An Analysis of Indonesia’s 2013 EFL Curriculum and Turkey’s National English Language Curriculum for Secondary Schools

Suci Noer Wulan Sari, Niken Anastasia Kusuma Wardani

Abstract


Indonesia and Turkey have experienced educational reforms for decades, for instance in constructing EFL curriculum. Educational reforms could be done to address a certain problem encountered by a nation and to better the quality of education. Therefore, there emerged a need to analyse the EFL curricula designed for secondary schools in both countries to identify the commonalities and differences considered for a better improvement in education quality. Thus, the present study was aimed at analysing Indonesia’s 2013 EFL Curriculum and Turkey’s National English language Curriculum for secondary schools: the rationale, aims and organization (instructional design, instructional materials, and assessment). The study employed a qualitative descriptive design using document analysis to analyse some curricula documents. The findings revealed the commonalities lie in learner-centeredness view and the main goal of EFL curriculum. However, the differences lie in the instructional design, materials, and assessment. Given that Indonesia may adopt technology-enhanced assessment for a better assessment. It is suggested for further studies to employ interviews and surveys with teachers and students to gain more data.

Keywords


EFL Curriculum, Indonesia’s 2013 EFL Curriculum, Turkey’s National English language Curriculum

Full Text:

PDF

References


Brown, J. E. (1994). How to Write Rationale. SLATE Starter Sheet, NCTE.

Chege, E. W. (1999). Reading comprehension and its relationship with academic performance in rural Machakos. Nairobi: Kenyatta University. Retrieved [April 18, 2017] from: http://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/handle/ 123456789/3722

Hurriyet Daily News. (2017). Turkey’s education ministry prepares curriculum overhaul. Retrieved [April 17, 2017] from: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/ turkeys-education-ministry-prepares-curriculum-overhaul.aspx?pageID=2 38&nID=108015&NewsCatID=341

Istiqomah, F. (2013). A comparison study of Australian and Indonesian English curriculum for upper primary school. Lingua Scientia, 5(2). Retrieved [April 20, 2017] from: http://id.portalgaruda.org/index.php?ref=browse &mod=viewarticle&article=253567

Kondakçı, N. (2014). A comparative analysis of national and international English language curricula for high schools in Turkey. Ankara: The Graduate School of Education of Bilkent University. Retrieved [April 16, 2017] from: www.thesis.bilkent.edu.tr/0006634.pdf

Mardjuki, M. S. (2018). English teachers’ perception on the use of authentic assessment in 2013 curriculum. IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics), 2(2), 151-163. Retrieved [May 22, 2018] from: http://ijeltal.org/index.php/ijeltal/article/view/95

Mendez-Shanoon, E. C. (2010). “We will always be in the shadows” – a qualitative descriptive study of undocumented Latino immigrants surviving in the United States. University of Iowa. Retrieved [November 12, 2016] from: http://ir.uiowa.edu/etd/555.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. California: SAGE Publications Inc.

Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Nulty, D. D. (2012). Curriculum design. Learning, teaching and higher education research. Griffith Institute for Higher Education.

OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 results in focus. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Ornstein, A. C., Levin, D. U., Gutek, G. L., & Vocke, D. E. (2011). Foundations of education. USA: Wadsworth CENGAGE Learning.

Posner, G. J. (1992). Analyzing the curriculum. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Prideaux, D. (2003). ABC of Learning and Teaching in Medicine: Curriculum Design. BMJ, Vol. 326.

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. USA: Cambridge University Press.

Su, S. (2012). The various concepts of curriculum and the factors involved in curricula-making. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(1), 153-158. doi:10.4304/jltr.3.1.153-158

Suarman, A. (2011). The comparison between Indonesian 2004 CBC and Philippine 2011 SEC of English. Retrieved [April 14, 2017] from: https://www.academia.edu/3082705/The_comparison_of_English_Curriculum_of_Indonesian_and_Philiphine

T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı, Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (MEB-TTKB). (2014). Ortaöğretim ingilizce dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. siniflar) öğretim programı (Secondary English course of 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th grades curriculum). Ankara: T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı, Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (Republic of Turkey, Ministry of National Education, Education and Training Boards).

Tabari, A. G. (2013). Challenges of language syllabus design in EFL/ESL context. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(4), 869-873. Finland: Academy Publisher. Retrieved [March 6, 2017] from: www.academypublication.com/issues/past/jltr/vol04/04/29.pdf

The Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation of Indonesia No. 69 Year 2013 on the Basic Framework and Curriculum Structure of Senior High Schools.

The Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation of Indonesia No. 21 Year 2016 on Standard of Content for Primary and Secondary Education.

Zacharias, N. T. (2012). Qualitative research methods for second language education: A coursebook. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21093/ijeltal.v3i1.113

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



Creative Commons License
IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics) by http://ijeltal.org is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


 

Abstracting and Indexing

                 



Contact Us: IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics; Address: FTIK, IAIN Samarinda; Jl. H.A.M. Rifadin, Samarinda, Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia. Email: ijeltalj@gmail.com