BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2012, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 53 - 62, 04.09.2013

Abstract

References

  • Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Esch, K. V. (2003). Language policy and language educational policy from a European perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 292-294.
  • Grabe, W. (1994). Foreword. Annual review of applied linguistics, 14, vii-xii.
  • Hu, Y. (2007). China’s foreign language policy on primary English education: From policy rhetoric to implementation reality. Unpublished dissertation, Purdue University.
  • Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R.B. (2003).Language and language in education planning in the Pacific basin. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Kırkgöz, Y. (2005). English language teaching in Turkey: Challenges for the 21st Century. In G. Braine (Ed), Teaching English to the world: History, curriculum and practice (pp. 159-175). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Kırkgöz, Y. (2007). Language planning and implementation in Turkish primary schools. Current Issues in Language Planning, 8, 2, 174-191.
  • Kocaoluk, F. & Kocaoluk, M.S. (2001). İlköğretim Okulu Program 1999-2000 [Primary Education Curriculum 1999-2000]. İstanbul :Kocaoluk publishers.
  • Lambert, R. D. (1999). A scaffolding for language policy. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 137, 3-25.
  • Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage Publications, USA.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB)[ Turkish Ministry of National Education] . (1997) Ilköğretim okulu 4. ve 5. Sinif Yabanci Dil (İngilizce) Ögretim Programi. [Primary Education Grades 4 and 5 Foreign Language (English) Curriculum]. Pp. 606. Milli Eğitim bakanlığı Tebliğler Dergisi, No.2481 [MEB Official Journal]
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB)[ Turkish Ministry of National Education] . (2005) Resmi Gazete [ MEB Official Paper] (1997); Law Number 4306: Changing various laws to enforce compulsory education. Retrieved on October 9, 2009 from http://www.gib.gov.tr/index.php?id=1028
  • Nunan, D. (2001).English as a global language. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 605-606.
  • Phllipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1995). Linguistic rights and wrongs. Applied Linguistics, 16, 483-504.
  • Poon, A. (2000). Medium of instruction in Hong Kong: Policy and practice. Lanham: University Press of America.
  • Ricento, T. K. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4, 196-213.
  • Spolsky, B. (1999). Linguistics and language learning. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), Concise encyclopedia of educational linguistics (pp. 26-29). New York: Elsevier.
  • Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Trim, J. L.M. (1994). Some factors influencing national foreign language policymaking in Europe. In R. D. Lambert (Ed.), Language planning around the world: Contexts and systemic change (pp. 1-15). Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center.
  • Van Els, T. (1994). Foreign language planning in Netherlands. In R. D. Lambert (Ed.), Language planning around the world: Contexts and systemic change (pp.47-68). Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center.

Turkey’s foreign language policy at primary level: Challenges in practice

Year 2012, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 53 - 62, 04.09.2013

Abstract

The present study aims to investigate the challenges that English language teachers in state
schools have faced during the implementation of the new policy prepared by the Ministry of
National Education in 1997 (T.C. Resmi Gazete;1997, p. 2). Ten Turkish teachers of English
as a foreign language participated in the study. Data for this qualitative study came from the
semi-structured interviews. The views of teachers on new English language teaching policy at
primary level; the challenges they have faced within practice and the extend of support they
have received in the process of implementation were the main issues of the interview. After
the interview was transcribed, it was coded by the pattern coding strategy. The results of
pattern coding revealed these codes; reasons, advantages and disadvantages of the policy,
achievability, challenges caused by the crowded classroom and lack of necessary equipments,
support from policy makers, administration and colleagues.

References

  • Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Esch, K. V. (2003). Language policy and language educational policy from a European perspective. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 292-294.
  • Grabe, W. (1994). Foreword. Annual review of applied linguistics, 14, vii-xii.
  • Hu, Y. (2007). China’s foreign language policy on primary English education: From policy rhetoric to implementation reality. Unpublished dissertation, Purdue University.
  • Kaplan, R. B., & Baldauf, R.B. (2003).Language and language in education planning in the Pacific basin. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Kırkgöz, Y. (2005). English language teaching in Turkey: Challenges for the 21st Century. In G. Braine (Ed), Teaching English to the world: History, curriculum and practice (pp. 159-175). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Kırkgöz, Y. (2007). Language planning and implementation in Turkish primary schools. Current Issues in Language Planning, 8, 2, 174-191.
  • Kocaoluk, F. & Kocaoluk, M.S. (2001). İlköğretim Okulu Program 1999-2000 [Primary Education Curriculum 1999-2000]. İstanbul :Kocaoluk publishers.
  • Lambert, R. D. (1999). A scaffolding for language policy. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 137, 3-25.
  • Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage Publications, USA.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB)[ Turkish Ministry of National Education] . (1997) Ilköğretim okulu 4. ve 5. Sinif Yabanci Dil (İngilizce) Ögretim Programi. [Primary Education Grades 4 and 5 Foreign Language (English) Curriculum]. Pp. 606. Milli Eğitim bakanlığı Tebliğler Dergisi, No.2481 [MEB Official Journal]
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB)[ Turkish Ministry of National Education] . (2005) Resmi Gazete [ MEB Official Paper] (1997); Law Number 4306: Changing various laws to enforce compulsory education. Retrieved on October 9, 2009 from http://www.gib.gov.tr/index.php?id=1028
  • Nunan, D. (2001).English as a global language. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 605-606.
  • Phllipson, R., & Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1995). Linguistic rights and wrongs. Applied Linguistics, 16, 483-504.
  • Poon, A. (2000). Medium of instruction in Hong Kong: Policy and practice. Lanham: University Press of America.
  • Ricento, T. K. (2000). Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4, 196-213.
  • Spolsky, B. (1999). Linguistics and language learning. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), Concise encyclopedia of educational linguistics (pp. 26-29). New York: Elsevier.
  • Spolsky, B. (2004). Language policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Trim, J. L.M. (1994). Some factors influencing national foreign language policymaking in Europe. In R. D. Lambert (Ed.), Language planning around the world: Contexts and systemic change (pp. 1-15). Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center.
  • Van Els, T. (1994). Foreign language planning in Netherlands. In R. D. Lambert (Ed.), Language planning around the world: Contexts and systemic change (pp.47-68). Washington, DC: National Foreign Language Center.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section ELT Research Journal
Authors

Görsev İnceçay

Publication Date September 4, 2013
Submission Date September 4, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2012 Volume: 1 Issue: 1

Cite

APA İnceçay, G. (2013). Turkey’s foreign language policy at primary level: Challenges in practice. ELT Research Journal, 1(1), 53-62.