A Comparative Analysis of English Language Education in Finnish and Turkish Basic Education Curricula

(1)

A Comparative Analysis of English Language Education in Finnish and Turkish Basic Education Curricula

Ezgi Anil Dogan

Master’s Degree Programme in Early Language Education for Intercultural Communication

University of Eastern Finland Philosophical Faculty

School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education 12.5.2021

(2)

University of Eastern Finland, Philosophical Faculty

School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education Early Language Education for Intercultural Communication

Dogan, Ezgi A.: A Comparative Analysis of English Language Education in Finnish and Turkish Basic Education Curricula

Thesis, 85 pages

Supervisor: Professor Ritva Kantelinen May 2021

Abstract

The importance of English language teaching for communicating with people from different cultures has grown as the world continues to globalize rapidly. For this reason, English curricula in schools have been reformed in order to improve intercultural communication competence.

As a consequence, Finland and Turkey have also reorganized their English language curricula with the aim of enabling students to use English language communicatively and raising awareness towards other languages and cultures.

This research explored the objectives, content, and pedagogical approaches in English language education examining the Finnish and Turkish basic education curricula. The aim of the study was to reveal the similarities and differences between the two countries’ English language curricula and to find out why a big difference occurs between Finland’s and Turkey’s English proficiency levels.

Data was collected from Finland’s and Turkey’s English language curricula for basic education and the official documents such as acts, decrees, and laws on basic education were also examined in order to support the data from the curricula. Data was analyzed with the method of thematic document analysis.

Overall, the results of the comparative study indicated that both Finland and Turkey aim at increasing linguistic and cultural awareness and teaching English language for communicative competence. Both countries also would like to encourage pupils to track their own English language learning. On the other hand, while the Finnish curriculum offers general guidelines for the instruction of the English language giving flexibility and autonomy to schools, the Turkish curriculum prevents schools from preparing a flexible plan in English language teaching according to the needs of pupils by offering specific content and testing techniques.

The findings may encourage curriculum developers and educational stakeholders in Turkey to point out the aspects that can be implemented from Finnish educational concept to increase English proficiency level in Turkey.

Keywords: English language education, basic education, curriculum, Finland, Turkey

(3)

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Education First English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) 2020 results………..8

Figure 3.1 Education system in Finland……….14

Figure 3.2 General structure of the Turkish education system………...17

Figure 3.3 Model English Language Curriculum (For 2nd - 8th Grades)………..19

Figure 3.4 The purposes of CEFR descriptors………...21

Figure 4.1 The differences between Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories………..24

Figure 4.2 Zone of Proximal Development………25

Figure 4.3 Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory………26

Figure 4.4 Bandura’s social learning theory………...29

Figure 6.1 Research design……….34

Figure 6.2 Phases of thematic analysis………...38

Figure 6.3 Raw data from the Turkish curriculum……….38

Figure 6.4 Screenshot of the raw data from the Finnish curriculum………..39

Figure 6.5 Generating codes………...39

LIST OF TABLE

Table 7.1 Four themes and related codes defined according to the research questions…42

(6)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages EDUFI: Finnish National Agency for Education

EF EPI: Education First English Proficiency Index ELP: European Language Portfolio

EU: European Union

FNBE: Finnish National Board of Education MONE: Ministry of National Education (Turkey)

NCCBE: National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (Finland) NATO: North Atlantic Treaty Organization

ZPD: Zone of Proximal Development

(7)

7

1 Introduction

“The curriculum is – or at least should be – at the heart of educational discourse and practice.”

(Priestley & Philippou, 2019, p. 2). The curriculum sets content, teaching methods, and assessment procedures in accordance with educational goals for teachers, students, and parents by providing knowledge and skills which students need to obtain in schools as well as in their daily lives and professional lives.

The value of foreign language education has increased in the world, which continues to globalize, and therefore, countries are trying to update their foreign language curricula, especially the English language curriculum, to keep up with globalization. To this end, Finland and Turkey have designed their English language curricula for basic education in order to promote “plurilingual and intercultural education” for the purposes of forming a basis for

“linguistic and intercultural abilities” and “personal development” (Beacco et al., 2016, p. 15).

In this regard, Finland has added transversal competences in the National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014 (Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE), 2016) and Turkey has attached key competences in the English language curriculum for basic education in 2018 (Ministry of National Education (MONE), 2018).

According to the Education First English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) results in 2020 presented by Education First, Finland’s score is 631 ranking 3^rd out of 100 countries which infers very high proficiency whereas Turkey has ranked 69^th with 465 score indicating low proficiency in English skills (see Figure 1.1). The two countries have demonstrated different levels of proficiency in English language skills that means Finland’s performance in English language learning is much better than Turkey’s performance. Based on these results, I became more concerned to investigate the similarities and differences between the English language education in Finnish and Turkish basic education by comparing both countries’ curricula in depth.

This study compared the Finnish and Turkish basic education curricula in terms of general objectives, content, teaching strategies, and assessment related to English language education.

The other official documents such as basic education acts and decrees were also conducted since the validity of the results increases when the researcher gives evidence that demonstrates the authenticity of the documents (Martella, Nelson, Morgan, & Marchand-Martella, 2013, p.

343). The main aim of the study is the analysis of similarities and differences between Finland’s

(8)

8

and Turkey’s pedagogical approaches taking into account the changes in the latest English language curricula.

Figure 1.1. Education First English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) 2020 results (EF EPI, 2020).

Retrieved from www.ef.com/epi

Previous comparative studies on foreign language education in Finland and Turkey primarily focus on the similarities and differences between the curricula, proficiency levels, and teacher education. Solak (2013), in his study on foreign language teaching at primary education in Finland and Turkey, finds out that foreign language education starts at an early age in both countries and the two countries offer almost equal number of lesson hours. And foreign language education in both countries is based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) descriptors; however, foreign language education in Finland is more successful compared to Turkey (Council of Europe, 2001). He suggests that teachers and authorities should be given flexibility in the preparation of the foreign language curriculum and the teaching profession should be made attractive with improvements in social status, rights, and salaries in Turkey. In her doctoral dissertation, Sak (2013) reveals that there are both similarities and differences between the English language curricula in Finnish and Turkish primary education considering the CEFR descriptors of reading, listening, writing, and speaking skills and attainments. Irican (2017) also notices that the main goal of English lessons in Finland is to introduce interdisciplinary areas rather than only teaching listening, speaking, reading, and writing whereas teachers in Turkey invariably use course books and test-like practices in English lessons to prepare students for exams.

(9)

9

The rest of this research paper is split into eight sections. Section 2 introduces the concepts and definitions referred in the study and Section 3 provides background information about the Finnish and Turkish education systems in general as well as foreign language education circumstances in the two countries. Section 4 presents a theoretical framework on language learning and development in line with the research questions in Section 5. And Section 6 offers an overview of the methodology used in this research with a qualitative research process.

Section 7 reveals the findings drawn from the thematic analysis and discussion to answer the research questions while the key results of the study are summarized in Section 8.

(10)

10

2 Concepts and Definitions

“Curriculum is a backbone of any education system across the universe as it guides learning institutions, teachers and educational authorities on the planned and unplanned learning experiences to guide the teaching and learning processes. Curriculum implementation is a critical parameter that dictates the success and failure of an education system.” (Mwanza &

Mkandawire, 2020, p. 193). It is the curriculum that ensures the planning and implementation of the entire education and training process in a systematic manner. The most significant identifying standards for curriculum quality are correlation of learning outcomes and set goals, curriculum content choices, and assessment (Druzhinina, Belkova, Donchenko, Liu, &

Morozova, 2018, p. 3). In this study, curriculum refers to Finnish and Turkish curriculum in basic education. The latest national core curriculum for basic education in Finland issued in 2016 and the latest English language curriculum of grades 2-8 in Turkey issued in 2018 were studied in this research in terms of general objectives, content, and pedagogical approaches.

According to the World Conference on Education for All, assembled in Jomtien, Thailand, in 1990, basic education includes:

“both essential learning tools (such as literacy, oral expression, numeracy, and problem solving) and the basic learning content (such as knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes) required by human beings to be able to survive, to develop their full capacities, to live and work in dignity, to participate fully in development, to improve the quality of their lives, to make informed decisions, and to continue learning. The scope of basic learning needs and how they should be met varies with individual countries and cultures, and inevitably, changes with the passage of time.” (UNESCO, 1994).

Basic education usually includes primary education and lower secondary education programmes. It also includes programmes with other curricula such as “basic health, nutrition, family planning, literacy, agriculture, and other life-related and vocational skills” (Bradley &

Yates, 2000, p. 7). In this context, basic education refers to primary education and lower secondary education stages in Finland and Turkey which lasts 9 years in Finland and 8 years in Turkey.

English language education refers to teaching English as a foreign language in basic education in Finland and Turkey in this study.

(11)

11

3 Background Information about Language Education

3.1 Language and language learning

Language is the cornerstone of human communication. It is language that transfers people’s thoughts and feelings and all kinds of information. Language makes “messages accessible to our listeners” and it grants us to “express our ideas with great precision” (Pinter, 2017, p. 11).

Effective use of language is, therefore, important for communicating and interacting with others.

Learning also happens through language since it requires interaction with peers, teachers, adults, and society (FNBE, 2016, p. 26). Language which is an essential part of human growth is learnt through the interaction between the individuals. Language learners use the language in accordance with its systematic structure; however, learning a language does not only mean knowing grammar and vocabulary but also it means interacting with people and producing a written text (Flowerdew, 2013, p. 1). Thus, all the components of language collaborate to attain a complete communication.

The main assumption of language instruction at schools is to use the language in various circumstances (FNBE, 2016, p. 179). Language learning allows pupils to raise language awareness along with development of multiliteracy. They learn to use their skills in different languages to study and interpret texts.

Pupils are leaded to realize other languages and other cultures around the world through language education at schools which is definitely the ultimate goal of language education. “The need to cultivate curiosity and openness about other cultures and languages” accompanies celebrating diversity with empathy (Pinter, 2017, p. 155). Making pupils aware of the diversity in the world has great importance in today’s growing multicultural classrooms. As a result, teachers have great responsibility at this point to guide pupils about embracing different cultures and languages.

3.2 Foreign language learning and intercultural communication competence

Undoubtedly, the first requirement of the modern era is global communication. As the world is expeditiously globalized, foreign language learning has gained more importance for intercultural communication. Especially, speaking English at a fluent level is a requirement in

(12)

12

every area of life. For this reason, curriculum designers have started to make changes in some of the countries including Finland and Turkey.

There are various reasons to learn a foreign language such as studying abroad, travelling, business, advancing career, interest in other cultures that obviously lead to intercultural communication. People need intercultural communication in the contemporary world in order to communicate with others from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds and to understand the diversity that others have as well. Consequently, intercultural communication has also become an objective of foreign language education in schools in recent years.

Equally importantly, learning a foreign language means learning about a foreign culture.

Culture is the identity of a society and it is conveyed by language; it carries the way people live in a specific society. In order to be able to communicate in a culturally appropriate and reasonable way, it has become necessary that you learn the cultural context of the foreign language (Kantelinen, Rusanen & Hacklin, 2009, p. 5).

On the other hand, there are major challenges in foreign language learning. “When people engage in an intercultural dialogue or international trade, they are inevitably facing the challenge from communication barriers such as cultural stereotype and prejudice, identity conflict, language deficiency, and the lack of interaction skills.” (Dai & Chen, 2014, p. 1).

Culturally wrong behaviours could be interpreted as disrespectful manners whereas linguistic misunderstandings in intercultural encounters are usually compensated (Kantelinen et al. 2009, p. 15). However, these challenges could be overcome through the understanding of intercultural communication competence. Byram (2002) defines intercultural communication competence as ‘a willingness and ability to interact with someone of different cultural origins on the basis of conscious awareness of one’s own cultural origins and the relationships between the two’.

According to Campbell et al. (2000), communicative ability is acquired when individuals and societies are aware of self and other in order to behave properly to culturally and socially different origins. By looking at the world from a different point of view, recognizing different languages and cultures and being aware of others as well as realizing one’s self is explicitly invaluable enlightenment.

Considering all the goals and challenges mentioned above, the importance of foreign language education becomes evident. Foreign language studies are necessary for us to exist in the global world to embrace all the differences with respect and empathy without forgetting the value we give to our native language and home culture. Last but not least, foreign language education is

(13)

13

provided for communicating and connecting with others around the world which is promoted by intercultural communication competence.

3.3 The education system in Finland

The Finnish education system is considered one of the best education systems in the world and many countries tend to implement the Finnish education system. The fundamental aim in the Finnish education system is to provide free and equal education to all pupils and to promote lifelong learning as well.

The Finnish education system consists of early childhood education and care, pre-primary, basic, upper secondary and higher education (see Figure 3.1). Compulsory schooling in Finland involves one-year pre-primary education for 6-year-olds and nine-year basic education for 7- 16-year-olds. Basic education is free for all pupils. Learning materials and daily meals are also free of charge in the basic education. The objective of basic education is “to ensure the equality and high quality of education and to create favourable conditions for the pupil’s growth, development and learning” and to build a sustainable future for pupils (FNBE, 2016, p. 10).

Furthermore, the aim of basic education is “to provide them with knowledge and skills needed in life” (Basic Education Act, 1998, p. 1).

All schools in Finland pursue the National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (NCCBE) that comprises general objectives, contents, and pedagogical approaches as well as those of different subjects. The NCCBE issued by the FNBE is prepared within the frame of Basic Education Act and Decree and Government Decrees. The aim of the core curriculum is to support school and educational work and to ensure the delivery of a single equal basic education (FNBE, 2016, p.

10). “Core curriculum in Finland is like a guidebook; it explains the objectives that need to be met instead of giving recipes on how to reach them.” (Irican, 2017, p. 142). The core curriculum traditionally points out criterions for objectives, content, and assessment instructions yet it does not specify certain rules on how to apply them (Niemi, Toom & Kallioniemi, 2012, p. 165).

Therefore, local education authorities and schools regulate their curricula according to the national core curriculum which gives them freedom on the organization of education and this freedom is the most important feature that indubitably makes the Finnish education system different from the other education systems in the world.

(14)

14

Figure 3.1. Education system in Finland. (Finnish National Agency for Education (EDUFI), 2017)

Foreign language education in Finland

Finland attaches great importance to foreign language learning as the country is aware of the need for intercultural communication in the globalized world. It is very important for Finnish people to learn foreign languages in order to communicate better with other nationalities (Korhonen, 2006). On the other hand, Finland embraces linguistic and cultural diversity as a result of migration which means that Finnish people have the possibility to be acquainted with foreign languages. Besides, the fact that Swedish is another national language along with Finnish paves the way for learning a foreign language for Finns and thus prepare them for multilingualism.

(15)

15

English has become the dominant foreign language in Finland recently. The popularity of English increased in Finland after the country became a European Union (EU) member in 1995.

And in the 2000s, the role of English grew stronger as a result of economic and cultural globalization and communication technology (Leppänen et al., 2011, p. 19).

English as a school subject has also gained importance in the Finnish educational system.

Foreign language teaching had started in grade 3 in Finland at the latest previously. However, in spring 2018, the Finnish government announced that all students would launch their first- grade language studies by January 2020. “The language learning that takes place in grades 1 and 2 will play an essential role in developing pupils’ readiness and willingness to communicate in different languages.” (EDUFI, n. d.). Therefore, a specific curriculum for grades 1-2 regarding the instruction of A1 language as an addition to the latest NCCBE which was published in 2016 since there was a need to reform foreign language teaching in grades 1-2.

And this additional curriculum with required amendments contains specific objectives, content areas, working methods, and assessment of learning for grades 1-2 in order to develop a positive attitude towards language learning and to increase pupils’ ability to use languages in daily life (EDUFI, 2020, p. 31).

The NCCBE, English curriculum in particular, basically focuses on the needs of the pupils, joy of learning, and interaction (FNBE, 2016). Finland is aware of the necessity of “a global, futuristic, and real-world learner” by implementing a free and autonomous curriculum with great variety of classroom activities (Irican, 2017, p. 138). And the English curriculum aims to teach English with a focus on understanding the language and using it communicatively rather than introducing advanced grammar skills.

3.4 The education system in Turkey

The national education system in Turkey is shaped within the framework of Atatürk’s principles in education. The Ministry of National Education (MONE) is responsible for all the organization of education systems and educational institutions. Basic Law of National Education Number 1739 (1973) covers the basic provisions regarding the objectives and principles of the Turkish national education, the general structure of the education system, the teaching profession, school buildings and facilities, educational tools, and the duties of the State in the field of education and training.

(16)

16

According to Basic National Education Law, the general aim of Turkish National Education is to educate citizens who adhere Atatürk’s reforms and principles and Atatürk’s nationalism as stated in the Constitution and who adopt, protect, and develop the national, moral, human, spiritual, and cultural values of the Turkish Nation and love the family, the country and the nation and who know their duties and responsibilities towards the Republic of Turkey. Besides, it aims to educate citizens into having well-developed personality, respect for human rights, and having responsibility towards society. In order to achieve these objectives, some fundamental principles of National Education that should be followed are explained in the Law and these are equality, individual and social needs, orientation, right to education, continuity, Atatürk’s reforms, democracy education, secularism, scientificness, planning, co-education, home-school collaboration and education everywhere.

In Turkey, the new system 4+4+4 that has come into effect in 2012-2013 academic year includes three stages: primary, lower-secondary and upper-secondary education (see Figure 3.2). In this system, the aim is to have flexible programme and to understand the development characteristics of children. Basic education continues for eight years starting from the age of 6 (69 months old); however, it is mandatory to complete all the three stages. Basic education is free to all students and textbooks are handed out in public schools. The aims and duties of basic education are to equip every Turkish child with the basic knowledge, skills, behaviours, and habits which are necessary to become a good citizen; to educate him/her in accordance with the national moral understanding and to prepare every Turkish child for life and higher education by educating them in terms of interests and abilities according to the general objectives and main principles of national education.

(17)

17

Figure 3.2. General structure of the Turkish education system. (Council of Higher Education, 2019)

Foreign language education in Turkey

Attitudes towards English language as a global language in Turkey cannot be underestimated.

Turkey has developed positive approaches towards English learning, especially, after Turkey became a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1952 and entered into negotiations with the EU (Demirpolat, 2015, p. 8). In a sense, English was embraced by the Turkish government on behalf of modernization and westernization and gained priority among other foreign languages (Dogancay-Aktuna, 1998, p. 27). After the 1980s, English substantially spread across the country in education, culture, and business due to increased interaction with free market economies.

Starting from the 2013-2014 academic year, it was decided that foreign language education (English) would start in second grades in Turkey. Before this decision, foreign language education started in fourth grades. English language courses are taught by subject teachers.

Students have 2 hours of English lessons weekly in second, third and fourth grades and 3 hours

(18)

18

in fifth and sixth grades and 4 hours in seventh and eighth grades. The English language curriculum is based on listening and speaking skills instead of reading and writing specifically in the second and third grades; the focus on reading and writing skills could be seen in the seventh and eighth grades (Irican, 2017, p. 147). English lessons are instructed through the creative activities such as songs, games, and plays. The English language curriculum mainly intends to make students be aware of the target language and culture and to prepare them for international communication.

In line with the general objectives of Turkish National Education, as specified in the Basic Law of National Education Number 1739 and the Main Principles of Turkish National Education, the English language curriculum has been reorganized in 2018 (MONE, 2018) (see Figure 3.3).

The present reorganization consists of revision of the theoretical framework which focuses on values education, basic skills as themes, testing and evaluation improvements and revision of each grade in terms of target language skills, contexts, tasks, activities, and functions.

Fundamentally, this revised curriculum focuses on learning language skills and proficiency without any specific content of the course.

The principles and the descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) are followed in the new English language curriculum (Council of Europe, 2001). In particular, the CEFR emphasizes that students’ learning should be blended with real- life practice. Hence, considering English as a means of communication and the emphasis on its authentic communicative use has become the major philosophy in the new English language curriculum in Turkey following the CEFR standards.

(19)

19

Figure 3.3. Model English Language Curriculum (For 2^nd – 8^th Grades) in Turkey (Ministry of National Education, 2018)

Although English language education starts in second grades and continues almost until the end of higher education and curriculum arrangements have been made, learning English is still a problem in Turkey. Demirpolat (2015), in her study in which she broadly refers to Turkey’s examination with foreign language teaching, mentions that crowded classrooms, lack of qualified teachers, as well as language policies and approaches to language teaching are the fundamental problems in foreign language education in Turkey. In addition, Yaman (2018) lays stress on the problems about teacher qualifications, assessment tools and existing prejudices about the language learning process. Furthermore, Ulum and Uzun (2020) conclude in their study that the styles of exams and grammar-translation method can be the reasons behind the failure of English language teaching and learning in Turkey and they suggest that both teachers and students should be present in the process of curriculum preparation. Given these problems and challenges, it could be said that Turkey has to find solutions to acquire a better foreign language education.

On the other hand, the number of private schools in Turkey has significantly increased in recent years. One of the most important factors that affect parents’ preferences in search of private schools is high-quality foreign language education. Other foreign languages such as German and French are also taught in some of the private schools along with English. Other factors include the intensive use of technology and the less crowded classrooms in private schools.

Therefore, there could be a great inequality between the children going to private schools, and the children going to public schools in terms of foreign language acquisition. On the contrary,

(20)

20

almost all educational institutions in Finland are public. In 2018, government-funded private schools accounted for 3% of all schools in basic education. In comparison, a little more than 95% of the schools were supported by a municipality and the rest are supported by the central government or a joint municipal authority (Eurydice, 2020).

3.5 Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, and assessment (CEFR) was published in 2001 by the Council of Europe to define language proficiency based on the standards valid internationally. The CEFR serves the purpose of “the promotion of reflective learning and learner autonomy” (Council of Europe, 2020, p. 13). It was updated in 2018 as “Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment: Companion Volume with New Descriptors” and then the current volume was published in 2020 keeping the 2001 version descriptors valid (Council of Europe, 2018).

The latest version aimed to provide more details on plurilingual and intercultural education in a user-friendly way for curriculum design.

The main aim of the CEFR is to “present the learner/user as a “social agent”, acting in the social world and exerting agency in the learning process” as well as to “promote the teaching and learning of languages as a means of communication” (Council of Europe, 2020, p. 28). In other words, this aim emphasizes learner engagement and learner autonomy. On the other hand, the CEFR aims at encouraging cross-national cooperation in terms of learning, teaching, and assessment.

The CEFR presents illustrative “can do” descriptors to examine what learners/users can do in foreign/second languages. These illustrative descriptors form a basis for Common Reference Levels A1 and A2 (basic user), B1 and B2 (independent user), C1 and C2 (proficient user). The descriptors could be used by curriculum designers and also by teachers to set the objectives for a specific subject and to assess learning (see Figure 3.4).

(21)

21

Figure 3.4. The purposes of CEFR descriptors (Council of Europe, 2020)

The English language curricula for Finnish and Turkish basic education conducted in this study are framed by the CEFR descriptors in order to “organise learning, track progress”, “to identify which language activities are relevant for a particular group of learners”, and “to establish which level those learners need to achieve in those activities in order to accomplish their goals”

(Council of Europe, 2020, p. 38).

(22)

22

4 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework is the starting point for research, and it serves as the foundation for organizing what is already known about the field built around existing theories and research related with the topic. In view of English language education in Finnish and Turkish context, the current study focused on four main theories that have dominated the research of comparative study of English language education: 1) Piaget’s cognitive development theory, 2) Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, 3) Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, and 4) Bandura’s social learning theory.

4.1 Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory

“Human languages emerged evolutionarily and historically from a complex set of processes, and children acquire competence with a particular language through a complex set of cognitive and learning processes as well.” (Tomasello, 2011, p. 255). Language development is carried out by cognitive processes in which children are involved with linguistic patterns such as meaning, sound, and grammatical structures.

Jean Piaget who was one of the well-known learning theorists of the 20^th century argued that language development in children is affected by cognitive stages as well as environmental factors. He suggested that children think differently than adults which put emphasis on mental development of children. As Pinter states, children move through four universal cognitive stages in language development: sensori-motor, pre-operational, concrete operational, and formal operational (2017, p. 7). In sensori-motor stage (0-2 years), by controlling the items in his/her world, a young child learns to communicate with surroundings. In pre-operational stage (2-7 years), the child’s reasoning is mainly based on intuition, however, he or she eventually gains the ability to think logically. This stage is identified by egocentrism (self-centredness) and a lack of logical reasoning. In concrete operational stage (7-11 years), the seventh year marks a turning point in cognitive growth, when children’s thought starts to imitate adult-like thinking. Children at this stage learn the ability to use logical reasoning in multiple areas of knowledge concurrently but they are unable to generalize their understanding at this point. In the last stage, formal operational stage (over 11 years of age), children have the potential to think more abstractly. They can perform logical operations like deductive reasoning. In a nutshell, even though each child is an individual learner, they share certain characteristics with their peers (Pinter, 2017, p. 6).

(23)

23

Jean Piaget is also known for his theories in active learning: constructivism. He proposed that

“children construct knowledge for themselves by actively making sense of their environment”

(Pinter, 2017). Children learn thanks to discoveries during games and interactions with adults.

They create knowledge combining their experiences acquired from plays with new ideas they learn from their surroundings. Hence, children become active constructors of their learning process.

Since this research studies English language education in basic education in Finland and Turkey, it focuses on fundamentally the concrete operational stage and the formal operational stage. As mentioned earlier in the section 3, English language education starts in the first grade in Finland and in the second grade in Turkey. Thus, children in basic education in Finland and Turkey go through the third and fourth Piagetian cognitive stage in their English language development which requires taking into account personal characteristics as well as certain basic features of nervous activity in language acquisition (Saienko, 2017, p. 5). Therefore, mainly speaking and listening skills are introduced in the first grades and reading and writing skills are fully introduced in the later grades as children think more abstractly when they are over 11 years old on the basis of Piaget’s formal operational stage.

In conclusion, it is important for both curriculum developers and language teachers to learn from Piaget’s theory of cognitive development to be sensitive to the needs and interests of various age groups (Pinter, 2017).

4.2 Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory

Lev Vygotsky put emphasis on the cognitive development of the child like Jean Piaget, but Vygotsky argued that socio-cultural factors also influence cognitive development. There are several differences between the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky, although they both share common ground in cognitive development (see Figure 4.1). Vygotsky agreed with Piaget that children construct knowledge for themselves by actively engaging in the learning process;

however, he indicated that the social environment has also a significant role (Pinter, 2017).

According to Vygotsky, “learning is a necessary and universal aspect of the process of developing culturally organized, specifically human, psychological functions” (1978, p. 90). In brief, social and cultural circumstances should be considered as well in order to understand human development.

(24)

24

Figure 4.1. The differences between Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories. (McLeod, 2018).

Vygotsky wanted to find out what children could learn with the assistance and guidance of individuals who were more experienced than themselves. This concern brought along the idea of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) (see Figure 4.2). The ZPD is “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). In other words, although two different children belong to the same age group, their learning level may differ depending on whether they are supported by an adult or a peer who is more knowledgeable. For instance, Schaffer (1996 as cited in McLeod, 2018) uses the story of a young girl who receives her first puzzle. First, the young girl fails while working on the puzzle alone. Then, the father starts to help her and explains some simple techniques, such as starting with the corner pieces first. And finally, with the help and encouragement of the father, the girl puts pieces together on her own.

Accordingly, children could gain confidence and take charge of the challenge as soon as they are willing and ready to achieve the task which brings the concept of scaffolding (Pinter, 2017).

However, they could still be provided help and support as the need arises. Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976) define the concept of scaffolding as “a kind of process that enables a child or a novice to solve a problem, carry out a task or achieve a goal which would be beyond his unassisted efforts” (p. 90). To conclude, the individual child first receives help according to the

(25)

25

ZPD by an adult or a peer, and then he or she is encouraged to take responsibility of the task to achieve the goal pursuant to scaffolding.

Figure 4.2. Zone of Proximal Development. (McLeod, 2018).

Although Piaget emphasized the biological stages in learning and development, Vygotsky underlined that there were social components that affected children’s development, too.

Children’s development is also influenced by social interactions with their peers, parents, or teachers.

In school context, language learning also takes place with social interactions with peers and teachers. Dialogues or conversations between the teacher and the peers allow students to learn new words in a foreign language. And the teacher is always present in the class to support the students in language learning and on the other hand, the teacher is always there to encourage the students for their learning on their own.

In a nutshell, based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, social environment and social interactions have an influential role in learning and development. Vygotsky focused on the learning potential of the individual which underlines the fact that all children are unique learners (Pinter, 2017); hence, every child’s uniqueness with his or her own interests and abilities must be acknowledged and supported by parents/carers and teachers. Last but not least, it is also extremely important to include content applicable to children’s individual interests in the curriculum that children will have the opportunity to engage in social interactions. Therefore, curriculum developers and teachers should take Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory into account to encourage pupils’ interactions in the class which support their language learning.

(26)

26

4.3 Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory

In addition to the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky (see sections 4.1, 4.2), it is also important to mention the other theory, ecological systems theory by Urie Bronfenbrenner on learning and development which focuses on mutual interactions of all components within an ecological system.

Bronfenbrenner puts a strong focus on the impact of the surrounding environment for social learning. As illustrated in Figure 4.3, he compares the layers of these social emphases to Russian dolls, where smaller dolls are put within larger ones (Pinter, 2017). These five layers are called respectively: microsystem, meso-system, exo-system, macrosystem, and finally chrono-system.

Since the five systems are interconnected, the impact of one on a child’s development is determined by how it interacts with the others (Guy-Evans, 2020). Considering that, Bronfenbrenner explains:

“The ecology of human development involves the scientific study of the progressive, mutual accommodation between an active, growing human being and the changing properties of the immediate settings in which the developing person lives, as this process is affected by relations between the settings, and by the larger contexts in which the settings are embedded.” (1979, p. 21).

Figure 4.3.Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (Guy-Evans, 2020)

(27)

27

Inthis ecological environment like a “nested structure”, the first level is microsystem which is

“a pattern of activities, roles, and interpersonal relations experienced by the developing person in a given setting with particular physical and material characteristics” and it includes family, school, peers, and neighbourhood (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, pp. 3-22). In a microsystem, relationships are bi-directional, which means that the child may be affected by others in their daily lives while still having the ability to change the values and behaviour of others (Guy- Evans, 2020). The next level in the ecological structure is mesosystem which “comprises the interrelations among two or more settings in which the developing person actively participates (such as, for a child, the relations among home, school, and neighbourhood peer group; for an adult, among family, work, and social life)” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 25). Mesosystem refers to a system of microsystems; for example, when a parent connects with his or her child’s teacher, the child’s development will be influenced (Guy-Evans, 2020). This means that if the child’s parents and teachers have a good relationship, it can have a positive impact on the child’s development or the other way around.

According to the ecological systems theory, the third level, exo-system, “refers to one or more settings that do not involve the developing person as an active participant, but in which events occur that affect, or are affected by, what happens in the setting containing the developing person” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 25). The exo-system includes the settings such as parents’

workplaces and school board where the child is affected indirectly. For instance, if one of the parents has a disagreement with his or her employer at work and comes home with a bad temper, the child’s development could be affected negatively by reason of the parent’s unpleasant experience at work in line with Bronfenbrenner’s exo-system (Guy-Evans, 2020).

Afterwards, the ecological system contains the layer, macrosystem. The macrosystem addresses the cultural factors that influence a child’s development such as socioeconomic status, wealth, poverty, and ethnicity (Guy-Evans, 2020). It means that a child’s conception of the world could be influenced by the society and culture he or she is surrounded. Therefore, there might be differences between the development of children living in undeveloped and developed countries since the countries have different ideologies and attitudes. And finally, the outmost level is chrono-system which serves as “the pattern of environmental events and transitions across one’s lifetime” (Pinter, 2017). These events and transitions could involve, for example, starting school, parents’ divorcing, graduating, finding a job, marrying, or moving to a new house which could affect an individual’s development; ultimately, an ecological transition could occur

(28)

28

throughout the life span when a person’s place in the ecological environment changes as a result of a change in role, setting, or both (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, pp. 6-26).

Bronfenbrenner (Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1994) later reconceptualised his theory and called it

“the bioecological theory”. He became more interested in the proximal processes of development referring to modes of interaction in the immediate environment; thus, his emphasis turned away from environmental factors and toward the developmental cycles that people go through over time (Guy-Evans, 2020). In the bioecological model,

“within the environmental sphere itself, a further differentiation is made between the immediate setting in which activities take place (such as family, classroom, peer group, or work place) and the broader context in which the immediate setting is embedded (e.g., social class, ethnicity, culture, subculture, or historical period)” (Bronfenbrenner

& Ceci, 1994, p. 572).

To conclude, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory has gained recognition as a valuable method for understanding children’s development by teachers focusing on the microsystem in particular. Children’s learning and development are influenced by everything that surrounds them, yet particularly the school environment, where they spend most of their time and communicate with peers and teachers. On the other hand, Bronfenbrenner advocated the importance of curriculum for caring whose purpose “would be not to learn about caring, but to engage in it” (Bronfenbrenner, 1974b, 1974c, 1978b as cited in Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 53).

Bearing in mind that, the curriculum needs to involve patterns of social interactions in the immediate environment in order to enhance children’s English language development regarding this study. Therefore, the ecological systems theory by Bronfenbrenner should be considered by teachers as a part of their pedagogical approach to language teaching.

All in all, although this theory could give the impression that individuals who do not have good and positive ecological systems are disadvantaged in terms of development, there are still many individuals who grow into fully developed individuals without the help of their ecological environments (Guy-Evans, 2020).

(29)

29

4.4 Bandura’s social learning theory

After introducing the ecological systems theory by Bronfenbrenner (see the section 4.3), Albert Bandura also needs to be mentioned in respect of social learning for children’s development.

Bandura focuses on individuals whereas Bronfenbrenner focuses on global influences in the social environment (Pinter, 2017).

Bandura claims that children learn by imitating the behaviours of others (see Figure 4.4). They copy the behaviours of adults whom they see in their immediate environment. Adults in the immediate environment such as parents and teachers being role models affect how children behave. Bandura, on the other hand, points out the importance of self-efficacy, which refers to the child’s belief in what he or she can do (Pinter, 2017). In order to persuade the child to complete a hard task and achieve goals, he or she should be encouraged by adults so that the child would be aware of his or her personal efficacy. “It is their growing sense of self-efficacy and purpose that serve as major personal influences in their ultimate level of accomplishment.”

(Zimmerman, 1995, p. 202). For instance, in school context, teachers should encourage students

“to measure their success in terms of self-improvement rather than by triumphs over others”

(Bandura, 1995, p. 4). This idea should also prevail in the curriculum in terms of evaluation and assessment criteria.

Figure 4.4. Bandura’s social learning theory. (Kurt, 2020)

Behaviour

Environmental factors

Personal

factors

(30)

30

There are four key types of control which can shape people’s perceptions of their own efficacy.

These essential forms of control are mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiological and emotional states (Bandura, 1995). Mastery experiences are the most powerful way to develop a good sense of efficacy. They are the most reliable indicator of success instilling a deep confidence in one’s own ability. It is not as easy as picking up pre- made behaviours to build a sense of efficacy through mastery experiences; significantly, it means mastering the cognitive, behavioural, and self-regulatory skills required to formulate successful strategies for coping with ever-changing life circumstances (Bandura, 1995, p. 3).

Experience in overcoming challenges along with a persistent struggle is necessary for a strong sense of efficacy. When people only have successes, they could be easily frustrated if they fail.

Therefore, it is important to teach pupils that success typically takes consistent effort drawing advantage from previous challenges and failures. Pupils could grow stronger from hardship by persevering through difficult times (Bandura, 1995, p. 3). Accordingly, in foreign language teaching, teachers should encourage pupils to be patient and not be afraid of their mistakes;

moreover, they should encourage pupils to learn by gaining experience from their failures which will contribute to their self-efficacy.

Vicarious experiences refer to the experiences gained by social models (Bandura, 1995, p. 3).

When people see models similar to them can be successful through hard work, they believe that they will also be successful with great effort. On the other hand, they could easily be demotivated looking at models who do not succeed with considerable effort. Thanks to vicarious experiences, people increase their competence through expert models and develop skills and strategies towards learning.

Social persuasion is another effective way for improving people’s confidence in their ability to succeed. People who are convinced orally that they have the skills to achieve a task are more likely to maintain more commitment than those who focus on personal flaws when difficulties occur (Litt, 1988; Schunk, 1989 as cited in Bandura, 1995, p. 4). By this way, “persuasive boosts in perceived self-efficacy lead people to try hard enough to succeed, self-affirming beliefs promote development of skills and a sense of personal efficacy” (Bandura, 1995, p. 4).

Individuals who are not sufficiently convinced about their abilities may withdraw in the face of difficulties and fail to keep motivation for their self-efficacy.

On the other hand, people often assess their abilities based on their physiological and emotional states. Both physical fatigue and mood play an important role in people’s judging their capabilities. In order to appreciate self-efficacy, one needs to “enhance physical status, reduce

(31)

31

stress and negative emotional proclivities, and correct misinterpretations of bodily states”

(Bandura, 1995, p. 5). To sum up, the four modes of influence directly, indirectly, persuasively, and sentimentally affect personal efficacy and self-assessment.

Bandura also suggested that children imitate and identify themselves with fictional characters in books, movies, or television (Pinter, 2017). It means that children observe and imitate fictional characters as well and learn from them by copying their behaviours. At this point, teachers and curriculum developers should take this kind of learning from virtual patterns into account when they prepare learning materials to teach a foreign language and a foreign culture as well.

To conclude, according to Bandura’s social learning theory, “a major goal of formal education should be to equip students with the intellectual tools, efficacy beliefs, and intrinsic interests to educate themselves throughout their lifetime” (Bandura, 1995, p. 17). Both students’ belief in their own efficacy to control their own learning and to succeed in specific subjects and teachers’

belief in their own efficacy to encourage their students will provide a basis for success in schools. Consequently, a curriculum should be organized to help students appraise their own self-efficacy, promote lifelong language learning, and assess their own language skills through direct or indirect experiences gained as a result of observing or imitating others.

(32)

32

5 Research questions

The aim of this study is to ascertain similarities and differences in English language education in Finland and Turkey comparing the two countries’ curricula in basic education. The study seeks to answer the questions based on general objectives, content, and pedagogical approaches in English language curricula in the two countries. The research questions were reformulated several times during the study to explain the findings more precisely. As a result, the following research questions were formulated in order to achieve the aim:

1. How are the general objectives of foreign language education indicated in Finnish and Turkish basic education curriculum?

2. How is the content of English language education framed in Finnish and Turkish basic education curriculum?

3. How are the pedagogical approaches in English language education defined in Finnish and Turkish basic education curriculum?

(33)

33

6 Methodology 6.1 Research Design

The main aim of this qualitative research was to identify the similarities and differences between the English language curricula in basic education in Finland and Turkey in order to attain an insight to how English language education is structured in Finnish and Turkish basic education curriculum. This study was designed and carried out in a sequential manner according to the base of qualitative research (see Figure 6.1). The purpose of the design was to compare general objectives, content, and pedagogical approaches in English language curricula in basic education in Finland and Turkey. Therefore, the data was collected from official documents such as national core curriculum, basic education act and basic education decree from Finland and English language curriculum, basic law of national education from Turkey.

(34)

34 Figure 6.1. Research design

A comparative analysis is a method of comparing two or more things in order to illustrate their similarities and differences and make certain conclusions or judgements about these things.

Comparative research is defined by Esser and Vliegenthart (2017, p. 2) as “the contrast among different macro-level units, such as world regions, countries, sub-national regions, social milieus, language areas and cultural thickenings, at one point or more points in time”. In comparative analysis, two criteria are met: a) Data from two or more instances which could be

(35)

35

countries, cities, families must be obtained. b) Rather than just describing, these instances must be justified (Pickvance, 2001). Since this study met the two conditions explained above, comparative analysis tradition was followed for finding answers to the research questions.

The official documents were the main substance for data analysis as they require “repeated review, examination, and interpretation of the data in order to gain meaning and empirical knowledge of the construct being studied” (Frey, 2018, p. 544). In addition, documents provide

“a rich source of information, contextually relevant, and grounded in the contexts they represent” (Stage & Manning, 2003, p. 86). Official documents also tend to be more objective which makes them less biased. Therefore, disregarding document analysis while applying qualitative research method about the student, school, or academic may create a big gap in understanding the problem in question. Finally, this research was mainly concerned with the review of the curricula with thematic analysis since “the curriculum is a selection of what is deemed to be worthwhile knowledge” (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007, p. 31).

6.2 Research Data Selection

This section about data selection explains how the data was collected or selected in this study and the research questions were taken into consideration in order to determine precisely what kind of documents were needed in the study.

As it is seen in the title of this section, the term “data selection” was used instead of “data collection”. The reason of naming it “data selection” is that the official documents do not need to be collected since they are already available prepared and shared by official institutions or organizations allowing researchers without having to observe or interview individuals.

The data was selected from official educational documents predominantly related to English language education in Finland and Turkey to understand how pedagogical approaches to foreign language teaching in these educational documents influence the two countries’ success in the related field. The documents selected in support of this research study were the basic education curricula and basic education acts and decrees of the two countries.

For Finland, the National Core Curriculum for Basic Education (NCCBE) by Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE) was selected to gather data on English language education as well as Basic Education Act 628/1998 and Basic Education Decree 852/1998 for the general structure and objectives of education in Finland. The act and decree were freely accessible on the internet. The e-book version of the national core curriculum was loaned from Ellibs Library

(36)

36

(https://www.ellibslibrary.com/en/book/9789521362590) on 02.12.2020 for the first time using University of Eastern Finland (UEF) student account details and it was loaned several times later on because the loan period was only for 14 days each time. The e-book version did not show page numbers for online reading; therefore, it was downloaded and opened in Adobe Digital Editions 4.5 app. Although the main focus was on the sections related to English language subject in the core curriculum, other parts were also studied according to the research needs and purpose.

As for Turkey, the primary data was gathered from the English language curriculum of grades 2-8 issued in 2018 by Ministry of National Education (MONE) which was publicly available online (http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=327). The parts in the curriculum that are in Turkish were translated into English by the researcher. In Turkey, there is not a core curriculum like in Finland but rather there are subject-specific curricula. In addition, Basic Law of National Education Number 1739 (1973) which was also publicly available online was studied in order to learn about the general objectives and fundamental principles of the Turkish national education system. This official document that is in Turkish was also translated into English by the researcher. Some other official documents such as regulation on primary education institutions were also occasionally conducted when needed.

Finally, the aforementioned official documents were collected and analyzed to compare the English language education in basic education in Finland and Turkey and to reveal the differences and similarities between the two countries’ approaches to English language teaching.

6.3 Qualitative Data Analysis

This section discusses briefly about qualitative data analysis and particularly focuses on thematic analysis applied for data analysis.

As defined by Flick, Metzler, & Scott (2014), “qualitative data analysis is the classification and interpretation of linguistic (or visual) material to make statements about implicit and explicit dimensions and structures of meaning-making in the material and what is represented in it.” (p.

5). It may also be used to identify and explain problems in the field. The ultimate goal is usually to make general statements by comparing different materials, documents, or events.

Qualitative data analysis entails arranging, accounting for, and describing data in terms of the participants’ perceptions of the situation, figuring trends, themes, categories, and regularities

(37)

37

according to Cohen et al. (2007, p. 461). There is no one-size-fits-all approach to analyzing and presenting qualitative data; however, the method used should be fit for purpose. It is important to remember that qualitative data often needs many interpretations. In order to follow the theory of “fitness for purpose”, the researcher must be specific about what the data analysis will be used for, since this will decide the type of analysis used (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 461). In this sense, the data analysis will be used in this study for exploring the differences and similarities between English language education comparing Finnish and Turkish basic education curricula.

Thematic analysis

Given (2008) states that “thematic analysis is a data reduction and analysis strategy by which qualitative data are segmented, categorized, summarized, and reconstructed in a way that captures the important concepts within the data set.” (p. 867). Thematic analysis is essentially a descriptive technique used for finding patterns within a collection of qualitative data. And thematic coding is a method of segmenting and categorizing data for thematic analysis (Given, 2008).

Thematic analysis is the most widely used method for data analysis in qualitative research. It requires a lot more understanding and interpretation from the researcher compared to other types of qualitative data analysis. Thematic analysis concentrates on defining and explaining both implicit and explicit ideas within the data which refers to themes rather than counting explicit words or phrases (Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012, p. 10). And then the established themes are generally defined by codes, which are connected to raw data for the following analysis process.

In this study, a six-phase analytic model developed by Terry, Hayfield, Clarke, and Braun (2017) was applied during the data analysis process. These phases are in order of: 1) familiarising with the data, 2) generating codes, 3) constructing themes, 4) reviewing potential themes, 5) defining and naming themes, and 6) producing the report (see Figure 6.2).

(38)

38 Figure 6.2. Phases of thematic analysis

Phase one: The initial phase allows the researcher to familiarise himself or herself with the data and to have a general idea about the essence of the data. “Familiarisation is about intimately knowing the dataset – this facilitates a deep engagement with the data.” (Terry et al., 2017, p.

23). The data needs to be read several times in this phase in order to gain success in the next phases for a good data analysis. During the first phase, the researcher is recommended to make observational notes and to note frequently emerging patterns in the data. After familiarising with the Finnish and Turkish curriculum, I gained insight about the general objectives, content, the structure of the curricula, teaching methods, and assessment of learning in English language education. I used four different colours (yellow, green, blue, and red) to code the patterns related with the research questions (see Figures 6.3, 6.4). And I finally I took notes for the potential codes which I could create in the second phase.

Figure 6.3. Raw data from the Turkish curriculum (MONE, 2018, p. 82)

(39)

39

Figure 6.4. Screenshot of the raw data from the Finnish curriculum (FNBE, 2016, pp. 594- 595)

Phase two: “Coding is the systematic and thorough creation of meaningful labels attached to specific segments of the dataset – segments that have meaning relevant to the research question.” (Terry et al., 2017, p. 25). Coding entails locating specific data and marking it with a few terms that provide context for the researcher. From this point of view, I generated codes which I think could be related with the research questions according to my own interpretation.

However, the codes had been revised and reviewed throughout the analysis process. I copied and pasted the relevant extract for each code in a Microsoft Word file, but this was not possible for the Finnish curriculum as it was not allowed to copy and paste the data; therefore, I typed the data to the Word file myself using the screenshots taken earlier (see Figure 6.5).

Figure 6.5. Generating codes

Phase three: “Theme development first involves examining codes (and associated data), and combining, clustering or collapsing codes together into bigger or more meaningful patterns.”

A Comparative Analysis of English Language Education in Finnish and Turkish Basic Education Curricula