Comparison of the English curricula between Turkey and The Republic of Korea
The English language is composed of plenty of languages. There are five invasions in English history. These are Anglo Saxon invasion, Roman invasion, Christian invasion, Norman invasion, and Vikings invasion. These invasions contribute to the English language specifically. In order to exemplify, Anglo Saxon invasion brings the Germanic heroic ideal to Old English literature. In addition, the Vikings and Norman invasion neoterize in the English language. Even these vocabularies utilize in English. Although the English language was not as popular today, the language blossomed through many aspects of the changing dynamic principles of the earth, such as technology, war, and political power. Throughout history, the United Kingdom reinforced and developed. While the UK gained influence, the language changed and improved through intercultural interaction. Thus, the English language started to spread and make progress. The amount of people who speak the language does not indicate that it is a universal tongue. Economic and political powers stated that the global language. (Crystal 62). However, the UK lost its political and economic power beginning in 21. Th nevertheless, the American government took control of the economy and political issues, and the English language spread around the globe. Besides, the native language of the Americans is English as well. (Crystal 9-15). In addition to these advancements, technology, and technological means developed at an extreme speed in the twentieth century and twenty-one-century. In old times, people contact each other by communicating through smoking signals or by using letters and ambassadors. Therefore, the dissemination of the English language is not quick and eloquently according to the 20 and 21 centuries. Thanks to technological advancements, the English language became the lingua franca. The English language utilizes in trade, political issues, and social conditions. Therefore, governments decide to teach English to their folks. In order to the education of English, many governments constitute their unique English curricula. The Republic of Korea and Turkey are two of them.
In point of General objectives of Curricula
Turkish curricula point out that the key to economic, political, and social progress stands in the ability of Turkish people to communicate at the international level and competence in English. The new curriculum model concentrates on language learning as communication, involving authentic use of the target language in an interactive context to produce real meaning. In addition, classroom materials and teaching tools are authentic sources to use in real life eloquently (MEB, 2018), and motivation has a significant role in the learning process. Instead of practicing prepared material, learners/users engage in activities that indicate honest communication between peers or students and their teacher, like creating a game as a group and then playing it with classmates (MEB, 2018). The curricula focus on youth and
adolescent learners. However, youth and adolescent learners are different from each other. Therefore, the curricula target the features of both groups because there is a critical period to acquire the language. The critical period affects success and progress. While young learners acquire the English language quickly and with high proficiency, adult learners acquire it more slowly and non-native way. (Patsy & Nina, 2013). For example, young learners focus on the play world, and dancing, doing arts, and playing games are included in the curricula. Therefore, all aspects of the curriculum, including contexts and tasks, cognitive load, assessment, and evaluation of the types of language skills covered take these differences into account. Turkish curricula are created based on CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages). Nevertheless, the teacher can make functional the reading and writing tasks. Another aspect of the Turkish curriculum is associated with the approaches of students. Turkish curricula include three diverse dimensions. The first dimension is about both teachers and authors. The curricula provide attractive, fascinating, and context-based tasks for the students. The second dimension is about assignments. The curriculum stated that diverse learning strategies classroom instruction, and assignments instruction. Therefore, both teacher and authors have to prepare the assignments methodologically well form instruction and conscientiously selected duty. The third dimension is the evaluation perspective of the curriculum. Because the evaluation perspective has enormous value; the Turkish curriculum aims to create a positive and beneficial washback effect. On the other hand, the Republic of Korea’s overall curriculum framework is based on six guiding principles. The first factor is helping the students actively adapt to societal change. The second factor is pursuing a national core system with an elective-centered curriculum. The third factor is improving the subject area standards for comprehensive instruction. The fourth factor is according to student’s abilities, aptitudes, and interests, offer a variety of learning subjects and teaching and learning methods. The other principle is encouraging local schools’ independence in developing and implementing their curricula. The last one is creating a curriculum assessment system to raise the standard of instruction. According to the Turkish curriculum, the Republic of Korean curriculum has a similar side, such as helping students understand and actively respond to their social changes, providing diverse learning and teaching methods according to students’ features and aptitudes, and establishing an assessment system for curriculum to enhance education quality. In short, the Republic of Korea provides more flexibility than Turkey. For example, Turkey’s curricula are based on CEFR because of that the flexibility rate is low. However, the Republic of Korea’s curricula promotes the organizing and application of unique curricula of the local schools.
In points of English Curriculum Goals
Turkey’s English curriculum goals focus on teaching English in a communicative way. Students can experience the usage of English in real life eloquently and genuinely. English curriculum states that the English learning process should be fun for students to enhance their productivity in teaching English. Therefore, the Turkish curriculum aims to counterbalance the student needs according to their level of development. Also, the curriculum is composed of the CEFR principle about culture. Students gather knowledge of both their own and other cultures. In addition, one of the curriculum goals is to inoculate respect for diverse cultures.
According to the ISCED 2 (Lower secondary education) goals, one of the purposes of the curriculum is to enhance the enthusiasm of the students and enhance English practicability in real life. In addition, curricula aim to provide awareness of diverse languages and cultures. Further, the second goal is to foster a favorable perception of the language. The curriculum teaches the English language as a means instead of being a purpose. Furthermore, the curriculum includes many learning outcomes according to themes and purposes. Curricula concentrate on the four skills of English (Listening, reading, speaking, and writing) (Yavuz & Demir, 2014). On the other hand, the Republic of Korea’s English curriculum has four fundamental principles in point of general English curriculum and four fundamental principles for elementary and secondary school. The goal of the curriculum is to cultivate the elemental ability to understand English and its usage in everyday life. Acquiring an interest in English has a significant role in the English curricula of the Republic of Korea. In order to accomplish these tasks, the curriculum promotes the confidence and enthusiasm of the students in the English learning process. Secondly, the curriculum encourages the students to improve their communication ability in everyday life and ordinary topics. Thirdly, the Korean curriculum urges understanding diverse cultures and their knowledge. Thus, students can understand both foreign culture and their cultures correctly. According to the ISCED 2 goals, the curriculum enables students to understand the value of English. Also, providing communication in everyday life and ordinary topic is another aim of the curriculum. In addition, the Korean curriculum aims to develop the comprehension of the students about the notion and knowledge of English. The last one is improving the appreciation of diverse cultures and introducing their culture in English. Although Turkey and the Republic of Korea have some similar points, there are plenty of differences between the English curriculums of both countries. Whereas Turkey English curriculum is composed according to CEFR principles, the Republic of Korea has composed its English curriculum independently. The English curriculum of Turkey includes teaching to respect other cultures and languages, but the Republic of Korea’s English curriculum includes introducing their culture correctly in English; however, improving communication skills in everyday life and ordinary topics, and contributing the knowledge and the necessity of the English language are similar goals of both English curricula.
In points of Content
Turkey’s English curriculum content considers the three descriptors of the CEFR comprising learner autonomy, self-assessment, and appreciation for cultural diversity (CoE, 2001). In accordance with this statement, learners will become confident and competent users of English. In addition, the curricular model divides into three divisions. Respecting the language uses, functions, and learning materials is introduced in these three divisions. Also, grades 2 through 4 include listening and speaking skills as an actual focus of the curriculum. The curriculum focuses on reading, writing skills, and grammatical issues for grades 5 through 8. The curriculum employs context-based learning methodologies in regard to themes, subjects, and activities. In addition, the curriculum stresses respecting and appreciating native and foreign cultures. In order to bring in predispose the learners, communication functions, and target vocabulary, the curriculum appeals to poets, songs, and
dialog (It primarily targets grades 2–4), and activities include peer activity, drama, matching, and inference from the context. Thus, learners can learn English in diversity. The curriculum content focuses on using English in a specific situation to practice the purposes of the language. On the other hand, the Republic of Korea’s English curriculum focuses on fostering reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. Besides, the curriculum content builds competency in the integration of four skills. Communication activities are composed of phonetic and written language activities. The curricula content includes language-related materials based on topics, circumstances, and lessons. Also, the language material induces learning motivation according to the student’s aptitude, interest, and needs. The curriculum determines a target vocabulary for every stage. Meetings, appreciation, farewells, appointments, congratulation, and introducing patterns are the focus of communicative functions in the content. In addition, suggesting grammatical rules are given for each communication function (Yavuz & Demir, 2014). Whereas the Republic of Korea’s English curriculum content includes phonetic and written language activities, Turkey’s English curriculum content focuses on listening and speaking in grades 2 through 4, then focus on reading, writing, and grammatical issues. Besides, Korea’s contents focus on meetings, appreciation, farewell, appointments, congratulation, and introducing patterns more than Turkey’s. The vast difference between Korea’s and Turkey’s is the composition of the curriculum according to the CEFR principles. In other respects, enhancing the ability to integrate the four skills in English is similar content between Turkey’s and Korea’s English curricula. In addition, determining the target vocabulary is another aspect of the material that is similar between the two countries.
In points of Assessment/evaluation
Assessment has significance for the curriculum. The assessment process provides feedback and correction of errors. Turkey’s English curriculum assessment and evaluation process is composed of CEFR principles. There are many assessment types emphasized in the curricula. Alternative and process-oriented testing processes utilize in the curricula. In addition, self-assessment is stressed as it is expected and encouraged for students to track their own development of communicative competencies. (Bachman, 1990; CoE, 2001). In order to do this, each unit has unique assessment scales. These scales include questions such as What did you learn? How much do you think you learned? And based on what you have learned in class, what do you think you can accomplish in real life? Thus, students can identify their weak sides. Besides the self-assessment, there are formal assessment types like homework assignments, oral exams, quizzes, and projects. However, The second and third grades do not have a summative assessment of English. In order to improve positive attitudes, beliefs, and motivations toward learning English, formative testing mechanisms work in conjunction with routine in- and outside-of-class tasks. Nevertheless, starting in the fourth grade, a variety of formative and summative testing methods are available to evaluate students’ language proficiency and communicative competence (M.E.B, 2018). Also, peer review, portfolio, teacher observation, and evaluation are the offered assessment types of Turkey’s English curricula evaluation process. Lastly, students must maintain a portfolio in accordance with the guidelines in the European Language Portfolio. On the other hand, the Republic of Korea’
English curriculum assessments ensure students are not under excessive mental strain in elementary school. By making observe the curricula evaluate the individual stages of the students. In points of secondary school assessment, the curriculum evaluates the four skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking, which indicate in the curriculum. Examine the learning objective’s achievement frequently, and analyze any causes of depreciation in the learning process to prevent accumulation.
Also, to make correct evaluations, assign diverse tasks and levels of questions. To make a right judge success of students, integrated assign carried out. It is significant to analyze the applicability of formative assessment methods for learning. ISCED 2’s specific assessment guide places emphasis on assessing four fundamental skills, conducting an analytical and holistic assessment, and regularly checking to see if learning objectives are being met. The ability statements for the four foundational skills are given for each stage. These competency assertions cover things like understanding the main idea of a conversation and briefly describing a person nearby. (Yavuz & Demir, 2014). The last assessment suggestions are a portfolio, peer review, and self-assessment. Korea’s English curriculum assessment criteria are different from Turkey’s at some point. For example, Turkey assesses their students by applying the test, oral exams, and quizzes, but Korea’s English curriculum does not state these assessment scales in the curriculum. Another difference is about CEFR. While Turkey’s assessment scale takes shape according to the CEFR principle, Korea’s English curriculum composed its assessment scale independently. However, portfolio, peer review, and self-assessment are similar evaluation types of countries’ curriculums.
Conclusion
In this article, the Republic of Korea and Turkey’s English curriculum is compared in points of general objectives, English curriculum goals, content, and Assessment/evaluation. Mainly both curriculums focus on four skills of English. Also, both curriculums praise the communicative functions of English. The main goals are the ability to communicate in everyday life and ordinary topics, appreciation, and respect foreign cultures and their unique culture. In respect of assessment, Korea’s and Turkey’s curricula have many similar scales, such as portfolio, self-assessment, and peer review. Although there are many similar points in both curriculums, there are many differences also. The vast difference between both curriculums is the composition of their curriculum according to the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages). Turkey composed the English curricula according to the CEFR principle because of their location. However, the Republic of Korea designs the English curriculum independently. In addition to this difference, Turkey has plenty of differences from the Republic of Korea in points of the assessment process. For example, Turkey’s assessment process includes oral exams, tests, and quizzes that differ from Korea’s. Nevertheless, many countries aim to teach the English language to improve the communication ability of students all over the world. Turkey and Korea are united in the purpose of the teaching process. Both countries mainly focus on language usage in everyday life rather than the grammatical rules of the English language.
Written by Ali ihsan Oktem
References
CRYSTAL, D. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: CUP, 1997
M.E.B. (2018). İlköğretim Kurumları (İlkokullar ve Ortakokullar) İngilizce Dersi Öğretim Programı, 2-8. Sınıflar. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
Yavuz, M., Demir, Y. (2014). Finlandiya, Japonya, Kore, Çin (Şangay) ve Türkiye deki İngilizce Dersi Öğretim Programlarının Karşılaştırmalı Olarak İncelenmesi, Mediterranean Journal of Humanities 4(1): 115-115, DOI:10.13114/MJH.201416428
Council of Europe (CoE). (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Lightbown P. & Spada N. M. (2013). How languages are learned (Fourth). Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2008). The School Curriculum of the Republic of Korea, English Curriculum. Korea.
