Türkiye’deki ve Finlandiya’daki İngilizce Öğretmeni Yetiştirme Programlarının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Öğretmenlerin nitelikleri ve kalitesi, eğitimin kalitesine ve öğrencilerin başarısına yansır ve profesyonelliğe yönelik atılan ilk adım olduğu için de hizmet öncesi öğretmen yetiştirmeye gereken önem verilmelidir. Bu görüşü dikkate alarak, İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programları verimli bir araştırma alanı olarak görülmektedir. İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programlarıyla ilgili çalışmalar giderek artmaktadır. Ancak Türkiye’deki ve diğer ülkelerdeki İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programlarını karşılaştıran çalışmalar nispeten daha azdır. Bahsi geçen bu sebeplerden yola çıkarak, bu çalışmanın amacı, Finlandiya’daki ve Türkiye’deki İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programlarını öğrenci seçimi, müfredat, uygulama dersleri, mezuniyet için gerekli koşullar ve öğretmen istihdamı gibi beş kritere göre incelemektir. Karşılaştırmalı bir çalışma olarak, veriler her iki ülkedeki İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programları ile ilgili dokümanlardan oluşmuştur. Bu nitel çalışma için doküman ve içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Bulgulara göre, öğrenci seçimi, hizmet öncesi uygulama dersleri ve öğretmenlerin istihdamı iki ülkede farklılık göstermektedir. Göze çarpan diğer önemli bir nokta da Finlandiya’daki öğretmenlere toplumda oldukça saygı duyulmaktadır, güvenilmektedir ve mesleklerine başlar başlamaz yüksek derecede bir özerklikleri bulunmaktadır. Bunun gibi karşılaştırmalı çalışmaların ışığında, Türkiye, farklı ülkelerdeki İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programlarının güçlü yanlarını alarak kendine özgü modelini oluşturmalı ve öğretmen eğitiminin kalitesini iyileştirmelidir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İngilizce öğretmeni
• İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programları
• Türkiye
• Finlandiya

Comparing English language teacher education programs in Turkey and Finland

Öz

The quality and qualifications of teachers reflect the quality of education and the success of students accordingly, and particular attention needs to be given to pre-service teacher training as it is the primary step towards professionalization. Keeping this point in mind, English language teacher education programs (ELTEPs) seem to be a worthwhile research area. There is an increasing number of studies addressing ELTEPs in Turkey. Yet, comparative data on Turkey’s ELTEPs and those of other countries remain relatively limited. Reasoning from the mentioned reasons, the study aims to analyze ELTEPs in Finland and Turkey based on five criteria; student selection, curriculum, practicum hours, graduation prerequisites and recruitment of teachers. Comparative in essence, the data were composed of documents indicating ELTEPs in both countries. For this qualitative research, basically, document analysis and content analysis were applied. As for the findings, one can count student selection, pre-service teaching practice and recruitment of teachers different from each other. More significantly, teachers in Finland are highly respected, trusted and have a high degree of autonomy in their work from the start of their profession. In the light of such comparative studies, Turkey needs to establish its unique model and enhance the quality of teacher education by taking the strengths of ELTEPs in different countries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• English language teacher
• English language teacher education programs
• Turkey
• Finland

Kaynakça

1. Aksoy, E. & Gözütok, D. (2014). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Finlandiya, Singapur ve Türkiye'de öğretmen eğitimindeki dönüşümler. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 13(25), 23-46.
2. Aldemi̇r, Y. & Er, K. (2012). A comparison of pre-service English language teacher training systems in Turkey and Japan. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 45, 83-106. DOI: 10.1501/Egifak_0000001237
3. Altmısdort, G. (2016). An analysis of language teacher education programs: A comparative study of Turkey and other European countries. English Language Teaching, 9 (8), 213-223.
4. Asmalı, M. (2020). General picture of English language teaching programs and students in Turkey. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 10, 264-275. DOI: 10.5961/jhes.2020.388
5. Bowen, A. G. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9, 27-40. DOI: 10.3316/QRJ090207
6. CoHE. (2020). YÖK’ten eğitim fakültelerine yetki devir kararı. Retrieved from https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Haberler/2020/egitim-fak%C3%BCltelerine-yetki-devri.aspx (Feb 15 2021).
7. Coskun, A., & Daloglu, A. (2010). Evaluating an English language teacher education program through Peacock’s model. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35. DOI: 10.14221/ajte.2010v35n6.2
8. Demir, Y. (2015). All or nothing: English as a foreign language (EFL) student teachers’ and teacher trainers’ reflections on a pre-service English teacher education programme in Turkey. The Anthropologist, 19, 157-165. DOI: 10.1080/09720073.201511891650

9. Demiroz, H. & Yesilyurt, S. (2015). Effective foreign language teaching perceptions of prospective English language teachers. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3, 862-870. DOI:10.13189/ujer.031112
10. English Proficiency Index (EF EPI). (2020). Retrieved from https://www.ef.com/wwen/epi/ (January 15 2021).
11. Ertuğrul-Seçer, Ş. Y. & Erişen, Y. (2020). Evaluation of English language teaching undergraduate programs in terms of document analysis. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 12 (2), 671-703.
12. Finland figures. Retrieved from https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/figures/living_en#population (December 15 2020).
13. Finland Ministry of Education and Culture. Retrieved from https://minedu.fi/en/frontpage (December 15 2020).
14. Gunes, S. (2019). The perceptions of the students about the English language test implemented as a component of university entrance exam. Cypriot Journal of Education Science, 14, 601-609. DOI:10.18844/cjes.v11i4.4388
15. Hatipoğlu, Ç. (2016). The impact of the university entrance exam on EFL education in Turkey: Pre-service English language teachers’ perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 136-144. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.038
16. Heras, A. & Lasagabaster, D. (2015). The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 19(1), 70-88. DOI: 10.1177/1362168814541736
17. Hismanoğlu, S. (2012). İngilizce öğretmeni adaylarının İngilizce öğretmeni yetiştirme programı ile ilgili görüşleri. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(2), 330-341.
18. Inal, S. & Büyükyavuz, O. (2013). İngilizce öğretmen adaylarının mesleki gelişime ve lisans eğitimine yönelik görüşleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 221-233.
19. Jenset, I. S, Klette, K. & Hammerness, K. (2018). Grounding teacher education in practice around the world: An examination of teacher education coursework in teacher education programs in Finland, Norway, and the United States. Journal of Teacher Education, 69, 184-197. DOI:10.1177/0022487117728248
20. Karakaş, A. (2012). Evaluation of the English language teacher education program in Turkey. ELT Weekly, 4 (15), 1-16.
21. Karakaş, A., & Yavuz, E. (2018). A comparative analysis of English language teacher education programs in Turkey and Malaysia. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 7, 287-306. DOI:10.30703/cije.446313
22. Kartal, G. & Başol, H. Ç. (2019). Generic teacher competencies and the English language teacher education program in Turkey. Novitas-ROYAL Research on Youth and Language, 13 (2), 133-154.
23. Kic-Drgas, J., & Comoglu, I. (2017). A comparison of English language teacher education programs in Poland and Turkey. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(2), 111-121.
24. Kilimci, S. (2009). Teacher training in some EU countries and Turkey: How similar are they?. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 1975–1980. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.347
25. Köksal, D., & Ulum, Ö. G. (2017). The state of EFL teacher education in Turkey: From past to present. ELT Research Journal, 7(4),161-174.
26. Kömür, Ş. (2010). Teaching knowledge and teacher competencies: a case study of Turkish preservice English teachers. Teaching Education, 21, 279-296. DOI:10.1080/10476210.2010.498579
27. Mahalingappa, L. J. & Polat, N. (2013). English language teacher education in Turkey: policy vs academic standards. European Journal of Higher Education, 3, 371-383. DOI:10.1080/21568235.2013.832348
28. Nergis, A. (2011). Foreign language teacher education in Turkey: A historical overview. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 181–185. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.070
29. Niemi, H. & Jakku-Sihvonen, R. (2011). Teacher education in Finland. In M. Valenčič Zuljan and J. Vogrinc (Eds.), European Dimensions of Teacher Education – Similarities and Differences (pp.33-53). Ljubljana: Faculty of Education.
30. Niemi, H. & Isopahkala-Bouret, U. (2015). Persistent work for equity and lifelong learning in the Finnish educational system. The New Educator, 11 (2), 130-145. DOI: 10.1080/1547688X.2015.1026784
31. Niemi, H., Nevgi, A. & Aksit, F. (2016). Active learning promoting student teachers’ professional competences in Finland and Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39 (4), 471-490. DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2016.1212835
32. Ostinelli, G. (2009). Teacher education in Italy, Germany, England, Sweden and Finland. European Journal of Education, 44 (2), 291-308.
33. Öztürk, G. & Aydın, B. (2018). English language teacher education in Turkey: Why do we fail and what policy reforms are needed?. AJESI - Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 9, 181-213. DOI:10.18039/ajesi.520842 PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment). (2020). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/ (December 15 2020).
34. Polat, H. & Ünişen, A. (2016). An analysis of teacher news in Turkish printed media within the context of teachers’ image. Cogent Education, 3, 1-22. DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1179614
35. Popa, C., Laurian, S., and Fitzgerald, C. (2015). An insight perspective of Finland’s educational system. Procedia - Social and Behavioral, 180, 104 -112. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.092
36. Ranta, E. (2010). English in the real world vs. English at school: Finnish English teachers’ and students’ views. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20 (2), 156-177.
37. Republic of Turkey Ministry of National Education. Retrieved from https://www.meb.gov.tr/en/ (December 15 2020).
38. Resmi Gazete. (2020). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı öğretmen atama ve yer değiştirme yönetmeliğinde değişiklik yapılmasına dair yönetmelik. Retrieved from https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2020/06/20200619-8.htm (Feb 15 2021).
39. Rizza, C. (2011). ICT and Initial Teacher Education: National Policies. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 61. OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/5kg57kjj5hs8-en
40. Sahlberg, P. (2018). Eğitimde Finlandiya modeli. Istanbul: Metropolis Yayınları.
41. Sahlberg, P. (2007). Education policies for raising student learning: the Finnish approach. Journal of Education Policy, 22, 147–171. DOI:10.1080/02680930601158919
42. Salihoglu, U. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ and their instructors’ beliefs on the effectiveness of an English language teacher education program. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3440-3444. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.081
43. Sanlı, Ş. (2009). Comparison of the English language teaching (ELT) departments’ course curricula in turkey’s education faculties. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 838–843. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.150
44. Seferoğlu, G. (2006). Teacher candidates' reflections on some components of a pre‐service English teacher education programme in Turkey. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32, 369-378. DOI:10.1080/02607470600981953
45. Solak, E. (2016). English teacher training programs in Denmark, Sweden and Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 439-443. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.060
46. Solak, E. (2018). An administrative overview of English language teacher education programs in Turkey. International Journal of Language Academy, 6, 70-76. DOI:10.18033./ijla.3995
47. Stanford University. (2017). Learning to teach in practice: Finland's teacher training schools. Retrieved from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/node/1520 (Feb 15 2021).
48. Toker-Gökçe, A. & Celep, C. (2011). A comparison of educational systems of Turkey, Malta, Ireland, Spain, Sweden, Portugal, Finland, Greece, Belgium, the Netherlands and Denmark. US-China Education Review, B 4, 547-557.
49. Tonga, F. E., Eryiğit, S., Ay -Yalçın, F. & Tantekin-Erden, F. (2019). Professional development of teachers in PISA achiever countries: Finland, Estonia, Japan, Singapore and China. Professional Development in Education. DOI:10.1080/19415257.2019.1689521
50. Topsakal, C. (2019). Policy on teacher employment model in Turkey: Contracted teachers. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5, 671-682. DOI:10.12973/ijem.5.4.671
51. Türken, M. (2017). A comparative evaluation of the latest ELTTP in Turkey: The lecturers’ perspective versus teacher trainees’ perspective. Journal of Foreign Language Education and Technology, 2 (2), 74-98.
52. Uusiautti, S. & Määttä, K. (2012). How to train good teachers in Finnish universities? Student teachers’ study process and teacher educators’ role in it. European Journal of Educational Research, 1 (4), 339-352.
53. Uzun, L. (2016). The educational and technical courses in the ELT program in Turkey: Do they contribute to ICT skills?. Cogent Education, 3, 1-12. DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1141454
54. Yavuz, A. (2011). The problematic context of mentoring: evidence from an English language teaching department at a Turkish university. European Journal of Teacher Education, 34, 43-59. DOI:10.1080/02619768.2010.516431
55. Yavuz, A. & Zehir-Topkaya, E. (2013). Teacher educators’ evaluation of the English language teaching program: a Turkish case. Novitas-ROYAL Research on Youth and Language, 7 (1), 64-83.
56. Westbury, I., Hansén, S. E., Kansanen, P. & Björkvist, O. (2005). Teacher Education for Research‐based Practice in Expanded Roles: Finland's experience. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49(5), 475-485. DOI: 10.1080/00313830500267937