Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

A Comparative Analysis on the ELT Graduate Course Syllabi between a Turkish University and an American University

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3, 104 - 118, 07.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.349574

Öz

Syllabus is an important and indispensable part of teaching. Further, it has a crucial role in motivating and inspiring not only teachers but also learners. When looking at the English language teaching (ELT) programs, syllabus design and application appears to be an important factor in the level of graduate education as in other levels of education. This study aimed to investigate the syllabi for five ELT graduate courses between Turkey and United States to see whether there were any similarities and differences regarding student learning objectives (SLOs), course requirements and course contents. For this purpose, this study compared syllabus designs in two higher educations for five MA and PhD courses in Turkey and the United States. The number of the syllabi for both settings are ten in total. Although the titles of the courses in Turkey and the USA may not be the same, they are counterparts. The data about ELT graduate courses were collected from the universities separately. After collecting the data, document analysis technique was used and several themes were identified. The results showed that the syllabi in the USA seem to have more comprehensive, practical and applicable designs in comparison to the syllabi in Turkey. In addition, classroom observations and informal conversations can indicate the applicability of the syllabus design in the USA whereas this may not be the case in Turkey all the time. In conclusion, it seems that the ELT graduate syllabi in the USA create a classroom environment which is more conducive to teaching and learning.

Kaynakça

  • Altman, H. B. (1999). Syllabus shares “what the teacher wants.” In M. Weimer & R. A. Neff (Eds.), Teaching college: Collected readings for the new instructor (pp. 45-46). Madison, WI: Magna.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
  • Brumfit, C. J. (1980). From defining to designing: Communicative specifications versus communicative methodology in foreign language teaching. The foreign language syllabus and communicative approaches to teaching: Proceedings of a European-American seminar. Special issue of Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3(1).
  • Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-131.
  • Çakır, İ. (2007). An overall analysis of teaching compulsory foreign language at Turkish state universities. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(2).
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 120-138.
  • Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Aldine.
  • Eisner, E.W. (2002). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. (3rd ed.) New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
  • Erozan, F. (2005). Evaluating the language improvement courses in the undergraduate ELT curriculum at Eastern Mediterranean University: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Karataş, H. (2007). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi modern diller bölümü İngilizce II dersi öğretim programının öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşlerine göre bağlam, girdi, süreç ve ürün (CIPP) modeli ile değerlendirilmesi. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Yıldız Technical University.
  • Kırmızı, Ö., & Sarıçoban, A. (2013). Choice factors in MA ELT programs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 282-287.
  • Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Pretice Hall.
  • Küçükoğlu, H. (2015). An Evaluation of PhD ELT Programs in Turkey. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Liu, Z., & Wang, W. (2016). A comparison of the Chinese and American graduate syllabi in regard to their content and style. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(6), 1207.
  • Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13-17.
  • Prior, L. (2003). Using documents in social research. London, UK: Sage Publications.
  • Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sezgin, G. (2007). An exploratory study of curricular change in an EFL context, (Unpublihed master’s dissertation), Bilkent University: Ankara.
  • Sharkey, J. (2004). ESOL teachers’ knowledge of context as critical mediator in curriculum development. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2), 279-299.
  • Yalden, J. (1983). The communicative syllabus: Evolution, design, and implementation. Oxford: Pergamon.
  • Zhao, Y. (2010). American College Course Syllabus. Education Teaching Research, 5: 163 - 164.

Türk ve Amerikan Üniversiteleri Arasında İngiliz Dili Eğitimi Lisansüstü Ders Müfredatı Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3, 104 - 118, 07.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.349574

Öz

Ders programları eğitim-öğretimin önemli ve ayrılmaz bir parçasıdır. Bununla birlikte öğretmen ve öğrencileri motive etmede oldukça önemi bir rol oynarlar. İngilizce öğretim programlarını (ELT) ele aldığımızda müfredat tasarımı ve uygulaması tıpkı diğer eğitim düzeylerinde olduğu gibi lisansüstü eğitimde de önemli bir etmendir. Bu çalışmada Amerika ve Türkiye’de okutulan beş lisansüstü ELT dersine ait programlar arasında öğrencilerin öğrenme hedefleri, ders gereksinimleri ve içerikleri bakımından bir farklılık ya da benzerlik olup olmadığı incelenmiştir. Bu amaçla Amerika ve Türkiye’de yüksek lisans ve doktora yüksek öğretim programlarına ait beş ders programı kıyaslanmıştır. Toplamda 10 müfredat ele alınmıştır. Seçilen derslerin isimleri her ne kadar Türkiye ve Amerika’da farklı olsa da içerik olarak birbirlerine eş değer derslerdir. ELT müfredatı ile alakalı veriler üniversitelerden ayrı ayrı toplanmıştır. Veri toplama sürecini takiben belge analiz tekniği kullanarak farklı temalar belirlenmiştir. Sonuçlar, Türkiye ile kıyaslandığında Amerika’da uygulanan müfredatların daha kapsamlı, pratik ve uygulanabilir bir tasarıma sahip olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Buna ek olarak, sınıf gözlemleri ve yapılan enformel görüşmeler Amerika’da uygulanan müfredatların Türkiye bağlamında uygulanabilir olmadığını da ortaya çıkarmıştır. Sonuç olarak, Amerika’da uygulanan ELT lisansüstü müfredatının eğitim-öğretim için daha uygun bir sınıf ortamı yarattığı söylenebilir.

Kaynakça

  • Altman, H. B. (1999). Syllabus shares “what the teacher wants.” In M. Weimer & R. A. Neff (Eds.), Teaching college: Collected readings for the new instructor (pp. 45-46). Madison, WI: Magna.
  • Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
  • Brumfit, C. J. (1980). From defining to designing: Communicative specifications versus communicative methodology in foreign language teaching. The foreign language syllabus and communicative approaches to teaching: Proceedings of a European-American seminar. Special issue of Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3(1).
  • Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-131.
  • Çakır, İ. (2007). An overall analysis of teaching compulsory foreign language at Turkish state universities. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 3(2).
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 120-138.
  • Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Aldine.
  • Eisner, E.W. (2002). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. (3rd ed.) New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall.
  • Erozan, F. (2005). Evaluating the language improvement courses in the undergraduate ELT curriculum at Eastern Mediterranean University: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Karataş, H. (2007). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi modern diller bölümü İngilizce II dersi öğretim programının öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşlerine göre bağlam, girdi, süreç ve ürün (CIPP) modeli ile değerlendirilmesi. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Yıldız Technical University.
  • Kırmızı, Ö., & Sarıçoban, A. (2013). Choice factors in MA ELT programs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 282-287.
  • Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Pretice Hall.
  • Küçükoğlu, H. (2015). An Evaluation of PhD ELT Programs in Turkey. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Liu, Z., & Wang, W. (2016). A comparison of the Chinese and American graduate syllabi in regard to their content and style. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(6), 1207.
  • Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13-17.
  • Prior, L. (2003). Using documents in social research. London, UK: Sage Publications.
  • Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sezgin, G. (2007). An exploratory study of curricular change in an EFL context, (Unpublihed master’s dissertation), Bilkent University: Ankara.
  • Sharkey, J. (2004). ESOL teachers’ knowledge of context as critical mediator in curriculum development. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2), 279-299.
  • Yalden, J. (1983). The communicative syllabus: Evolution, design, and implementation. Oxford: Pergamon.
  • Zhao, Y. (2010). American College Course Syllabus. Education Teaching Research, 5: 163 - 164.
Toplam 21 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Bölüm Bu Sayıda
Yazarlar

Ceyhun Yükselir

Yayımlanma Tarihi 7 Aralık 2017
Kabul Tarihi 23 Kasım 2017
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2017 Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Yükselir, C. (2017). Türk ve Amerikan Üniversiteleri Arasında İngiliz Dili Eğitimi Lisansüstü Ders Müfredatı Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(3), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.349574