International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2021, Vol. 17(1) 111-128

The Methodological Bases of Turkish ELT Curricula for Basic Education from 1991 to 2018

Ahmet Acar

pp. 111 - 128   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2009-04-0005.R1

Published online: February 01, 2021  |   Number of Views: 433  |  Number of Download: 428


Abstract

This paper aims to investigate the methodological bases of the 1991 ELT curriculum for the secondary schools (1st, 2nd, and 3rd grades), the 1997 ELT curriculum for the 4th and 5th grades of the primary education, the 2006 ELT curriculum for the primary education (grades four to eight), 2013 and 2018 ELT curricula for the primary and secondary schools (grades two to eight) in Turkey by utilising document analysis as a form of qualitative research. Investigation of the other components of ELT curricula, namely, needs, goals and objectives, syllabus, assessment and evaluation is not the main concern of the study but some of these components will also be mentioned to shed light on the adopted methodology in the mentioned curricula. It is argued that all the curricula investigated present the teachers with an eclectic approach while some of these curricula (e.g. 1991, 2013, 2018 curricula) state it explicitly and some of them (e.g. 1997 and 2006 curricula) indicate it implicitly by suggesting the teachers get benefit from different principles and/or activities from different methods and/or approaches. It is also observed that the principles and/or activities of the communicative approach are present in all these curricula although their dominance varies from one curriculum to the other. In line with this observation, the study indicates that the commonly articulated thesis in the literature that the communicative approach was integrated, for the first time, into the Turkish ELT curricula with the 1997 curriculum is not valid. It is also argued that besides adopting an eclectic approach with more focus on the communicative approach, the 2013 and 2018 ELT curricula, unlike all the previous curricula, claim to adopt the action-oriented approach but in reality, these two curricula are not action-oriented. The reason behind this problem is purported to be the misinterpretation of the action-oriented approach by the developers of the curricula as well as some other ELT researchers in Turkey.

Keywords: ELT Curricula, Approaches and Methods, Primary Schools, Secondary Schools


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Acar, A. (2021). The Methodological Bases of Turkish ELT Curricula for Basic Education from 1991 to 2018 . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), 111-128. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.8

Harvard
Acar, A. (2021). The Methodological Bases of Turkish ELT Curricula for Basic Education from 1991 to 2018 . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), pp. 111-128.

Chicago 16th edition
Acar, Ahmet (2021). "The Methodological Bases of Turkish ELT Curricula for Basic Education from 1991 to 2018 ". International Journal of Progressive Education 17 (1):111-128. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.8.

References
  1. Acar, A. (2019a). The action-oriented approach: Integrating democratic citizenship education into language teaching. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 5(1), 122-141.  [Google Scholar]
  2. Acar, A. (2019b). A comparison of the 2013 and 2018 primary and secondary schools ELT curricula in Turkey: An analysis of 7th-grade syllabi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48 (224) , 299-325. [Google Scholar]
  3. Acar, A. (2020a).  Transforming communicative tasks into mini-projects.  Elementary Education Online, 19 (3), 1660-1668.  [Google Scholar]
  4. Acar, A. (2020b). An analysis of the English textbook ‘let’s learn English’ in terms of the action-oriented approach, Turkish Studies – Educational Sciences, 15(3), 1449-1458.  [Google Scholar]
  5. Acar, A. (2020c). Social-action-based textbook design in ELT. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 6 (1), 27-40. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bayyurt, Y. (2012). Proposing a model for English language education in the Turkish sociocultural context. In Y. Bayyurt & Y. Bektaş-Çetinkaya (Eds.), Research Perspectives on Teaching and Learning English in Turkey: Policies and Practices (pp. 301-312). Frankfurt: Peter Lang. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bayyurt, Y. (2020). Task-based language learning and teaching. In B. Haznedar, & H. Uysal (Eds.), Handbook for Teaching Foreign Languages to Young Learners in Primary Schools (4th edition). (pp. 89-118). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowen, G.A. (2009).  Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. [Google Scholar]
  9. Council of Europe (CoE). (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Council of Europe (CoE). (2018).  Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989. [Google Scholar]
  11. Demirezen, M. (2011). The foundations of the communicative approach and three of its applications. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 7(1), 57-71. [Google Scholar]
  12. Çelik, S., & Gül Peker, B. (2018). The CEFR and English language teaching: A framework for communicative competence. In İ. Yaman, E. Ekmekçi & M. Şenel (Eds.), Basics of ELT (pp. 480 - 509). Samsun: Black Swan Publishing House. [Google Scholar]
  13. Demircan, Ö. (1988). Dünden bugüne Türkiye’de yabancı dil. İstanbul: Remzi. [Google Scholar]
  14. Demirel, Ö. (1999). İlköğretim okullarında yabancı dil öğretimi. İstanbul: M.E.B. Yayınları.  [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Ekşi, G. Y. (2017). Designing curriculum for second and foreign language studies. In A. Sarıçoban (Ed.), ELT Methodology (pp. 39-60). Anı Yayıncılık: Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  17. Haznedar, B. (2004). Türkiye’de yabancı dil öğretimi: İlköğretim yabancı dil programı. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 21 (2), 15-29. [Google Scholar]
  18. Haznedar B. (2010). Türkiye’de yabancı dil eğitimi: Reformlar, yönelimler ve öğretmenlerimiz. ICONTE International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 11-13 November, Antalya-Turkey ISBN:  978 605 364 104 9 [Google Scholar]
  19. Haznedar, B. (2018). Türkiye’de yabancı dil eğitimi. Hürriyet (Online). Retrieved from https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/egitim/turkiyede-yabanci-dil-egitimi-41045279 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes, (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269- 93). Harmondsworth: Penguin. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kırkgöz, Y. (2007). English language teaching in Turkey: Policy changes and their implementations. RELC Journal, 38(2), 216–228.  [Google Scholar]
  22. Kırkgöz, Y. (2009). Globalization and English language policy in Turkey. Educational Policy, 23(5), 663–684.  [Google Scholar]
  23. Kırkgöz, Y. (2020). Teaching English at primary education: From policy planning to practice. In B. Haznedar, & H. Uysal (Eds.), Handbook for Teaching Foreign Languages to Young Learners in Primary Schools (4th edition). (pp. 23-41). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kırkgöz, Y., Çelik, S., & Arıkan, A. (2016). Laying the theoretical and practical foundations for a new elementary English curriculum in Turkey: A procedural analysis. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(3), 1199-1212. [Google Scholar]
  25. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı,  (MEB) [Turkish Ministry of National Education]. (1991). Ortaokul 1. 2. ve 3. sınıflar İngilizce dersi öğretim programı. [Secondary schools 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grades English curriculum]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.  [Google Scholar]
  26. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı,  (MEB) [Turkish Ministry of National Education]. (1997). İlköğretim okulu 4 ve 5. sınıf yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğretim programı. [primary education school 4th and 5th grades foreign language (English) curriculum]. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. [Google Scholar]
  27. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı  ̧ (MEB) [Turkish Ministry of National Education]. (2006). İlköğretim İngilizce dersi (4,5,6,7 ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı [English language curriculum for primary education (grades 4,5,6,7 and 8)]. Ankara: T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. [Google Scholar]
  28. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, (MEB) [Turkish Ministry of National Education]. (2013). İlköğretim kurumları (ilkokullar ve ortaokullar) İngilizce dersi (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı [Primary education institutions (primary and secondary schools) English language teaching program (Grades 2-8)]. Ankara: T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.  [Google Scholar]
  29. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı  ̧ (MEB) [Turkish Ministry of National Education]. (2018). İngilizce Dersi öğretim programı (ilkokul ve ortaokul 2,3,4,5,6,7 ve 8. sınıflar) [English language teaching program (primary and secondary schools grades 2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8)]. Ankara: T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. [Google Scholar]
  30. Nunn, R. (2020). Project-based learning: Learning about PBL from successful freshman writing projects. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 6 (1), 41-56. [Google Scholar]
  31. Piccardo, E., & North, B. (2019). The action-oriented approach: a dynamic vision of language education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.  [Google Scholar]
  32. Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  33. Puren, C. (2002). Perspectives actionnelles et perspectives culturelles en didactique des langues-cultures: vers une perspective co-actionnelle co-culturelle. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2002b/ [Google Scholar]
  34. Puren, C. (2004). De l'approche par les tâches à la perspective co-actionnelle. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2004a/ [Google Scholar]
  35. Puren, C. (2006).  De l’approche communicative à la perspective actionnelle. À propos de l’évolution parallèle des modèles d’innovation et de conception en didactique des langues-cultures et en management d’entreprise. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2006f/ [Google Scholar]
  36. Puren, C. (2014a).  Approche communicative et perspective actionnelle, deux organismes méthodologiques génétiquement opposés… et complémentaires. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2014a/ [Google Scholar]
  37. Puren, C. (2014b).  La pédagogie de projet dans la mise en œuvre de la perspective actionnelle. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2014b/ [Google Scholar]
  38. Puren, C. (2020).  From an internationalized communicative approach to contextualised plurimethodological approaches. Retrieved from https://www.christianpuren.com/mes-travaux/2020c-en/ [Google Scholar]
  39. Topkaya, E. Z., & Küçük, Ö. (2010). An evaluation of 4th and 5th grade English language teaching program. Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 52–65. [Google Scholar]
  40. Yeni-Palabiyik, P., & Daloğlu, A. (2016). English language teachers' implementation of curriculum with action-oriented approach in Turkish primary education classrooms. Journal on English Language Teaching, (6)2, 45-57.    [Google Scholar]
  41. Yüce & Mirici (2019). A qualitative inquiry into the application of 9th grade EFL program in terms of the CEFR. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(3), 1171-1187. [Google Scholar]
  42. Zorba M.G., & Arıkan A., (2016). A study of Anatolian high schools’ 9th grade English language curriculum in relation to the CEFR. Uşak Üniversitesi Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 13-24.  [Google Scholar]