever speaks English. If one

of our friends makes a grammatical mistake while talking, I can recognize it

immediately and say that ‘he didn’t use it correctly.’”

For the second part of the question, the participants were expected to make a

comment on their reading ability considering the way it differed from the start to end of

the year. The most re-emerging theme appeared to be ‘Understanding what a text

suggests’ (35,30%) preceding the theme of ‘Having a wide vocabulary knowledge’

(29,42%). According to the accepted opinion of the students, the rationale behind these

qualifications was the training they received in the process of preparing for university

entrance exam and getting the chance of building on it during prep year. As another

contribution of preparatory education to reading competency, 4 interviewees were in the

belief that they were able to read quickly. For 2 out of 10 participants, in the beginning,

doing reading meant understanding the reason and effect relation suggested in a text.

However, at the end of the semester, they emphasized that they read not only to

understand the subject matter or plot but also to benefit from the content personally.

That is why, they can be said to become more conscious readers. As presented in Table

4.11 above, an overwhelming majority of the students (7) stated that they succeeded in

conceiving most of the information covered by a reading text in the end. Additionally, 4

students considered themselves as proficient in reading more academic texts and 3 of

the participants alleged that they managed to make an analysis of scientific articles with

the help of in-class practices. The excerpt below forms a good example of this category:

69

Excerpt 2:

“Before entering the university exam, I highly engaged in reading paragraphs

and the questions about them. Therefore, I managed to understand what the

paragraph refers to. Also, I memorized a lot of English words as a preparation

for the exam. During the prep year, the number of the words that I knew

increased so I knew a lot words when I started first year... At present, our

lecturer brings different reading texts to class and they are generally more

academic ones. I can read them without difficulty and understand almost all the

things the author suggests in those articles.”

In accordance with the themes arising out of the responses given to the third

aspect, it is clearly understood that all the students moved from prep class to first year

having knowledge of essay rules and its specifics. Moreover, more than half of the

students (6) expressed that they were also acquainted with essay types at the beginning

of the semester since they got accustomed to compose various essays requiring them to

bring out different issues. With a percentage of 22,23%, 4 students indicated that by

applying their theoretical knowledge to their writings, they were able to convey clearly

what they wanted to drive at. When looked into the themes emerging from the students’

perceptions of their writing competency at the end of the second semester, it is seen that

5 participants remarked they managed to employ more advanced words in their

paragraphs and by a nearly equal number of students it was stated that they could

produce better essays in different forms. In the same positive vein, 18,75% of the

answers showed that the students were successful in making complex sentences in the

course of writing and 12,50% of them referred to the fact that 2 freshmen felt

themselves more motivated to write with the help of portfolio files. The following

excerpt is a good example of writing domain:

Excerpt 3:

“The most visible effect of preparatory education was on our writing skill. Before

prep year, we did not know how to compose an English essay. Because, at high

school we continually read something and we were not given any writing task by

our teachers. However; last year we learnt about how to write a topic sentence

and thesis statement. We wrote a cause and effect essay or comparison essay.

Hence, we did not get surprised at anything in our writing course this year…

70

Thanks to our instructor, we can write better essays now and since we use

portfolio, I try to be more careful about the way I write.”

When the interviewees were asked about the state of their speaking proficiency in

the first weeks of the fall semester, 3 students referred to self-confidence in expressing

their personal views that was thought to develop thanks to the practices they did in prep

class. Most of the responses (41,66%) came together around the ability of making a

presentation in front of other students without suffering much difficulty, which is

considered to be gained via prep education, as well. On the other hand, as a weak aspect

of the relevant skill, 2 students found not easy to participate in class discussions and

another 2 participants had a problem with recalling what to say after beginning to talk.

At the end of the spring semester, as it is obvious from Table 1.11, 4 students reached a

sufficient level to express their ideas about a film or song and with the same percentage

rate (33,34%) ‘Talking straightforwardly without hesitation’ was claimed to be

accomplished by 5 interviewees. According to 3 of them, they spoke more fluently than

they do before. Below excerpt is effective in terms of representing this scale:

Excerpt 4:

“At the beginning of last semester, I felt myself very incompetent in speaking

course. The prep year did not make any contribution to my speaking skill last

year. So, whenever I wanted to say something, I deterred from it…My friends

were able to indicate their opinions when we discussed a topic. But, even if I

raised my hand to say what I think, I forgot it while speaking…Now, I can say

that my speaking ability improved very much. At least, after we watch a movie or

listen to a song in class, I am able to express my thoughts about them.”

4.3.2. Group B Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency

With respect to their experiences of language proficiency, the students were

firstly asked about how they perceived their listening ability considering both the

beginning and end of the academic year. The frequency distributions of the themes

revealed that most of the students (6) taking part in the interview confronted a bit

trouble while trying to make out what’s being talked about. Besides being unable to

understand the content of speeches, 20,00% of the answers comprised the theme of

71

having difficulty in taking key words down from spoken language since it was awkward

for them to distinguish important points.

Table 4.12. Themes Appearing in Group B Participants’ Perceptions of Language Proficiency

# Themes f %

LISTENING

Beg.

1 Understanding English films or songs to some extent 2 13,33

2 Being able to follow the lecture given in English 4 26,67

3 Having a bit difficulty in making out what’s being talked about 6 40,00

4 Going through trouble with writing down key words from spoken

language

3 20,00

TOTAL 15 100

End

1 Understanding the main idea when one person is talking 6 42,85

2 Recognizing what is important in spoken description 3 21,43

3 Gaining awareness of what should be listened to improve ability 2 14,29

4 Having problems understanding people when their pronunciation is

different from what s/he is used to

3 21,43

TOTAL 14 100

READING

Beg.

1 Understanding the main idea of a text 7 36,85

2 Answering questions checking comprehension 8 42,10

3 Confronting difficulty in comprehension of scientific articles 4 21,05

TOTAL 19 100

End

1 Reading quickly 5 31,25

2 Getting ahead in vocabulary knowledge 6 37,50

3 Feeling ready for reading academic texts or articles 3 18,75

4 Failing to understand all the information in an advanced text 2 12,50

TOTAL 16 100

WRITING

Beg.

1 Writing grammatically correct sentences 6 42,85

2 Being able to compose essays in a desired form 3 21,43

3 Failing to reflect exactly what is thought on a paper for fear of

making a mistake

2 14,29

4 Having difficulty in sustaining coherence among sentences 3 21,43

TOTAL 14 100

End

1 Getting to know well about essay rules and particulars 7 33,34

2 Producing good essays in different types 4 19,04

3 Being able to make good transitions between statements 3 14,28

4 Recognizing mistakes in a written task immediately 3 14,28

5 Taking writing ability a step further through portfolio 2 9,53

6 Having difficulty in constructing more advanced sentences and phrases 2 9,53

TOTAL 21 100

72

With an approximate frequency rate to the former problem (4), it was conversely

presented that following lectures given in English was not difficult for the students,

which was believed to stem from slow and free of complex structures talking of their

lecturers. Another theme suggested by 2 students as a strong aspect of their listening

skill was ‘Understanding English films or songs to some extent’. They meant that they

did not understand them completely but they were able to get the gist. Concerning their

present situation in the same skill, the participants predominantly put forward such

favorable features as ‘Understanding the main idea when one person is talking’

(42,85%), ‘Recognizing what is important in spoken description’ (21,43%), and

‘Gaining awareness of what should be listened to improve ability’ (14,29%). These

strengths could be most likely attributed to their being more engaged in listening

activities and becoming choosy about what is a useful way of developing their

competency in listening. On the other hand, according to 3 interviewees, the problem

occurred if the pronunciation of the people to whom they listened differs from what

they were accustomed to. In the face of such a situation, it got hard to understand what

is being talked about even if they knew the meanings of words the speaker pronounced.

The comments of a student related to listening are as follows:

Excerpt 5:

“Listening was not a big problem for me at any time. In general, I am a person

who listens to English songs or watches foreign films. Maybe because of this, I

did not have as much difficulty in understanding our instructors as my friends did

in the beginning. I just confused about which part of the listening text should be

Table 4.12. (Continuation)

SPEAKING

Beg.

1 Knowing how to say something in English 6 30,00

2 Shying away from expressing ideas 5 25,00

3 Having trouble with participating in class discussions 4 20,00

4 Feeling tense and going into panic when given a right to speak 3 15,00

5 Forgetting what to say in the course of speaking 2 10,00

TOTAL 20 100

End

1 Making a presentation in front of class at ease 5 35,71

2 Getting more successful at pronunciation of words 3 21,43

3 Trying to use English to communicate with classmates 2 14,29

4 Becoming eager to be involved in class discussions 4 28,57

TOTAL 14 100

73

written down or which words should be taken down as a key concept. However;

towards the end of the second semester, as I listened more, I could cope with this

problem and now I can realize the important parts of any speech.”

After providing answers to the question about listening ability, the students were

asked then to comment on their proficiency in reading. With regard to the strengths of

the skill, a good many of the participants mentioned that they succeeded in responding

to comprehension questions and perceiving the main idea of a text. From their point of

view, this was due to the fact that to be able to matriculate at university they underwent

a process of preparing for an exam which was principally based upon reading

comprehension. However; 4 out of 10 students also remarked that since the reading

passages they dealt with were presented at intermediate level, they experienced

difficulty in apprehension of the scientific or academic articles in the beginning. At the

end of the year, while 3 interviewees came to feel themselves ready for reading

academic texts or articles, other 2 participants indicated that they failed to understand all

the information covered by an advanced reading text. In addition to readiness for being

involved in different types of reading, ‘Reading quickly’ and ‘Getting ahead in

vocabulary knowledge’ were also among the positive statements made by some

members of the participant group. A good illustration of this subscale is the following

excerpt:

Excerpt 6:

“As you know, we took an English test to be able to enter university. On this

exam, there were reading passages and each of these passages had

comprehension questions. In order to answer those questions correctly, we

constantly read different texts and did practices through their questions while

preparing for the exam. Therefore, I did not have any trouble understanding the

texts we read in classroom or giving responses to the questions related to them. I

encountered problem only with scientific articles because of the complex words

or terms they contained in the beginning. But today, I don’t think I have still the

same problem. Rather, I feel that from now on I can deal with just academic

articles.”

74

For the third part of the question, the participants were asked to express their

perceptions of experiences they lived related to writing skill. When analyzed the figures

that belong to the themes, it can be understood that more than half of the responses

surprisingly pointed to a certain competency. 6 students stated that they were able to

write grammatically correct sentences which depended mostly on the grammar-based

approaches they were subjected to during their high school years. What’s more, it was

claimed by 3 participants that they managed to compose essays in a desired form since

they practised writing in advance of proficiency exam they took in the beginning. On

the other hand, with percentages of 21,43% and 14,29%, ‘Having difficulty in

sustaining coherence among sentences’ and ‘Failing to reflect exactly what is thought

on a paper for fear of making a mistake’ were put forward as the weak aspects of

writing ability. Regarding the current situation, a high number of the interviewees (7)

mentioned their getting to know about essay rules and particulars. With a relatively high

percentage when compared to others, the theme of ‘‘Producing essays in different types’

(19,04%) was also suggested as a good attitude developed in writing. Following these,

the participants promisingly touched upon, ‘Recognizing mistakes in a written task

immediately’ (14,28%) ‘Being able to make good transitions between statements’

(14,28%), ‘Taking writing ability a step further through portfolio’ (9,53%). The single

difficulty relevant to writing, in accordance with the responses of 2 students, was

claimed to occur while trying to construct more advanced sentences and phrases. The

following excerpt can be given as an illustration of writing domain:

Excerpt 7:

“In terms of grammar, I did not experience any difficulty in making sentences

since I got good training in grammar as well as vocabulary during my high

school years. I was just unable to provide a meaningful connection between

sentences. It seemed to me that they did not stick together…In fact, my writing

ability developed in the second semester. With the help of our instructor, I

manage to write different essays and I can know which essay type I should use in

accordance with the topic. I want to also say that the main factor which helps my

writing ability develop is the portfolios we prepared throughout the year.”

In the last aspect of language proficiency, the students were expected to evaluate

their speaking ability for two academic terms. The themes, shown in Table 4.12, are

75

taken into consideration, it is clearly understood that the students had trouble speaking

English in the first weeks of the fall semester. With a percentage of 25,00%, the most

recurring theme among negative ones was ‘Shying away from expressing ideas’ which

came to mean that most of the students did not feel confident about themselves enough

to tell what they thought. Furthermore, 4 respondents pointed out that they lived through

trouble with taking part in class discussions since they in general felt like not knowing

the subject at issue well enough. The themes of ‘Feeling tense and going into panic

when given a right to speak’ (15,00%), ‘Forgetting what to say in the course of

speaking’ (10,00%) were the shortcomings of the students’ speaking ability, as well.

The only positive aspect of it, which was mentioned by 6 interviewees, was that even if

they did not seem to be keen on reflecting verbally, they could know how to say

something in English. However; towards the end of the semester, by a majority this

eagerness appeared to be gained in that 4 of them point to their motivation to be

involved in class discussions and other 2 students referred to the same thing for using

English to communicate with their classmates. Moreover, 35,71% of the responses

demonstrates the fact that half of the participants did not go through much difficulty in

making a presentation in front of class anymore and with a percentage of 21,43%, it was

put forward that the students achieved more success in pronunciation of words. The

excerpt below represents this category:

Excerpt 8:

“I do not want to even remember my memories of speaking course...

Whenever I happened to make an eye contact with the lecturer and she asked me

to express my opinion on the subject, I went into panic. I knew how to say the

things in my mind in English, but it seemed to me as if I were not well-equipped

enough to comment on the subject. Then, as I got familiar with both my friends

and the academic staff, I felt myself more comfortable in class. In particular,

during presentations I gave up feeling tense thanks to the encouragement of our

instructor and now I am also more eager to express what I think in class

discussions.”

76

4.3.3. Group A Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment

After replying to the questions concerning language proficiency, the participants

expressed their experiences of university adjustment. First of all, they were asked about

how they perceived themselves in terms of academic adaptation in the beginning and

end of the school year. According to 4 interviewees, they entered upon the first year

with possession of a background knowledge of the program and from the perspective of

half of the students, they already knew the academic staff with whom they were

satisfied. Besides, 3 interviewees stated that they had well-defined academic goals

determined beforehand. However; there were also some other experiences that could be

described as negative sides of their academic adjustment like ‘Worrying a lot about

course difficulty’ (19,04%), ‘Finding some courses difficult’ (14,28%), and ‘Being less

motivated to study’ (9,53%).

Table 4.13. Themes Appearing in Group A Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment # Themes f %

ACADEMIC

Beg.

1 Having well-defined academic goals 3 14,28

2 Being satisfied with academic staff 5 23,83

3 Possessing a background knowledge of program 4 19,04

4 Worrying a lot about course difficulty 4 19,04

5 Finding some courses difficult 3 14,28

7 Being less motivated to study 2 9,53

TOTAL 21 100

End

1 Carrying on studies in line with academic objectives 3 13,05

2 Developing closer relationship with instructors 4 17,39

3 Enjoying courses that are not as difficult as expected 4 17,39

4 Coping with difficulties and doing well academically 5 21,74

5 Thinking of having an academic career 2 8,69

6 Reinforcing previous knowledge through new learning 3 13,05

7 Giving more importance to exam marks 2 8,69

TOTAL 23 100

SOCIAL

Beg.

1 Having a large group of friends 6 35,30

2 Finding many things in common to share with classmates 5 29,42

3 Joining a lot more in social activities 4 23,52

4 Only attending classes and doing what is supposed to 2 11,76

TOTAL 17 100

End

1 Becoming more popular among friends 1 10,00

2 Taking part in extracurricular activities 4 40,00

3 Having an enlarged social circle from different levels of program 5 50,00

TOTAL 10 100

Table 4.13. (Continuation)

77

When looked into the themes and their percentages, it is seen that the level of

adjustment in academic domain increased. For instance, in the beginning while some

courses were considered to be difficult or some students felt uneasy about course

difficulty, in the end it was stated by 5 students that they overcame the difficulties and

did well academically. In the same favourable manner, it is understood from Table 3

that 2 participants thought of having an academic career and another 2 students gave

more importance to exam marks contrary to the lack of motivation they had before. The

other positive themes emerging from the students’ responses were ‘Carrying on studies

in line with academic objectives’ (13,05%), ‘Developing closer relationship with

instructors’ (17,39%), ‘Enjoying courses that are not as difficult as expected’ (17,39%),

and ‘Reinforcing previous knowledge through new learning’ (13,05%). The following

excerpt can be representative sample of this subscale:

Excerpt 9:

“When I moved from prep class to first year here at this university, there was a

question mark in my mind. Some of my senior friends warned me that the most

stressful process of this program was experienced during first year. Thus, I

worried a lot what if I would have difficulty in courses even though I had

background knowledge of the program. But, after I knew well about the contents

of the courses, I realized that they were not as difficult as I thought. To tell the

Table 4.13. (Continuation)

PERSONAL

Beg.

1 Being hopeful for further personal development 3 25,00

2 Making a comfortable and conscious start on new semester 5 41,66

3 Feeling tense and nervous 2 16,67

4 Feeling unready and reserved 2 16,67

TOTAL 12 100

End

1 Feeling at ease in classroom environment 6 50,00

2 Being happy with making progress personally 4 33,33

3 Learning to make use of one’s own power 2 16,67

TOTAL 12 100

ATTACHMENT

Beg.

1 Being pleased with studying at university 7 53,85

2 Feeling attached to this college 4 30,76

3 Getting a bit disinclined to come to the school 2 15,39

TOTAL 13 100

End

1 Feeling him/herself an inseparable part of the university 4 40,00

2 Adopting the title of being university student 6 60,00

TOTAL 10 100

78

truth, I lived through a bit trouble at first and that is why I studied harder. Then, I

succeeded in the courses and even started to think of getting master degree here.”

For the social aspect of university adjustment, more than half of the respondents

stated that when the semester began, they had a large group of friends and with

approximately the same frequency (4), they supported the idea that they joined in social

activities a lot more than previous year. Over and above this, 29,42% of the answers

centered upon the students’ feeling close to each other since they pointed out that they

could find many things in common to share with their classmates. Only 2 of the

interviewees mentioned just attending classes and doing what was expected from them

due to the fact that they got started to the semester with lack of motivation. As for the

end of the year, it is obvious from the numeral data, given in Table 3, that half of the

responses concentrated on the theme of ‘Having an enlarged social circle from different

levels of program’ (50,00%). This came to mean that the students made friendship with

other people in department as sophomores, juniors or seniors and became more social.

Another theme which implied the socialization of the students again with the percentage

of 40.00% was their taking part in extracurricular activities, that is, they did not only

care about courses but also participated in the activities not included in the curriculum.

In accordance with what only one interviewee indicated, he gained more popularity

among his friends towards the end of the second semester and he believed that he

became a well-liked person by other students around. The following excerpt is related to

this domain:

Excerpt 10:

“In contrast with prep class, at the beginning of this year I had more friends and

we spent more time together. For instance; we went to the cinema, participated in

activities on campus or met outside of the university and chatted somewhere in

the city center. I have still plenty of friends but now most of them are from other

levels of the program who are studying at second or third year. I take part in the

school activities with them, as well if I have free time of course.”

In the third aspect, the participants were asked to express how they felt

psychologically at the beginning and end of the school year. Half of them pointed out

that they felt themselves so comfortable and conscious when compared to last year that

79

they managed to make an easy start on the new semester. 3 participants were in tune

with one another in that they were optimistic about further personal development.

However; in the beginning 2 of them felt tense and nervous anyhow because they

thought that they were required to make a fresh start on the new academic year and they

were unable to foresee what was in store for them. As for other 2 out of total 10

participants, they put forward that they felt unready for a new beginning and behaved

timidly. According to them, the underlying reason for this resulted from the fact that a

one-year preparatory education was not as efficacious as they expected and they were

included in a class where they encountered people they did not know from last year.

Regarding the end of the term, these 2 participants stated that they got used to their

friends and learnt how to make use of their power to develop both personally and

academically. Additionally, 50% of the responses showed that the students felt at ease

in classroom environment and the feeling of satisfaction with taking themselves a step

further was another theme touched upon by a few students. An effective way to

illustrate this category can be the following excerpt:

Excerpt 11:

“In the first weeks of the fall semester, I was a bit nervous. Since I already took

preparatory education last year, I was acquainted with my friends, lecturers, and

the social environment at university. However; it was a new semester and I could

meet anything unexpected. Maybe, I would not get along well with one of the

instructors or I would be unsuccessful in any course. At the end of the previous

term, I got rid of all my worries. As I engaged in the courses and got to know the

academic staff, I felt myself more relaxed. Especially, I noticed the progress that I

made about myself and this helped me feel at ease a little more.”

In the last part of the question about university adjustment, the students were

asked how they perceived their college experiences in general and also those related to

the university they were attending in particular. Almost 54% of the answers, given

considering the beginning of the term, showed that a large number of students were

pleased with the idea of being at university. A relatively high percentage of the answers

(30,76%) also presented that most of the students felt attached to the university they

were studying at. However; in a different sense, 2 interviewees indicated that they got a

bit disinclined to come to the university in the first weeks of the semester since they

80

were bored with the courses they took during the prep year and they were unable to

attain what they expected from a university in general. As for the current state of the

students in institutional adjustment, none of them conveyed any negative thought. While

6 participants asserted that they adopted the title of being university student, through

more intense notification, 5 of the interviewees expressed that they felt themselves an

inseparable part of the university now. The following comments can be a good example

to the institutional adjustment domain:

Excerpt 12:

“When I first started prep class, I was really motivated to come to the school.

Because this university was always in my dreams. Yet, I did not find what I

expected before. The materials used in prep program were very boring and the

marks we got from exams did not have any effect on our GPA score. Hence, my

motivation to attend classes decreased to some extent. However; a few weeks

later the courses given in the first year appeared to be more enjoyable and our

lecturers promoted us to enjoy the courses through the activities carried out in

classroom. Also, instead of just attending classes and doing what needed to be

done, I began to deal with different social activities provided by the university.

Now, I am used to the idea that I am a university student and I’m pleased with

being a part of here.”

81

4.3.4. Group B Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment

Table 4.14. Themes Appearing in Group B Participants’ Perceptions of University Adjustment

# Themes f %

ACADEMIC

Beg.

1 Having well-defined academic goals 3 11,53

2 Having question marks in mind regarding being

a teacher

2 7,70

3 Finding some courses difficult 6 23,07

4 Dropping the idea of further study at university 3 11,53

5 Regretting being exempted from prep class 2 7,70

6 Having difficulty in focusing on courses 5 19,24

7 Feeling obliged to constantly research

something

2 7,70

8 Being afraid of failing the class 3 11,53

TOTAL 26 100

End

1 Being satisfied with academic staff 6 26,08

2 Developing self-confidence in courses 5 21,74

3 Thinking of having an academic career 3 13,05

4 Becoming more motivated to learn 4 17,39

5 Reaching academically good level 5 21,74

TOTAL 23 100

SOCIAL

Beg.

1 Having a group of friends 3 16,66

2 Feeling lonely a lot 6 33,33

3 Having difficulty in living in a dormitory 3 16,66

4 Suffering from lack of communication with

classmates

4 22,23

5 Feeling left out of social circle on campus 2 11,12

TOTAL 18 100

End

1 Developing interest in social situation of

university

4 20,00

2 Making friendship with other students 7 35,00

3 Joining in social activities with classmates 5 25,00

4 Getting active and social 4 20,00

TOTAL 20 100

82

The students were firstly asked about the experiences they lived through

academically in order to infer to what extent they managed academic adjustment

considering the beginning and end of the school year.

Table 4.13. (Continuation)

PERSONAL

Beg

.

1 Having prejudice and distrust against people

around

6 27,27

2 Feeling tense and nervous 5 22,72

3 Feeling unready and reserved 3 13,64

4 Getting bored 2 9,09

5 Having a fright because of being alone for the

first time

3 13,64

6 Preferring to be at home as soon as possible 3 13,64

TOTAL 22 100

End

1 Enjoy living freely 3 18,75

2 Learning to take everything as it comes 2 12,50

3 Feeling at ease in classroom environment 6 37,50

4 Becoming shrewd enough to know well about

people

3 18,75

5 Getting sure of achieving personal

development

2 12,50

TOTAL 16 100

ATTACHMENT

Beg

.

1 Being satisfied with his/her existence at this

university

5 50,00

2 Thinking of dropping out of school 2 20,00

3 Preferring to be at another university 3 30,00

TOTAL 10 100

End

1 Being pleased with studying at university

7 46,67

2 Feeling no remorse for choosing this

university

6 40,00

3 Being unwilling to leave school at the end of

the semester

2 13,33

TOTAL 15 100

83

In the light of the themes arising from the participants’ responses, it is clearly

seen that the students mostly went through negative experiences at first. For example, a

high number of them (6) encountered difficulty in some degree courses, and with a high

frequency rate again (5) they faced trouble focusing on subjects. Additionally, while 3

interviewees deterred from the idea of further study at university, another 3 out of 10

participants became anxious about failing the class. ‘Having question marks in mind

regarding being a teacher’ (7,70%) and ‘Feeling obliged to constantly research

something’ (7,70%) were also other themes constructed by taking the responses of the

participants into account. The mere theme which could be accepted as a positive attitude

adopted in academic domain of university adjustment was ‘Having well-defined

academic goals’ with a percentage of 11,53%. When looked into the themes which were

composed in accordance with what the students lived through at the end of the year, it is

clearly understood that they achieved a good level of academic adaptation. As presented

in Table 4, while 26,08% of the statements centered upon ‘Being satisfied with

academic staff’, ‘Developing self-confidence in courses’ constituted 21,74% of the

answers. In the same manner, the students came together around such favourable themes

as ‘Thinking of having an academic career’ (13,05%), ‘Becoming more motivated to

learn’ (17,39%), and ‘Reaching academically good level’ (21,74%). Some of the themes

are clearly put forward in the following statements of a participant:

Excerpt 13:

“In the beginning, I had difficulty in concentrating on the courses. Because for

the first time I had left from my family… Before coming here, I thought that

university would not be different from high school; it would be like a follow-up of

it. However; after I began to attend classes, I noticed that it was totally different.

First and foremost, we didn’t get an intensive training on speaking or writing and

here our lecturers gave us lots of assignments regarding these skills as soon as

the semester started. I experienced problem with some courses because they were

really difficult for me and due to this reason alone, I said “I wish I had

preparatory education.” Later on, I asked myself “Why don’t you study harder

and try to keep pace with what the courses require?” Therefore, I tried hard and

benefited from different sources to produce something good. As I realized what I

achieved, I began to trust myself and became more eager to learn new things.”

84

When the participants were posed a question about what they experienced

socially at the beginning of the first year of university education, they gave answers that

predominantly contained discontent with social life. As can be concluded from Table

4.14, more than half of the students felt themselves lonely a lot at first and nearly half of

them suffered from either living in a dormitory or lack of communication with their

classmates. What’s more, 2 participants indicated that they felt left out of social circle

on campus. On the other hand, even if they entered into the university life for the first

time, another 3 out of 10 students mentioned their already having a group of friends

which mainly stemmed from the fact that either they were from Adana or they came

from the same adjacent regions. When analyzed the findings growing out of the

responses given to the last state in social adjustment, it is obvious that the students

reached a higher level of adaptation. The indicators of this increase could be attributed

to such recurring themes as ‘Developing interest in social situation of university’

(20,00%), ‘Making friendship with other students’ (35,00%), ‘Joining in social

activities with classmates’ (25,00%), and ‘Getting active and social’ (20,00%). The

comments that belong to one of the interviewees are as follows:

Excerpt 14:

“I should admit that in the first weeks I felt myself lonely a lot. I knew nobody at

university and my roommates in the dormitory were not the people with whom I

could get along well. I was unable to share anything with my classmates, either.

But, after a certain time we got used to each other and built up a good friendship

among us. I also changed my room in the dormitory and my new roommates are

now better people than the others…Contrary to the first semester, I consider

myself as a more social and active student. I always want to take part in the

activities at university with my friends. Because we are going to be together for

four years and that’s why we should do something in common to strengthen our

friendship.”

After social domain of the adjustment, the participants were asked to reflect their

thoughts about the psychological situation they were in at the beginning and end of the

school year. In accordance with the themes, it is highly possible to sum up their feelings

as ‘distrust and prejudice’, ‘tension and anxiety’, ‘unreadiness and inhibition’,

‘boredom’, ‘longing’, and ‘fear’. As it is seen in Table 4.14, the most re-emerging

85

feeling was ‘distrust and prejudice’ with a percentage of 27,27% which came from the

fact that the students were involved in an environment they did not know before. As a

result of this, they experienced the sense of ‘tension and anxiety’ (22,72%) that was

shown as the second most re-emerging theme. On the other hand, at the end of the

semester more than half of the students (6) felt at ease and 3 of the students enjoyed

living freely. While 3 participants became shrewd enough to know well about people, 2

out of total 10 participants gained self-confidence in achieving personal development.

As for another 2 out of total 10 participants, they claimed that they learnt to take

everything as it came instead of constantly questioning. The following excerpt is a good

illustration of some of the themes included in this subscale:

Excerpt 15:

“Since I am from Adana, I already had a few friends at university. So, I didn’t

feel myself lonely but I got tense and nervous. I did not know well the people in

class and the instructors giving us lectures. It seemed to me that at any moment I

came across something bad as I couldn’t trust people around…Then, I

understood that if you determine your limitations against others and accept every

person or situation as how they are, you become more relaxed. Now, I feel

comfortable in classroom or whenever I spend time with my friends... I also enjoy

my life more since my family believe that I can cope with the obstacles at

university and thus give me more independence.”

For the last step of the question, the students were expected to mention the

experiences they went through in institutional attachment. The statements, presented in

Table 4.14, demonstrate that half of the interviewees were pleased with their existence

at the university. However; 2 of the remaining half thought of dropping out of the

school whereas the rest preferred to be studying at another college at first. At the end of

the academic year, what the students thought about the university turned completely

into positive one. A high number of the students (7) pointed out that they were satisfied

with studying at university in general sense. Furthermore, 6 respondents claimed that

they felt no remorse for choosing the university at which they took education. With a

percentage of 13,33%, the answers also revealed that few students were unwilling to

leave school even at the end of the academic year. The excerpt below forms a good

example of this category:

86

Excerpt 16:

“During the first semester, I preferred to be at another university in İstanbul or

Ankara. I chose this university because my family wanted me to do so. But, as the

time passed I recognized that our lecturers were really qualified and experienced

in their areas. They also helped us learn new things and always encouraged in a

way that “You can do this.”…Now, I am very pleased with being at this

university, with my friends and instructors. As you know, a few weeks later we

will turn back to our homes but I don’t want to leave at all. I am sure that it will

be boring to be at home.”

4.3.5. Effects of Preparatory Education on Language Proficiency

In the following table, it can be seen in what ways preparatory education has an

effect upon language proficiency. As the table shows, 7 themes emerged in accordance

with the answers the students in Group A gave.

Table 4.15. Themes Appearing in Participants’ Perceptions of Effects of Preparatory

Education on Language Proficiency

# Themes f %

GROUP A

1 Extending vocabulary knowledge 3 9,10

2 Reading quickly 2 6,06

3 Getting to know essay rules and types 8 24,24

4 Expressing what to say clearly in a written form 5 15,15

5 Having self-confidence in making a presentation 6 18,18

6 Understanding easily what is being talked about 5 15,15

7 Doing listening exercises more easily 4 12,12

TOTAL 33 100

GROUP B

1 Gaining experience in note-taking 2 12,50

2 Extending vocabulary knowledge 2 12,50

3 Constructing strong knowledge on how to write 6 37,50

4 Providing practices in listening 3 18,75

5 Providing practices in speaking 3 18,75

TOTAL 16 100

87

When looked into what the participants suggested, more than half of them with

the highest percentage (24,24%) think that the most powerful impact of prep education

on language proficiency is getting to know essay rules and types. As they claim, while

they made a start on prep class without being aware of even composing a paragraph, at

the end of the year they were able to write various essays in different types and

criticized them whether they were appropriately constructed. In relation to writing skill,

5 students also indicated that they could express what to say clearly in a written form.

Because during the writing course of prep program, they were well taught about how

unity and coherence could be maintained in a written text. The following excerpt is a

good example of the views about writing:

Excerpt 17:

“I can state that preparatory education helped us a lot to improve ourselves in

writing skill. Before prep class, I did not try to write even a paragraph in

English… Last year we learnt about how to make an outline of essay and essay

types. Our instructor also taught as which conjunctions we could use to link

sentences… When I look through a paragraph or an essay now, I can realize the

missing or imperfect points easily.”

With a similar number to that of the participants supporting the theme of being

familiar with types and rules of essay, most of the students stated that the preparatory

continuum helps them acquired the essential self-confidence in order to make a

presentation in front of other students. Since they found the chance of being acquainted

with their instructors as well as their classmates and taking part in small class

discussions during that period, they did not hold off from sharing their ideas with people

in class. Considering this, what was suggested by the participants was that the students

who had already taken prep training should not be included in a student group most of

which consists of those being exempted from that education. Otherwise, they would

most probably feel alone and would not be at ease enough to show active participation

in classroom. Excerpt 18 below is effective in terms of representing what was suggested

about speaking:

88

Excerpt 18:

“During the prep year, we prepared various presentations and shared what we

prepared with our friends in classroom. Therefore, when I moved from prep class

to first year, I was not afraid of talking in front of my friends. Because I knew

those people and those people knew me. If I had been in another class where

there were students I didn’t meet before, it would have been a bit challenging for

me to speak in front of them.”

Pertaining to listening ability, 15,15% of the responses demonstrate that

preparatory program enabled the students to understand easily what is being talked

about. According to what they put forward, they were provided with such useful

activities as listening to a conversation or song on CD or watching movie on video

player. That is why, they became more familiar with sounds and pronunciation of words

and this helped them cope with the difficulty in understanding the utterances.

Furthermore, 4 participants remarked that after prep education they were able to handle

listening activities more easily. Because, following almost every listening text they were

required to engage in comprehension questions and this made them gain practicality of

doing them. The comments of a student concerning are as follows:

Excerpt 19:

“The listening course we took in prep year was full of activities. Sometimes we

listened to a song, sometimes we watched a movie, at other times we listened to

an interview on tape recorder. Hence, we were so lucky that we had the chance of

hearing how the words were pronounced and getting to know what the speaker

was talking about.”

From 3 participants’ point of view, prep education had an impact on vocabulary

knowledge in terms of the fact that it increased the number of words they knew in

English. The main reason behind this was the encouragement their lecturers provided to

read short stories, periodicals of foreign publications, and different articles or columns.

In addition to these publications, the students also believed that trying to choose

appropriate words while writing a paragraph or listening to any conversation or even a

song made contribution to their vocabulary knowledge. With respect to reading skill, 2

interviewees think that they became faster in reading by means of prep program. They

89

did not give as many pauses as before while reading a text aloud. A good illustration of

the mentioned themes is the following excerpt:

Excerpt 20:

“After taking prep education, I gained self-confidence in the number of English

words that I knew. Because we continually read different texts, short stories or

journal as our lecturer gave us a task for each week and in every written text we

read we encounter new words. Therefore, each word the meaning of which we

learnt helped our vocabulary knowledge to develop.”

When analyzed the part of the table related to the students in Group B, it is seen

that the strongest emerging theme was Theme#3 out of totally 5 themes. According to

what it suggested, more than half of the participant group consider that the effect of the

preparatory program could be most intensely felt on constructing strong knowledge on

how to write. This referred to the same meaning as what the students in Group A meant

by getting to know essay rules and types and both of them were seen to have possess the

highest percentage among other themes. The students in Group B asserted that even if

they did some practices in writing before the exemption exam and therefore had

foreknowledge on essay types, whatever they would learn in writing course of prep

class would be in any case useful for them. The following excerpt can be given as an

illustration of these opinions:

Excerpt 21:

“If I hadn’t been exempted from preparatory class, I would have been more

experienced in types of essay and the rules of how to write when I started the first

year. I wouldn’t have thought over for so long from where I should begin to write

or about what I should mention at first.”

Another concept which was not experienced by 2 students before was note-taking

strategy. They indicated that if they were taught this method in prep class, they would

know how to make the best use of what they listened to and their class time in general.

The students were in the belief that at least they would not get confused about

distinguishing important parts from unimportant ones and write down every word they

hear. The comments of a student concerning are as follows:

90

Excerpt 22:

“As far as I know, during preparatory education the students are taught how to

make a note of what they listen. For example, in the first days of the semester I

tried to write down almost everything that I heard while listening. If I had been

familiar with note-taking technique before, I would have just focused on the

important parts and taken them down appropriately.”

In terms of reading skill, 2 participants pointed out that they were well educated

about possible vocabulary items they may encounter on the test of English essential for

entering university. Hence, they were able to understand the main idea of a text easily.

However; the students were in the belief that the more one is engaged in a foreign

language, the more s/he found a chance to extend his/her vocabulary knowledge. If they

were to study at university for one more year through preparatory education, the extent

of their understanding the meanings of words would develop accordingly. The

following excerpt can be representative of what was claimed:

Excerpt 23:

“The preparatory training may particularly contribute to vocabulary knowledge.

Because, one more year spent on English education means listening, reading and

writing more in English at the same time and in each of this area you have the

possibility of learning a new word.”

When looked into what half of the participants mentioned, providing an

opportunity to practise listening and speaking skills was understood to be suggested as

the possible effect of prep program on language proficiency. According to what they

believed, the program would not bring about a considerable change on their skills since

the development of these abilities was something that can be achieved via personal

effort and with the passing of time. But, a one-year prep training would lay the

groundwork for future education and enable them to do as many practices in both

listening and writing skills as they did not do before. The following excerpt is related to

what is explained here:

91

Excerpt 25:

“I didn’t get preparatory education and I don’t feel any remorse for this. It might

have been useful in terms of dealing with speaking and listening activities one

year in advance as we have some difficulty in these skills. However; I believe that

this is somewhat related to personal effort. If a person is determined enough to

develop himself in a language, he can achieve it on his own without needing to

get formal education for one more year.”

Taking all the responses into consideration, it can be stated that the participants of

Group A and Group B did not deny the positive effect of preparatory education on

language proficiency in some aspects. However; it should be pointed out here that a

large number of the students in Group A claimed that they could do what they achieved

with the help of prep class without taking it, as well. Because the training they got in the

first year was not totally different from the one they got during preparatory year and

those who made a direct transition from high school to first year at university reached

almost the same level at the end of the semester. In a similar vein, a good many of the

participants in Group B thought that not taking prep education did not mean a

deficiency for them even if they had some difficulties and had to study hard in the first

weeks of the semester. As they became familiar with courses, teaching staff and got to

know what was expected from them, they were able to cope with those troubles in the

end.

92

4.3.6. Effects of Preparatory Education on University Adjustment

Table 4.16. Themes Appearing in Participants’ Perceptions of Effects of Preparatory Education on University Adjustment

In the fourth question of the interview sessions, the participants were asked

whether the preparatory program has any effect on university adaptation. As presented

in the table below, most of the students in Group A agreed with the idea that the prep

year helped them know the instructors and the course contents. When they got started

on the first year, they were well aware of what they were supposed to fulfill for many of

the courses and how they could meet the expectations of their lecturers. Excerpt 26

below represents what was suggested well:

Excerpt 26:

“It needs to be admitted that the preparatory continuum helps students adjust

well to the university environment. For instance; when I completed my prep

education, I had a lot friends and I knew the instructors in our department. More

or less, I could guess the contents of the courses that belonged to first-year

curriculum even if I was afraid of the degree of their difficulty.”

# Themes f %

GROUP A

1 Getting familiar with academic staff 6 21,43

2 Making a circle of friends 5 17,85

3 Being aware of course content 6 21,43

4 Gaining the impression of being at university for years 4 14,29

5 Giving way to lonesomeness and longing for family 3 10,71

6 Coming to know how to behave as a university student 4 14,29

TOTAL 28 100

GROUP B

1 Making a comfortable and conscious start on new

semester

4 16.00

2 Having an enlarged social circle 6 24,00

3 Losing motivation to study 2 8,00

4 Feeling confidence about oneself and one’s abilities 3 12,00

5 Getting familiar with academic staff 5 20,00

6 Being aware of course content 5 20,00

TOTAL 25 100

93

Additionally, with a percentage of 14,29% it was claimed that although at the

beginning of the preparatory year the students felt like an outsider in classroom

environment, towards the end of the semester they became more comfortable. Because,

the relevant continuum enabled them to know other students in class and make

friendship with them. By means of this acquaintance with academic staff, courses and

students around, as 4 interviewees remarked, they could gain the impression of being at

university for years. Moreover, they managed to give way to lonesomeness and longing

for family, which constituted another theme of the interview emerging from the

responses of the participants. According to some interviewees, after one-year prep

program they came to know how to behave academically, socially and personally as a

university student. They realized the expectations the people around wanted them to

meet and the ones they themselves wanted from life. Considering both sides and their

own weaknesses as well as strengths, they tried to make a smooth transition from prep

class to first year. The following comments can be a good example to these themes:

Excerpt 27:

“I felt that in a real sense university education started not in the prep class but in

the first year. You can know what you should do as a university student when you

step into the first year and you do not feel lonely anymore.”

In the light of the themes arising out of the responses the students in Group B

gave to the same question, it can be put forth that they came together around the similar

thoughts to those of the interviewees in Group A. Because ‘Having an enlarged social

circle’, ‘Getting familiar with academic staff’ and ‘Being aware of course content’ were

also among the themes suggested by the participants of Group B. Concerning these

statements, nearly half of them asserted that they would be able to make a comfortable

and conscious start on new semester if they took preparatory education. They believed

that they would not make the errors of the previous year again and instead they would

concentrate on the attitudes approved as appropriate. From some students’ point of

view, preparatory continuum would help them feel confidence about themselves and

their abilities. By way of that process, they would find a chance to realize what they

could accomplish and in what situations they were subject to fail. As the name suggests,

in this way they would be prepared for the next year with awareness of their weak and

94

strong qualifications. Some of the themes are clearly put forward in the following

statements of a participant:

Excerpt 28:

“I think that the preparatory education is important in terms of the fact that you

can attain the opportunity to see in what ways you are successful or incompetent.

When you know this, you are able to start the new semester more consciously.

That is to say, you can be sure of yourself in the area that you are successful. On

the other hand, you try to be good at what you regard yourself as not efficient.”

On the contrary, 2 of the total participants think that if they went through the

preparatory continuum, they would lose their motivation to study and be unable to make

an academically good start. The comments that belong to one of the interviewees are as

follows:

Excerpt 29:

“Getting preparatory education may cause a student to make a start on the first

year with lack of motivation. I believe that if I were not good at English, I would

not be here now. Hence, being subjected to take prep class would have made me

feel unsuccessful. Spending one year at university with this thought could have

decreased my motivation for the next years.”

Likewise, the general thoughts provided for the question about language

proficiency, almost all the participants in Group A and Group B argued that the

preparatory education definitely has positive impact on university adjustment. However;

they also claimed that they could adjust well to university without preparatory training.

According to some students in Group B, if someone accepts the idea of studying at

university in a different city, this means that s/he accepts taking the risk of staying alone

or other challenges of university life. Most importantly, s/he needs to have appropriate

maturity level to cope with those obstacles.

In this chapter, findings both from the questionnaires and interviews and data

analysis procedures were presented. In the following chapter, the results and findings of

this study will be discussed.

95

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1. Introduction

This chapter includes the conclusion and discussion of the findings that were

presented in the previous section. It also introduces the implications of the study and the

recommendations for future studies.

5.2. Discussions and Conclusions

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the transitional effects of a one-

year preparatory program on English language proficiency and university adjustment of

first-year ELT students. Each of two dependent variables, language proficiency and

college adjustment, were covered with its four specific areas: listening, reading, writing,

and speaking skills; academic, social, personal, and institutional adjustment. Like two

dependent variables, the participants of the study composed of also two groups of

students. One of them, addressed as Group A throughout the study, consisted of the

freshmen who made a transition from prep class to first year. The other group, named as

Group B, referred to those exempted from preparatory program and admitted to the

freshman year.

As a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods, this study

benefited from both questionnaires and interview. Whereas the results of the

questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively, for the analysis of interviews qualitative

method was utilized. In the light of the data gathered through questionnaires and

interview protocols, the study attempted to find answers to the following research

questions:

1. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. listening ability?

b. reading ability?

c. writing ability?

96

d. speaking ability?

2. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. academic adjustment?

b. social adjustment?

c. personal adjustment?

d. institutional (attachment) adjustment?

3. Does one-year preparatory continuum contribute to transition process in terms

of:

a. English academic achievement?

b. adjustment to university?

The conclusions drawn from the results and the discussions made on each one of

the research questions are presented below:

1. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. listening ability?

The results of the questionnaire revealed that the responses of the students in

Group A gathered around mostly “little” and relatively “some” alternatives with regard

to the difficulty they had in listening at the beginning of the fall semester. Even if most

of them indicated “little” difficulty in the same ability again at the end of the academic

year, it was concluded that they did not face as much difficulty as before and they made

progress in listening to some extent, which was supported by the interview results in

analysis chapter. Because, in the same way, there were two themes (Theme#3 and

Theme#4) appearing in the responses of the students as two problems with listening in

the beginning like “failing to make notes from spoken language” and “understand

people when they talk quickly.” As for the end, they claimed only one trouble as “being

unable to catching the drift of people in broadcast media” and mostly focused on what

they could accomplish in listening as a skill.

According to the findings obtained from the questionnaire, a high number of the

students in Group B got started on the first-year with “some” difficulty in listening.

97

However; towards the end of the spring semester they became more proficient in what

they listened to and the level of difficulty they suffered went down from “some” to

“little”. During the interview, they confirmed their development through what they

achieved in listening and even thinking over what they could do to go a step further.

It is clearly understood that there is not a significant difference between two

groups in terms of listening ability, which is justified by the results of independent t-

test, as well. When the means scores of both groups are taken into consideration, it just

appears that the students who had prep education made a transition to first-year with

one step ahead about the listening dimension of language proficiency. On the other

hand, when they came to the end of the academic year, the students not taking prep

training caught up with the others and reached almost the same level of success. It

should be also noted that according to the results provided in the table of a mixed

between-within subjects analysis of variance, the listening is the only ability that the

groups showed a significant difference in rating it at the beginning and end of the first

year. Additionally, this difference appeared to be in favour of Group B in accordance

with the numerical information in the table of ANOVA.

b. reading ability?

Regarding their reading ability, the students in Group A generally pointed to

“little” difficulty in the pre-questionnaire. For the most part, the items they lived trouble

with were identified as “searching to read for assignments” and “reading complicated

texts.” At the end of the academic year, the answers got together around the alternatives

of “little” and “no” difficulty which probably comes to mean that the reading ability of

the students improved. Considering the recurring themes in responses to the interview

questions in analysis section, the students can be said to have positive perceptions of

their reading skills since they focused on their strong features.

In accordance with the figures obtained from both pre-questionnaire and post-

questionnaire, the students in Group B did not evaluate themselves negatively in reading

skill. In both questionnaires, they claimed that they encountered “little” difficulty

concerning reading. Like Group A, they also seem to become more successful in

98

reading and more optimistic while talking about the current state of the relevant ability

during the interview.

It might be most probably suggested that the two groups do not show any

remarkable difference in their reading abilities as the t-test and ANOVA results

suggested, as well. In other words, in the beginning they started the semester from

almost the same point and in the end they met in nearly the same point again. This

conclusion may be linked to the familiarity with reading English texts dating back to the

high school years, which can be understood from the excerpts (Excerpt 2 and 6).

Because, both groups went through a process of preparation for an exam in order to

enter the university which was principally based on reading comprehension. Therefore,

even though the freshmen in Group B did not take preparatory education, they very

likely attained a certain degree of competency in reading prior to the first-year.

c. writing ability?

The results attained from the LPQ questionnaire pointed out that the freshmen in

Group A did not experience much difficulty in writing not only at the beginning but also

at the end of the academic year. A majority of the students agreed with the idea that

writing in English caused them only “little” problem. In the pre-questionnaire, the

problematic areas appeared to be “using suitable and a wide range of vocabulary”, “the

subject matter of the written text” and “punctuation.” However; there seems to be a

conflict between the problem related to using vocabulary items and what the students

remarked while talking about their reading ability. They asserted that when they stepped

into the first-year, they had a wide vocabulary knowledge. On the other hand, the

questionnaire results showed that most of them were unable to employ different words

while writing. This contradiction may be explained through the fact that the freshmen

failed to reflect what they knew on what they wrote in the first weeks of the fall

semester. According to the post-questionnaire results, the difficulty they encountered in

the same issue decreased and as they reported, they even began to use more advanced

vocabulary items.

The responses provided to the items on the questionnaire by the freshmen in

Group B gathered around the alternatives of “some” and” little” difficulty in the pre-

99

questionnaire. It is perceived from the results that the students did not have problem

with grammatical dimension of what they wrote but they faced difficulty in “using

appropriate” and “various vocabulary components” as the other group did. This can be

referred to their being acquainted with grammatical structures since secondary school

years as they were mostly subjected to traditional teaching principles like grammar-

translation method.

When made a comparison between two groups, even though it is not statistically

significant it may be realized from the results that Group A moved from prep class to

first year with a head start in terms of writing skill. As can be understood from the

interview findings, by the time they began to take writing course in the first-year, they

had already known about essay rules and types. At least, they got to know how to

construct an outline of what they would write. On the other hand, the freshmen

exempted from prep program were not aware of much even how to start writing, which

may stem from the fact that they did not do enough practice in writing during high

school. But, at the end of the second semester both groups appear to make progress in

their writing ability. Because, in the responses of the students, it is possible to encounter

such expressions referring to development as “the usage of more advanced vocabulary

items”, “producing better essays”, and “getting more motivated in writing or taking

writing ability a step further through portfolio”.

d. speaking ability?

Concerning the speaking ability of the freshmen in Group A, it can be suggested

that they evaluated themselves as neither good nor bad in the beginning. In accordance

with the figures attained from the questionnaire, the students had mostly “some” and

partially “little” difficulty in speaking English. The items reflecting where they met

challenge were “giving oral reports and short talks”, “answering questions asked by

teachers”, and “expressing opinions as well as counter-arguments in discussions”.

However; during the interview half of the students argued that they could make

presentation without much difficulty and some of them stated that they felt self-

confident enough to explain their personal views. That the students may be unfamiliar

with some of their instructors despite already spending one year on prep education

possibly affected the extent to which they felt themselves at ease in classroom in the

100

beginning. Yet, as the time passed it is possible that they got accustomed to their new

classroom atmosphere and therefore expressed their opinions a bit more freely.

The students in Group B generally indicated either “some” or “little” problem

with speaking English in the first weeks of the freshman year. During the interview,

they confirmed what they claimed on the questionnaire and more than half of the

students stated that they only know how to say something in English but had trouble

expressing ideas in general. On the other hand, at the end of the semester they appear to

cope with most of the obstacles preventing them from being competent in speaking

target language. Additionally, they might be said to gain more self-confidence and

motivation which helped them to be open to the expression of what they had in their

minds. The themes appearing in the qualitative data like “making a presentation in front

of class at ease” or “becoming eager to be involved in class discussions” can be

suggested as an evidence to these deductions.

It can be revealed from the results that the two groups did not differ from each

other in terms of speaking ability. They started the first-year with a certain level of

insufficiency and then reached a good degree of proficiency. The insufficiency may be

linked to failing to benefit from prep education in terms of speaking course or going

into panic while speaking, which can be seen in the comments of the participants

(Excerpts 4 and 8). As for the improvement in the same ability, it can be explained

through increased mean scores on the questionnaire and the positive themes occurring

in the answers to interview questions like “talking straightforwardly without hesitation”,

“expressing comments on a film or song” or “trying to use English to communicate with

classmates”.

As a conclusion, it can be stated that the students taking prep education and the

others exempted from it did not differ significantly from each other with regard to

language proficiency. They started the new academic year with almost the same level of

proficiency and in the end they reached nearly the same degree of competency in the

target language, as well. In addition, listening was found as the only ability in which the

participants showed a significant difference when the pre-questionnaire and post-

questionnaire results were compared.

101

2. Do the ELT freshmen making a transition from prep class to first year and those

making a direct transition to first year differ from each other in their :

a. academic adjustment?

Compared to the students in the other group, the freshmen in Group A seem to

have a relatively better level of academic adjustment in the beginning in accordance

with both questionnaire and interview results. This may be attributed to their familiarity

with teaching staff as well as course contents after a one-year preparatory program as

they claimed during the interview. Despite their familiarity, some of the students

remarked that they were concerned about course difficulty and found them difficult. At

the end of the second semester, it is understood from the findings that these worries

went away and the degree of academic adjustment increased.

As can be expected, it is concluded that the first-year students exempted from

prep education managed less academic adjustment in the first weeks of the fall semester.

It may come from the fact that they newly started to get used to their new educational

area and did not get over the psychology of being high-schooler. However; at the end of

the first-year, as both qualitative and quantitative data revealed, it seems that the

freshmen could keep pace with the nature of university education, which can be

deduced from the themes like “being satisfied with academic staff”, “becoming more

motivated to learn” and “reaching academically good level”. The results also revealed

that the academic adjustment is the only area that the two groups did not differ

significantly from each other which means that the level of academic adjustment was

not affected by the state of taking prep education or being exempted from it.

b. social adjustment?

In accordance with the qualitative data, having a lot of friends, sharing something

with classmates, and taking part in social activities appear to be the most striking

features of the social adjustment of the students in Group A and therefore, they could be

regarded as more socially adjusted to the university at the beginning of the academic

year. This may be attributed to their getting to know the people around them and

gaining awareness of the social structure of the university throughout the preparatory

102

education. When considered the end of the spring semester, it seems that the more they

spent time on campus, the more they extended their social life. Because, as the students

stated, they began to participate in extracurricular activities and make friendship with

people from other years of the program. For that reason, their degree of social

adjustment may have enhanced in the end.

When they stepped into the first-year from high school, the freshmen in Group B

can be said to show social maladjustment according to the questionnaire and interview

findings. Although some of them were from Adana and already had a group of friends, a

majority of the students suffered from “feeling lonely”, “living in a dormitory” or “lack

of communication with classmates”. On the other hand, these typical adjustment

problems seem to be tackled at the end of the year since they showed greater level of

social adaptation. This increase can be linked to the students’ being more acquainted

with their friends and discovering the facilities the university included as the time

passed. Furthermore, it may be due to their success in making a transition from the

psychology of being a high-schooler to university student. The students might get rid of

their old student identity and make it up-to-date in accordance with what it required

then.

c. personal adjustment?

Like in academic and social adjustment, the freshmen in Group A started the first-

year with one step ahead in terms of personal adjustment in comparison with the other

group. Despite the feelings of “tension” and “unreadiness”, they appear to achieve

personally an easy start. Additionally, the progress they made in both academic and

social areas as stated above might help them emotionally feel better. Thus, they can be

said to be able to manage personal adjustment at the end of the year.

It can be concluded from qualitative and quantitative results that the students in

Group B fell behind in personal adjustment at the beginning of the first semester. They

bore such feelings as anxiety, inhibition, longing or fear which might be most probably

explained in a way that a large number of them had to make a change on where they

lived, who they were with, and even what they usually did. But; it seems that as they got

accustomed to the changes in their lives, they either began to enjoy them or learnt to

103

take everything as it came as they remarked in the course of the interview. Therefore, in

the end they could feel at ease in their new environment (Theme#3) and become hopeful

about personal development (Theme#5).

d. institutional adjustment?

When taken the outcomes of the questionnaire and interview into account, the

freshmen taking preparatory education can be said to be satisfied with the institution

where they were taught about their profession. This overall satisfaction may be

attributed to what they achieved in terms of academic, social and personal aspects as

mentioned above. In addition, because of the new improvements in these cases, the

students might “feel themselves an inseparable part of the university” and “adopt the

title of being university student” as they suggested during the interviews.

With regard to the institutional attachment, it is possible to state that there was a

difference of opinion among the students in Group B. Some of them referred to the

pleasure in being a student at university whereas another some thought of either

dropping out of school or preferred to be at another university. The satisfaction can

come from the fact that they gained the chance of taking education at university which

was in their ultimate goals. On the other hand, the students who were dissatisfied with

being a student at the university may have a dream of another university or they might

be afraid of coping with the challenges of university life and thus wanted to turn back

home. However, like the other group, as these students met new people, enjoyed the

time together and achieved success, they might most probably feel content with their

current state. Therefore, they appear to show more attachment to the university towards

the end of the academic year.

As a consequence, it can be revealed that there was a significant difference

between both participants groups in terms of university adjustment. The students

making a transition to first-year after preparatory education showed better adjustment

than the students in the other group in the beginning. However; at the end of the year it

was found that the two participant groups made progress in adjustment to university. It

was also found that the students differed more significantly from each other in the areas

104

of social, personal and institutional adjustment than they did in the area of academic

adaptation.

3. Does one-year preparatory continuum contribute to transition process in terms

of:

a. English academic achievement?

According to the perceptions of the students taking a one-year preparatory

education, the preparatory program helped their four basic language skills develop with

regard to some aspects like “producing essays in different types”, “making a

presentation”, “understanding easily what is being talked or reading quickly”. In the

same vein, from the perspectives of the students not going through the prep continuum,

if they had lived through that process, they could have reaped the benefit of it such as

gaining experience in note-taking, extending vocabulary knowledge or constructing

strong knowledge on how to write.

Considering the difference between the mean scores of two groups they got on the

LPQ, it is possible to conclude that the students making transition from prep class to

first-year appear to be in an advantageous position in the beginning even if it wasn’t

regarded as a significant difference as t-test results revealed. Furthermore, when looked

into the findings gathered from both interview and questionnaire, it is easily understood

that the two groups reached nearly the same level of proficiency in the target language

at the end of the academic year.

On the whole, it can be suggested that the preparatory education makes a

contribution to the students’ English academic achievement to some extent. At least, it

may be accepted that it fulfills the responsibility of preparing students for the next year.

However; it should be also here emphasized that maybe owing to the students’ own

efforts or the teachers’ encouragement or both, the students exempted from the

preparatory education are able to make progress in language proficiency although they

show a bit insufficiency in the beginning.

b. university adjustment?

105

The freshmen stepping into the first-year after prep class positively indicated their

perceptions of the preparatory program’s role in university adjustment. Namely, they

believed that the education they received in the previous year enabled them to display

an overall adjustment like “getting familiar with academic staff”, “making a circle of

friends” or “giving way to lonesomess”. In the same way, most of the students making a

direct transition to first-year thought that if they had attended prep class, this could have

positively affected their adjustment to university.

Taking the difference in percentages rate on the SACQ questionnaire that

belonged to each of two groups into consideration, it can be clearly asserted that Group

A showed a higher level of adjustment in the beginning. However; as the time passed

the other group adjusted well to the university and seem to cope with the problems they

experienced academically, socially or personally before. This may be attributed to the

personal effort, the achievement coming with those personal attempts, or the support

provided by the people around like family, academic staff or peers.

All in all, it may be revealed that a one-year preparatory education contributes

more to university adjustment than English academic achievement. Probably, since the

students not taking prep training are deprived from that adjustment process provided by

prep continuum, they are unable to make completely the same start in terms of language

proficiency. It may be also suggested that the students going through prep continuum

spend that duration mostly adjusting to the university and begin to focus on their

courses in the first-year. On the other hand, the other group of students exempted from

preparatory process experience a large number of their problems regarding adjustment

and language proficiency in the first semester. When they move to the second term, they

seem to become more proficient academically and well adjusted to the university.

5.3. Implications of the Study

This study revealed that a one-year preparatory education has a positive effect on

students’ language proficiency and university adjustment to some extent. At the same

time, it has also found out that the ELT students making a direct transition to the

freshman year without taking preparatory training experienced relatively proficiency

problems in the target language and a certain number of drawbacks in the process of

106

adjustment to the university. Considering these outcomes, the following implications

can be put forward:

• With the aim of easing the adjustment process that the students not taking

preparatory education go through, the courses like “Problem-solving Strategies”,

“Critical Thinking Strategies” or “Autonomous Learning” can be included in the

curriculum of the first-year. In this way, it may become possible for freshmen to cope

with the problems they have in terms of academic achievement as well as college

adjustment. What’s more, the knowledge they will acquire in these courses might also

serve them when they embark on their career in an unfamiliar place to which they will

probably have to adjust.

• At the beginning of the academic year, a needs analysis may be conducted to

determine the strengths and weaknesses students have and then make a decision on the

implementation of the courses accordingly. This may raise the instructors’ awareness of

the individual differences in backgrounds of the students coming from prep class or

high school.

• In order to initiate a collaboration at once among students who do not know one

another, the lecturers may employ teaching strategies that bring students together.

Through these strategies, students can come closer and learn from each other.

Additionally; as they get to know their peers, they will probably be more open to share

or express their ideas in classroom setting.

• It may be necessary for students passing the proficiency examination and

therefore being admitted to the first-year to receive an orientation seminar prior to

attending classes. In this way, they can be made aware of course contents, teaching staff

and the sources at university that they can benefit from. By means of the seminars,

students may get over their general concerns and make a smooth transition to the first-

year.

• The current study also has significance for policy in high school education. The

findings reveal data about transitional experiences of the students making a direct

transition from high school to first-year. That is why, policy makers might use the

results to examine whether their programs really prepare students for higher education

or just for gaining acceptance to the university.

107

• In an attempt to make preparatory education and its outcomes more effective and

long-lasting, some modifications can be inserted into the curriculum. For instance;

instead of giving speaking and listening skills as only one course, they may be given

separately since these skills are the ones that students in general need to do more

practices. Furthermore, as the curriculum of the prep year contains fewer courses in

comparison with the other years, in addition to these courses conversation groups or

language club activities could be initiated so that the students can find more

opportunities to put what they learn into practice.

5.4. Suggestions for Further Studies

In this study, the transitional experiences of the first-year students were

investigated and analyzed descriptively. In another study, a correlational research

method may be applied to reach a statistical measure of the relationship between the

subscales of the questionnaires. Through this method, it may be possible to attain an

indication of how one variable may predict another.

Additionally, further research can be conducted to find out what kind of strategies

students employ to cope with their problems with regard to academic achievement and

university adjustment and to what extent these strategies make contribution to their

problem-solving as well as critical thinking skills.

Another future study may examine the effects of transition on graduation or

retention rates of the students. The long term effects of the transition can be revealed in

such a longitudinal study.

108

REFERENCES

Anderson, L. E. & Carta-Falsa, J. (2002), “Factors that make faculty and student

relationships effective”, College Teaching, 50, 134-138.

Arredondo, M. (1999), “First-generation college students at a selective, four-year

institution: Transition to college, adjustment in college, and self-image”,

Doctoral Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles, USA.

Astin, A.W. (1975), Preventing Students from Dropping out, Washington: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1977), Four Critical Years, Washington: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1984), “Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher

education”, Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.

Astin, A. W. (1985), Achieving educational excellence: A Critical Assessment of

Priorities and Practices in Higher Education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1993), What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited, San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Baker, R.W. & Siryk, B. (1980), “Alienation and freshman transition into college”,

Journal of College Student Personnel, 21, 437-442.

Baker, R. W., McNeil, O. V. & Siryk, B. (1985), “Expectations and reality in freshmen

adjustment to college”, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 94-103.

Baker, R. W. & Siryk, B. (1999), SACQ: Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

Manual, Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

Bean, J.P. (1985), “Interaction effects based on class level in an explanatory model of

college student dropout syndrome”, American Educational Research

Journal, 22, 35-64.

Benseler, D. P. & Schulz, R. A. (1978), “Intensive foreign language courses and

language in education: Theory-practice”, Arlington, VA: Clearinghouse on

Languages and Linguistics.

Berdie, R. F. (1968), “Changes in university perceptions during the first two college

years”, Journal of College Personnel, 9, 85-89.

Berg, B. L. (2007), Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Science (6th ed.), USA:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Berman, W. H. & Sperling, M. B. (1991), “Parental attachment and emotional distress

in the transition to college”, Journal of Youth and Adolesence, 20, 427-441.

109

Bernier, A., Larose S., Boivin, M., & Soucy, N. (2004), “Attachment state of mind:

Implications for adjustment to college”, Journal of Adolescent Research,

19(6), 783-806.

Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (2006), Research in Education (10th ed.), USA: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Bialystok, E. (2001), Bilingualism in Development: Language Literacy, and Cognition,

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Birdsong, D. (1989), Metalinguistic Performance and Interlinguistic Competence, New

York: Springer-Verlag.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (2007), Qualitative Research for Education: An

Introduction to Theories and Methods (5th ed.), USA: Pearson Education.

Brammer, L. (1991), How to Cope with Life Transitions: The Challenge of Personal

Change, New York: Hemisphere.

Bray, S., & Kwan, M. (2006), “Physical activity is associated with better health and

psychological well-being during transition to university life”, Journal of

American College Health, 55(2), 77-81.

Bridges, W. (1991), Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change, Cambridge,

MA: De Capo Press.

Cargan, L. (2007), Doing Social Research, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Carroll, J. B. (1965), “Research on Teaching Foreign Languages”, In N. L. Gage (Ed.),

Handbook of Research on Teaching, Chicago: Rand McNally.

Chick, N. & Meleis, A.I. (1986), “Transitions: A Nursing Concern”, In P.L. Chinn

(Ed.), Nursing Research Methodology: Issues and Implementation,

Rockville, MD: Aspen.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007), Research Methods in Education (6th ed.),

New York: Routledge.

Cope, R. & Hannah, W. (1975), Revolving College Doors: The Causes and

Consequences of Dropping out, Stopping out, and Transferring, New York:

Wiley & Sons.

Cote, J. E. & Levine, C. G. (2000), “Attitude vs. aptitude: Is intelligence or motivation

more important for positive higher education outcomes?”, Journal of

Adolescent Research, 15, 58-80.

110

Çiftci, A. (2005), “Students' and lecturers' views on the motivational factors of

preparatory class students at university”, Master Thesis, Dokuz Eylül

University, Institute of Social Sciences, izmir.

Dalziel, J. R., & Peat, M. (1998), “Academic performance during student transition to

university studies”, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney.

DeStefano, T. J., Mellott, R. N. & Petersen, J. D. (2001), “A preliminary assessment of

the impact of counseling on student adjustment to college”, Journal of

Counseling, 4, 113-121.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998), Student Development in College:

Theory, Research, and Practice (1st ed.), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Field, A. (2006), Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (2nd ed.), UK: Sage Publications.

Galloway, V. (1987), “From Defining to Developing Proficiency: A Look at the

Decisions”, Heidi Byrnes and Michael Canale, Defining and Developing

Proficiency: Guidelines, Implications, and Concepts (Ed.), Lincolnwood, IL:

National Textbook Company.

Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. (1965), Language Aptitude, Intelligence and Second-

Language Achievement, Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 191-199.

Golan, N. (1981), Passing through Transitions: A Guide for Practitioners, London:

Collier Macmillian Publishers.

Hicks, T. (2005), “Assessing the academic, personal and social experiences of pre-

college students”, Faculty Working Papers from the School of Education,

Fayetteville State University.

Hudd, S. S., Dumlao, J., Erdmann-Sager, D., Murray, D., Phan, E., Soukas, N., et al.

(2000), “Stress at college: Effects on health habits, health status, and self-

esteem”, College Student Journal, (34)2, 217-227.

Hudson, F. M. (1991), The Adult Years: Mastering the Art of Self-renewal, San

Francisco: CA, Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Huon, G. & Sankey, M. (2000), “The transition to university: Understanding

differences in success”, School of Psychology, The University of New

South Wales.

Jackson, L. M., Pancer, S. M., Pratt, M. W., & Hunsberger, B. E. (2000), “Great

expectations: The relation between expectancies and adjustment during the

transition to university”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(10),

2100-2125.

111

Johnson, G. B. (1954), “A proposed technique for the analysis of drop-outs at a state

college,” Journal of Educational Research, 47, 381-87.

Heper, Ş. (1998), “The evaluation of the achievement levels of objectives for

preparatory classes course at universities in Turkey”, Master Thesis,

Anadolu University, Institute of Social Sciences, Eskişehir.

Hurtado, S., & Kamimura, M. (2003), “Latina/o retention in four-year institutions”, In

J. Castellanos & L. Jones (Eds.), The majority in the minority: Expanding

the representation of Latina/o faculty, administrators, and students in higher

education, Sterling, VA: Stylus.

King, H. & Walsh, W. B. (1972), “Change in environmental expectations and

perceptions”, Journal of College Student Personnel, 13, 331-337.

Kohn, P. M., & Veres, E. (2001), “Fewer hassles mediate the auspicious effects of

adaptive coping on student adjustment”, Unpublished Manuscript, York

University.

Kramer, H. C. (1980), “Monitoring freshman perceptions of college”, Journal of

NAWDAC, 44, 7-13.

Lado, R. (1961), Language Testing: The Constructionand Use of Foreign Language

Tests; A Teacher’s Book, London: Longman.

Lahn, A. M. (1971), “Changes in study habits and attitudes during a college preparatory

program for high risk student,,” Shippensburg State College.

Lokitz, B. & Sprandel, H. Z. (1976), “The first year a look at the freshman experience,”

Journal of College Student Personnel, 17, 274-279.

Lamothe, D., Currie, F., Alisat, S., Sullivan, T., Pratt, M., Pancer, M., et al. (1995),

“Impact of a social support intervention on the transition to university”,

Canadian Journal of Community, (14)2, 167-180.

Lopez, F. G. & Gormley, B. (2002), “Stability and change in adult attachment style over

the first-year college transition: Relations to selfconfidence, coping, and

distress patterns”, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 355-364.

Martin, N. K. (1988), “The effects of freshman orientation and locus of control on

adjustment to college”, Doctoral Dissertation, Texas Tech University, USA.

McDonough, J. & McDonough, S. (2004), Research Methods for English Language

Teachers, London: Arnold Publishers.

McKay, S. L. (2002), Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking

Goals and Approaches, Oxford University Press.

112

Murphy, S. A. (1990), “Human responses to transitions: A holistic nursing perspective”,

Holistic Nursing Practice, 3, 1-7.

Omaggio, A. C. (1986), Teaching Language in Context: Proficiency-Oriented

Instruction,

Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.

Pallant, J. (2005), SPSS Survival Manual (2nd ed.), Berkshire: Open University Press.

Pancer, S. M., Hunsberger, B., Pratt, M. W. & Alisat, S. (2000), “Cognitive complexity

of expectations and adjustment to university in the first year”, Journal of

Adolescent Research, 15, 38-57.

Parkes, C. M. (1971), “Psychosocial transitions: A field for study”, Social Science and

Medicine, 5, 101-115.

Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (1991), How College Affects Students, San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (2002), Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.), USA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Ruane, J. M. (2005), Essentials of Research Methods: A Guide to Social Science

Research, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Sanford. N. (1962), Developmental Status of the Entering Freshmen, In N. Sanford

(Ed.), The American College, New York: Wiley.

Sasaki, M. (1996), Second Language Proficiency,Foreign Language Aptitude, and

Intelligence, New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Scherer, C. & Wygant, N. S. (1982), “Sound beginnings support freshmen transition

into university life”, Journal of College Student Personnel, 23, 378-383.

Schlossberg, N. K (1981), “A model for analyzing human adaptation”, The Counseling

Psychologist, 9(2), 2-18, Sage Publications.

Schlossberg, N. K., Waters, E. B., & Goodman, J. (1995), Counseling Adults in

Transition: Linking practice with theory (2nd ed.), New York: Springer.

Singleton, R. A., Jr. & Straits, B. C. (1998), Approaches to Social Research (3rd ed.),

Oxford University Press, Inc.

Spencer, S. A. & Adams, J. D. (2003), Life Changes: A Guide to the Seven Stages of

Personal Growth, Paraview Special Editions.

Tao, S., Dong, Q., Pratt, M., Hunsberger, B., & Pancer, M. (2000), “Social support:

Relations to coping and adjustment during the transition to university in the

people’s republic of China”, Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 123-144.

113

Terenzini, P. T. & Pascarella, E. T. (1977), “Voluntary freshman attrition and patterns

of social and academic integration in a university: A test of a conceptual

model”, Research in Higher Education, 6, 25-43.

Timmons, F. R. (1978), “Freshman withdrawal from college: A positive step toward

identity formation?”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 7, 159-172.

Tinto, V. (1975), “Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent

research”, Review of Educational Research, 45, 89-125.

Tinto, V. (1994), Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student

Attrition, University of Chicago Press.

Titley, R.W. & Titley, B. S. (1980), “Initial choice college major: Are only the

"undecided" undecided?”, Journal of College Student Personel, 21, 293-298.

Toker, O. (1999), “The Attitudes of teaching staff and students towards the preparatory

curriculum of the department of foreign languages in the University of

Gaziantep”, Master Thesis, Gaziantep University, Institute of Social

Sciences, Gaziantep.

Turhan, E. (2007), “A comparative analysis of students' success on university courses in

two groups; direct entry students and students following their preparatory

studies”, Master Thesis, Beykent University, Institute of Social Sciences,

İstanbul.

Tyhurst, J. (1957), “The role of transition states - including disasters - in mental

illness”, In Symposium on Preventive and Social Psychiatry, (149-169),

Washington, DC: Walter Reed Army Institute of Research.

Weir, C. & Roberts, J. (1994), Evaluation in ELT, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Werther, E. (2009), “Student adjustment: Identification of factors impacting transition”,

Department of Counseling and Human Development Services, University of

Georgia.

Vitalo, R. L. (1974), “A course in life skills,” Journal of College Student Personnel, 15,

34-38.

Vural, T. (2004), “An evaluation of the curriculum applied at the preparatory English

classes of Yıldız Technical University”, Master Thesis, Yıldız Technical

University, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.

Yalçın, M. (2006), “Differences in the perceptions on language learning strategies of

English preparatory class students studying at Gazi University”, Master

Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.

114

Zea, M. C., Jarama, L. & Bianchi, F. T. (1995), “Social support and psychosocial

competence: Explaining the adaptation to college of ethnically diverse

students”, American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 509-531.

115

APPENDIX 1.

Language Proficiency Questionnaire

Please provide the identifying information below.

Being exempt from preparatory education [ ]

Having already taken preparatory education [ ]

A L

ot o

f D

iffic

ulty

Som

e D

iffic

ulty

Litt

le

Diff

icul

ty

No

D

iffic

ulty

Listening Ability

1 Understanding spoken description and narrative 1 2 3 4

2 Understanding spoken instructions 1 2 3 4

3 Understanding informal language 1 2 3 4

4 Understanding what’s being talked about 1 2 3 4

5 Recognising individual words in what is being said

1 2 3 4

6 Recognising where sentences end and begin 1 2 3 4

7 Understanding what the speaker is saying and linking this to what he has said earlier

1 2 3 4

8 Recognising what is important and worth noting 1 2 3 4

9 Being able to write down quickly and clearly 1 2 3 4

10 Thinking of and using suitable abbreviation 1 2 3 4

11 Organising the notes you take down so that you can understand them when you read them later

1 2 3 4

Reading Ability

12 Reading carefully to understand all the information in a text

1

2

3

4

13 Reading to get the main information from a text 1 2 3 4

14 Search reading to get information specifically required for assignments

1

2

3

4

15 Critical reading to establish and evaluate the author’s position on a particular topic

1

2

3

4

16 Reading quickly 1 2 3 4

17 Making notes from textbooks 1 2 3 4

18 Reading texts where the subject matter is very

complicated

1

2

3

4

Writing Ability 19 Writing grammatically correct sentences 1 2 3 4

20 Using a variety of grammatical structures 1 2 3 4

116

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to elicit your difficulties with regard to listening to and

understanding spoken English, reading and summarizing written material, writing ability, and speaking

ability. Please read the following statements and circle the appropriate number on the scale to indicate

how much difficulty you have in each of them :

21 Using appropriate grammatical structures 1 2 3 4

22 Using appropriate vocabulary 1 2 3 4

23 Using a wide range of vocabulary 1 2 3 4

24 The subject matter 1 2 3 4

25 Expressing what you want to say clearly 1 2 3 4

26 Arranging and developing your written work 1 2 3 4

27 Spelling 1 2 3 4

28 Punctuation 1 2 3 4

29 Handwriting 1 2 3 4

30 Tidiness 1 2 3 4

Speaking Ability

31 Giving oral reports and short talks 1 2 3 4

32 Asking teachers questions 1 2 3 4

33 Asking other students questions 1 2 3 4

34 Answering questions asked by teachers 1 2 3 4

35 Answering questions asked by other students 1 2 3 4

36 Working with other students using English to

communicate

1 2 3 4

37 Expressing your own opinions in discussions 1 2 3 4

38 Expressing your opinions when they are not

immediately understood in discussions

1

2

3

4

39 Expressing counter-arguments to points raised

by other students in discussions

1

2

3

4

40 Expressing counter-arguments to points raised

by teachers in discussions

1

2

3

4

117

APPENDIX 2. Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire

Please provide the identifying information below.

Being exempt from preparatory education [ ]

Having already taken preparatory education [ ]

Directions: The 67 statements on this form describe college experiences. Read each one and decide how

well it applies to you at the present time (within the past few days). For each statement, circle the number

at the point in the continuum that best represents how closely the statement applies to you. Select only

one number for each statement.

Applies very closely Doesn’t

apply to

to me me at all

ç è

1 I feel that I fit in well as part of the college

environment.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2 I have been feeling tense or nervous lately. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

3 I have been keeping up to date on my academic

work.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

4 I am meeting as many people, and making as many

friends as I would like at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

5 I know why I’m in college and what I want out of it. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

6 I am finding academic work at college difficult.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

7 Lately, I have been feeling down and moody a lot.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

8 I am very involved with social activities in college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

9 I am adjusting well to college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 I have not been functioning well during

examinations.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

11 I have felt tired much of the time lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

12 Begin on my own, taking responsibility for myself,

has not been easy.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

118

13 I am satisfied with the level at which I am

performing academically.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

14 I have had informal, personal contacts with college

professors.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

15 I am pleased now about my decision about my

decision to go to college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

16 I am pleased now about my decision to attend this

college in particular.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

17 I’m not working as hard as I should at my course

work.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

18 I have several close social ties at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

19 My academic goals and purposes are well defined.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

20 I haven’t been able to control my emotions very well

lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

21 I’m not really smart enough for academic work I am

expected to be doing now.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

22 Lonesomeness for home is a source is of difficulty

for me now.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

23 Getting a college degree is very important for me.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

24 My appetite has been good lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

25 I haven’t been very efficient in the use of study time

lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

26 I enjoy living in a college dormitory. (Please omit if

you do not live in a dormitory; any university

housing should be regarded as a dormitory.)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

27 I enjoy writing papers for courses. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

28 I have been having a lot of headaches lately. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

29 I really haven’t had much motivation for studying

lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

30 I am satisfied with the extracurricular activities

available at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

31 I’ve given a lot of thought lately to whether I should

ask for help form the Psychological/Counseling

Services Center or from a psychotherapist outside of

college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

119

32 Lately, I have been having doubts regarding the

value of a college education.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

33 I am getting along very well with my roommates(s)

at college. (Please omit if you do not have a

roommate.)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

34 I wish I were at another college or university.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

35 I’ve put on (or lost) too much weight recently.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

36 I am satisfied with the number and variety of courses

available at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

37 I feel that I have enough social skills to get along

well in the college setting.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

38 I have been getting angry too easily lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

39 Recently I have had trouble concentrating when I try

to study.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

40 I haven’t been sleeping very well.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

41 I’m not doing well enough academically for the

amount of work I put in.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

42 I am having difficulty feeling at ease with other

people at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

43 I am satisfied with the quality of courses available at

college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

44 I am attending classes regularly.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

45 Sometimes I get confused too easily.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

46 I am satisfied with the extent to which I am

participating in social activities at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

47 I expect to stay at this college for a bachelor’s

degree.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

48 I haven’t been mixing too well with the opposite sex

lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

49 I worry a lot about my college expenses.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

50 I am enjoying my academic work at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

120

51 I have been feeling lonely a lot at college lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

52 I am having a lot trouble getting started on

homework assignments.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

53 I feel I have good control over my life situation at

college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

54 I am satisfied with my program of courses for this

semester/quarter.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

55 I have been feeling in good health lately.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

56 I feel I am very different from other students at

college in ways that I don’t like.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

57 On balance, I would rather be home than here.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

58 Most of the things I am interested in are not related

to any of my course work at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

59 Lately I have been giving a lot of thought to

transferring to another college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

60 Lately I have been giving a lot thought to dropping

out of college altogether and for good.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

61 I find myself giving considerable thought to taking

time off from college and finishing later.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

62 I am very satisfied with the professors I have now in

my courses.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

63 I have some good friends or acquaintances at college

with whom I can talk about any problems I may

have.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

64 I am experiencing a lot of difficulty coping with the

stresses imposed upon me in college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

65 I am quite satisfied with my social life at college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

66 I’m quite satisfied with my academic situation at

college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

67 I feel confident that I will be able to deal in a

satisfactory manner with future challenges here at

college.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

121

CURRICULUM VITAE

PERSONAL DETAILS

Name-Surname : Nermin ARIN

Date of Birth : 23.08.1986

Place of Birth : Adana, Turkey

Phone (office) : +90 322 338 60 84 – 2793 – 34

Email : narin@cu.edu.tr

EDUCATION

2008-2010 : M.A at Cukurova University, The Institute of Social Sciences,

English Language Teaching Department, Adana.

2004-2008 : B.A at Cukurova University, Faculty of Education,

English Language Teaching Department, Adana.

2000-2004 : Seyhan Danisment Gazi Anatolian High School, Adana.

WORK EXPERIENCE

2009- : Research assistant at Cukurova University, Adana.

2009 (Spring Semester) : English instructor in Karatas College of Tourism and

Hotel Management, Cukurova University, Adana.

CONFERENCES AND SEMINARS ATTENDED

• International ELT Conference, “Stepping Over Thresholds: Transitions in English

Language Learning and Teaching”, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey, 2008.

• “Providing Guidelines for CLIL Implementation in Primary and Pre-Primary

Education”, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey, 2008.

122

PAPER PRESENTED Arin, N. & Orsdemir, E. (2010), “Reflecting on Teaching Practicum: From ELT Major

Student-Teachers’ Perspective”, The 6th International ELT Research

Conference, Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Izmir, Turkey.