Amacı Türkçe öğretmeni adaylarının yazılı anlatım becerilerini ve dile karşı duyarlıklarını belirleyebilmek olan çalışmanın problem cümlesi “Türkçe öğretmenliği son sınıf öğrencileri anadillerine duyarlık kazanmış ve yazılı anlatım becerilerini istendik düzeyde geliştirebilmiş midir?” olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışma, Türkçe öğretmeni adaylarının dilsel yeterliklerine ilişkin dönüt sunacak olması nedeniyle önemli görülmektedir. Araştırmanın problemi ışığında çözümü aranan alt problemler şunlardır: 1. Türkçe öğretmenliği son sınıf 1. ve 2. öğretim öğrencilerinin yazılı anlatım becerileri ne oranda Türkçenin kullanım ilkeleriyle örtüşmektedir? 2. Türkçe öğretmenliği son sınıf öğrencilerinin 1. ve 2. öğretim olmaları bağlamında yazılı anlatım becerilerini doğru kullanmalarında anlamlı farklılıklar var mıdır? 3. Türkçe öğretmenliği son sınıf öğrencilerinin sınav sorularının bilgi ölçmeye ve yaratıcı yazmaya dayalı olması, bu öğrencilerin yazılı anlatım becerilerini kullanma başarılarını etkilemekte midir? Tarama modeline dayalı bu çalışmanın veri kaynağı, 2011-2012 eğitim-öğretim yılında İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Türkçe Öğretmenliği Anabilim Dalının 4. sınıfında öğrenim gören 1. öğretimden 47 ve 2. öğretimden 53 olmak üzere toplam 100 öğretmen adayının “Tiyatro ve Drama Uygulamaları” dersinin dönem sonu sınav sorularına verdikleri yazılı yanıtlardır. Kâğıtlarda toplam 4 açık uçlu soru yer almaktadır. 100 öğrencinin yalnızca 3. ve 4. sorulara verdikleri yanıtlar incelenmiştir. Bu soruların seçilmesindeki gerekçe ise, öğrencilerin tamamının 3. ve 4. sorulara yanıt vermiş olmalarıdır.

Introduction and Purpose of Study: It is a fact that the teachers have important responsibilities to make the students comprehend the expression potential and rules of Turkish. Also all the teachers must use their own language in most competent and correct way. Teaching Turkish is the principal and most important phase of the native language learning in elementary school education. According to Gögüş (1993:6) the basic vocabulary of human-beings starts to develop in this age group (7-14). The more lucid the child in this age group uses the words and the meaning of terms and the more accurate he uses the language, the better he/she can command his/her own native language during his/her lifetime. Therefore the Turkish teachers, who upskills the linguistic ability of the students, are required to acquire a skill of teaching Turkish accurately and effectively. The problematic sentence of this study, which aims to specify the written expression skills of the candidate Turkish teachers and their sensitivity to the language, is “have the senior students (final year students) studying at the department of Turkish Teaching Department gained awareness in their native language and developed their written expression skill at an satisfactory level?” This study may be important as it presents the feedback regarding the linguistic skills of the candidate Turkish teachers. The sub-problems whose solutions sought for within the scope of this study are as follows: 1. To what extent do the written expression skills of the senior daytime and evening education students at the Turkish Teaching Department correspond to the principals of usage of Turkish? 2. Are there any meaningful differences between the senior daytime and evening education students at the Turkish Teaching Department in terms of using their writing skills correctly? 3. The exam questions asked to the senior students are based on measuring their knowledge and creative writing. Does this fact affect their success in using their written expression skills? Methodology: This study is based on a descriptive survey model on a generated structure. Data Source: The data source of this study based on the descriptive survey model is the written answers of the students to the end of semester exam of the “Theatre and Drama Practices” course in the academic year 2011-2012. The number of the students, who studies at the Department of Turkish Teaching of the Faculty of Education, İnönü University, who participated in this exam is 100. 47 of them studies at the daytime education programme while 53 of them studies at the evening education. There are 4 open-ended questions in the papers. Only the 3rd and 4th answers of the 100 students are analyzed. The reason why these questions are selected is that all the students replied only 3rd and 4th questions. Forming Options (Categories) and Sub-Options: While forming options and sub-options, the researchers primarily utilized the field information and another studies carried out for the same purpose (Esengül, 2006; Aslan, 2007; Sever and Aslan 2011). In this study, the classification executed by the Özbay in his research called “Written Expression Skills of the Elementary School Students” (2000) is used and the papers are analyzed in accordance with this classification. So the papers of the candidate students are examined under 10 titles, namely “punctuation marks”, “grammatical rules”, “disharmony”, “word ordering error” “use of odd word”, “occurrence”, “defect”, “excess”, “ambiguous expression” and “contradictory expression”. Reliability and Data Analysis: In order to verify the reliability of the codification used in this study, 10 papers were selected randomly out of the 100 papers and analyzed by two researchers. It is seen that the consistency rate (94%) between the researchers is reliable (Tavşancıl and Aslan, 2001). The papers are analyzed in accordance applying the “content analysis” method. Content analysis is to combine the similar