Evaluating EFL Curricula in Turkey: A Study on Skills and Suggested Assignments

Year 2020, , 431 - 441, 31.01.2020

Reyhan Ağcam , Muzaffer Pınar Babanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3635

Cited By: 4

Abstract

Subsequent to the 2012 educational reform in Turkey, English as a Foreign Language course curriculum was revised based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) in 2017, and put into practice in the following academic year. It is acknowledged in the programme document that the primary focus is on the communicative skills rather than traditionally emphasized skills such as reading and writing. The current research primarily investigated the learning outcomes and suggested assignments identified in the primary EFL curriculum to see to what extent they are designed to attain communicative objectives of the programme. The data were compiled from the programme document released on the official website of Ministry of National Education (MoNE), and administered to content analysis. The research findings displayed that 86% of the learning outcomes were designed to improve speaking and listening skills, indicating compatibility of the communicative nature of the programme. The suggested assignments, on the contrary to the major philosophy of the programme, were not designed to require collaboration and communication between and among the students since 76% of them were grounded on their individual work. The study is intended to contribute to the existing literature via re-search-driven implications reported here.

Keywords

EFL Curriculum, Communicative Skill, Learning Outcome, Assignment

Türkiye’de İngilizce Öğretim Programının Değerlendirilmesi: Beceri ve Ödev Önerileri üzerine Bir Çalışma

Abstract

Türkiye’de 2012 yılında gerçekleşen eğitim reformunun ardından, İngilizce dersi öğretim programı, Avrupa Dilleri Ortak Çerçeve Programı temelinde 2017 yılında güncelle-nerek takip eden eğitim-öğretim yılında uygulanmaya baş-lanmıştır. Programda, önceliğin; okuma ve yazma gibi geleneksel olarak vurgulanan becerilerden ziyade iletişim-sel becerilere verildiği belirtilmektedir. Bu çalışmada, gün-cellenen öğretim programında tanımlı kazanımlar ile ödev önerilerin, programın iletişimsel amaçlarına ne ölçüde hizmet ettiği araştırılmıştır. Veriler, Milli Eğitim Bakanlı-ğı’nın resmi internet sayfasında yayınlanmış bulunan İngi-lizce dersi öğretim programından elde edilmiş ve içerik analizi yöntemiyle çözümlenmiştir. Araştırma bulguları, kazanımların %86’sının konuşma ve dinleme becerilerini geliştirmeye yönelik tasarlandığını, programın iletişimsel yapısı ile uyumlu olduğunu göstermiştir. Ödev önerilerinin ise, programın temel felsefesinin aksine, öğrenciler arasın-da işbirliği ve iletişim gerektirmediği, %76’sının öğrencile-rin bireysel çabası temelinde yapılandırıldığı ortaya çıkmış-tır. Çalışmanın, araştırmaya dayalı uygulama önerileri ile mevcut alan yazına katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

İngilizce Öğretim Programı, İletişimsel Beceri, Kazanım, Ödev

References

• Altan, M. Z. (2017). Globalization, English language teaching and Turkey. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 5(4), 764-776. DOI: 10.18298/ijlet.2238
• Aksoy, E., Bozdoğan, D., Akbaş, U., & Seferoğlu, G. (2018). Old wine in a new bottle: Implementation of intensive language program in the 5th grade in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 301-324. DOI:10.32601/ejal.464187
• Amiryousefi, M. (2016). Homework: Voices from EFL teachers and learners. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(2), 35-54. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1127366.pdf
• Arıkan, A. (2017). English language teachers’ views on the new national curriculum for 2nd graders. Journal of Narrative and Language Studies, 5(9), 34-40. Retrieved from https://nalans.com/index.php/nalans/article/view/82
• Banegas, D. L. (2011). Teachers as ‘reform-doers’: developing a participatory curriculum to teach English as a foreign language. Educational Action Research, 19(4), 417-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2011.625654
• Buga, R., CăpeneaĠă, I., Chirasnel, C., & Popa, A. (2014). Facebook in foreign language teaching –a tool to improve communi-cation competences. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128, 93-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.124
• Canlıer, D., & Tümen, N. T. (2018). Yabanci dil ağirlikli beşinci sinif İngilizce dersi öğretim programinin program tasarim il-keleri açisindan analizi [Analysing 5th grade English curriculum regarding curriculum design principles]. Pegem Atıf İndeksi, North America. Retrieved from http://pegemindeks.net/index.php/Pati/article/view/3355 Date accessed: 19 Feb. 2019.
• Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cam-bridge, U.K., Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
• Doğan, Y. (2010). Fen ve teknoloji dersi programinin uygulanmasi sürecinde karşilaşilan sorunlar [The problems encountered during the implementation of science and technology curriculum]. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 86-106. http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/yyuefd/article/view/5000055544
• Dubetz, N. E. (2014). Studying the effects of an EFL curriculum for young adults in Brazil. English Language Teaching, 7(1), 103-113. DOI: 10.5539/elt.v7n1p103
• Erdem, S., & Yücel-Toy, B. (2017). Determination of the needs for foreign language oriented fifth grade English curriculum. Turkish Studies, 12(28), 259-280. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.12346
• Gao, X., Liao, Y., & Li, Y. (2014). Empirical studies on foreign language learning and teaching in China (2008–2011): A review of selected research. Language Teaching, 47(1), 56-79. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444813000414
• Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (2002). English language teaching in China: A bridge to the future. Asia-Pacific Journal of Education, 22(2), 53-64.
• Johnstone, R. 2009. An early start: What are the key conditions for generalized success? In J. Enever, J. Moon, & U. Raman. (Eds.), Young Learner English Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspectives. Reading: Garnet Education, pp. 31–41.
• Kırkgöz, Y. (2008). Curriculum innovation in Turkish primary education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(4), 309-322. DOI: 10.1080/13598660802376204
• Kırkgöz, Y., Çelik, S., & Arıkan, A. (2014). Designing an ELT curriculum for young Turkish learners: Pedagogical foundations, practical considerations, and procedures. Paper presented at the 1st Eurasian Educational Research Congress, Istanbul, Turkey.
• Koç, Y., Işıksal, M., & Bulut, S. (2007). Elementary school curriculum reform in Turkey. International Education Journal, 8(1), 30-39. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ841629
• Kovalska, N., & Prisyazhnyuk, N. (2013). Students' projects as home assignment. Випуск, 2, 65-71. http://visnyk.fl.kpi.ua/article/viewFile/30050/26782
• Kumar, A. J. (2006). Homework education: A powerful tool of learning. Atlantic Publishers & Distributors (P) Ltd.
• Kurt, A. (2017). The evaluation of 4th grade English language curriculum by context, input, process, product model. Dicle Uni-versity Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 30, 508-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.1801
• Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching (3rd Edition). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Mackenzie, A. S. (2002). EFL curriculum reform in Thailand. Curriculum Innovation, Testing and Evaluation: Proceedings of the 1st Annual JALT Pan-SIG Conference, May 11-12, 2002. Kyoto, Japan: Kyoto Institute of Technology. http://hosted.jalt.org/pansig/2002/HTML/Mackenzie1.htm
• Mihai, F. M. (2003). Reforming English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Curriculum in Romania: The Global and the Local Con-texts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, USA. https://fsu.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/fsu:180648/datastream/PDF/view
• Oh, K., & Johnson, D. (2017). The South Korean national curriculum for English: Problems of transparency and coherence. Korea TESOL Journal, 13(1), 3-32.
• O´Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-sity Press.
• O’Neill, G. (2010). Initiating curriculum revision: exploring the practices of educational developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 15(1), 61–71. DOI: 10.1080/13601440903529927
• Orafi, S. M. S. (2008). Investigating Teachers' Practices and Beliefs in Relation to Curriculum Innovation in English Language Teaching in Libya. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Leeds, UK.
• Orafi, S., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing communicative curriculum reform. System, 37, 243-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.11.004
• Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
• Oxford, R. (1996). Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives. University of Hawaii, Honolu-lu.
• Paudel, J. (2012). Dealing with homework in English language teaching: A case of Dadeldhura district. Journal of NELTA, 17(1-2), 50-60.
• Razmjoo, S. A., & Barabadi, E. (2015). An activity theory analysis of ELT reform in Iranian public schools. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 127-166. http://ijal.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2493-en.html
• Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sayer, P., & Ban, R. (2014). Young EFL students’ engagements with English outside the classroom. ELT Journal, 68(3), 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccu013
• Sönmez-Ektem, I., & Yıldız, S. B. (2017). Teacher views about English homework. Journal of the Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, 26(3), 78-91. http://dergipark.gov.tr/cusosbil/issue/33225/369724
• Stake, R. E. 1995. The art of case study research. London: Sage.
• Strakšienė, G. (2011). Characteristics of the development of junior pupils’ communicative competence at primary school. TILTAI, 1, 123-138.
• Tezci, E. (2002). The Effects of Constructivist Instructional Design on the Success and Creativity of Fifth-Year Students in Pri-mary Schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fırat University, Elazığ.
• Torres, D. B., Matamoros, G. B., Vargas, J. R. S, & Pérez, N. S. (2012). The increase in percentage of students who actually do homework by means of communicative out-of-class tasks instead of homework assignments: A case study of adult EFL stu-dents in the conversation courses at the University of Costa Rica. Revista de Lenguas Modernas, 16, 229-253.
• Wallinger, L. M. 1997. Foreign language homework from beginning to end: A case study of homework practices in foreign language classes. Unpublished manuscript, College of William and Mary at Williamsburg, VA.
• Wallinger, L. M. (2000). The role of homework in foreign language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 33(5), 483-496.
• Wiyono, B. B., Gipayana, M., & Ruminiati (2017). The influence of implementing communicative approach in the language teaching process on students’ academic achievement. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(5), 902-908. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0805.08
• Xiohong, Z. (2009). A Great Leap Forward: EFL Curriculum, Globalization and Reconstructionism-A Case Study in North East China. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Ballarat, Australia. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/30542/1/the_great_leap_forwrd_citatiom
• Yavuz, F. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes to foreign language teaching; change or status quo? Procedia-Social and Be-havioral Sciences, 191, 1823-1827. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.226
• Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Yue, S. (2016). On speaking terms! Learners' views on an evolving out-of-class activity. The Bulletin of Central Research, 15(3), 45-53.
• Yücel, E., Dimici, K., Yıldız, B., & Bümen, N. T. (2017). An analysis of the primary and secondary school English language curricula published over the last 15 years. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 18(2): 702-737. DOI: 10.12984/egeefd.305922
• Zhang, D. (2012). Chinese primary school English curriculum reform. In J. Ruan & C. B. Leung (Eds.), Perspectives on Teach-ing and Learning English Literacy in China, Multilingual Education 3 (pp. 67-83). DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-4994-8_5.