Evaluation of the Learning Outcomes in the Revised EFL Curriculum: A research on Outcome Verbs
AbstractEFL curricula for primary and secondary education in Turkey were revised based on the 2012 educational reform, and issued to the institutions of primary and secondary education affiliated to the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) in 2017 to be put into practice the following academic year. This study was motivated to examine the revised primary EFL curriculum with a focus on the outcome statements with respect to verb choice. Accordingly, seven sets of data were compiled from these statements identified for 2nd to 8th grades in the document, and a total of 376 outcome statements were analysed. The results demonstrated that only active verbs, which are recommended for writing learning outcomes, consitutited 14% of 403 verbs in these statements while over 41% were comprised by vague verbs that should be avoided in writing learning outcomes such as understand and know as they make the statements hard to evaluate. The findings were discussed and outlined in detail, and a couple of practical implications were offered for curriculum designers based the findings reported in this research.
Adam, S. (2004). Using Learning Outcomes: A consideration of the nature, role, application and implications for European education of employing learning outcomes at the local, national and international levels. Report on United Kingdom Bologna Seminar, July 2004, Herriot-Watt University.
Adelman, C. (2015). To Imagine a Verb: The Language and Syntax of Learning Outcomes Statements. National Institute for Learning Outcome.s Assessment. Accessed at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED555528.pdf
Akmajian, A., Demers, R.A., Farmer, A.K. & Harnish, R. M. (1995). Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (Fourth Edition). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Aksoy, E., Bozdoğan, D., Akbaş, U., & Seferoğlu, G. (2018). Old wine in a new bottle: Implementation of intensive language program in the 5th grade in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 301 – 324. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.464187.
Altan, M. Z. (2017). Globalization, English language teaching and Turkey. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, 5(4), 764-776. DOI: 10.18298/ijlet.2238.
American Association of Law Libraries: http://www.aallnet.org/prodev/outcomes.asp.
Avşar, G., & Mete, F. (2018). Classification of actions used in Turkish teaching programs according to the revised Bloom taxonomy. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(1), 75-87.
Aydın, M., Laçin, S. & Keskin, İ. (2018). Teacher opinions on the implementation of the secondary school mathematics curriculum. International e-Journal of Educational Studies (IEJES), 2(3), 1-11.
Batdı, V. (2017). Comparing the high school English curriculum in Turkey through multi-analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(4), 1255-1290. DOI: 10.12738/estp.2017.4.0490.
Bingham, J. (1999). Guide to Developing Learning Outcomes. The Learning and Teaching Institute Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.
Birgül, Y., & Nacakcı, Z. (2019). Views of music teachers for 2017-2018 primary educations curriculum. Fine Arts (NWSAFA), 14(1):60-70, DOI: 10.12739/NWSA.2019.14.1.D0226.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. doi:10.3316/QRJ0902027.
Caffarella, R.S. (2002). Planning Programs for Adult Learners: A Practical Guide for Educators, Trainers and Staff Developers. Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Council of Europe (CoE). (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Demir, G., Akar-Vural, R. (2017). The examination of teacher opinions on
mathematical competence and skills of secondary mathematics curriculum. Adnan Menderes University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 4(1), 118-139. https://dergipark.org.tr/download/article-file/297511.
Deveci, İ., & Çepni, S. (2017). Examination of science education curriculum (5-8 grades) in terms of entrepreneurial characteristics. Alan Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 51-74.
Diab, S., & Sartawi, B. (2017). Classification of questions and learning outcome statements (LOS) ınto Blooms Taxonomy (BT) by similarity measurements towards extracting of learning outcome from learning material. International Journal of Managing Information Technology, 9(2), 1-12. DOI: 10.5121/ijmit.2017.9201.
Dogan, Y. & Burak, D. (2018). 4. Sınıf Fen Bilimleri Dersi Kazanımlarının Revize Edilmiş Bloom Taksonomisine Göre İncelenmesi. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(23), 34-56. doi: 10.29329/mjer.2018.138.3.
Duruk, Ü., Akgün, A., Doğan, C., & Gülsuyu, F. (2017). Examining the learning outcomes included in the Turkish Science curriculum in terms of science process skills: A document analysis with standards-based assessment. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(2), 117-142.
Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A. & Nyström, M. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48-63.
Erarslan, A. (2018). Strengths and weaknesses of primary school English language teaching programs in Turkey: Issues regarding program components. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 325-347. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.464194.
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall (2000). A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.
Gezer, M., & İlhan, M. (2015). An analysis on the assessment questions in the textbook and objectives of the curriculum social sciences course according to the SOLO taxonomy. Sakarya University Journal of Faculty of Education, 29, 1-25.
Gosling, D. & Moon, J. (2001). How to use Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria. London: SEEC Office.
Güneş-Koç, R. S., & Kayacan, K. (2018). The views of science teachers about engineering design skills. Turkish Studies Educational Sciences, 13(19), 865-881. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.13771.
Gürsoy, E., Korkmaz, Ş. C., & Damar, E. A. (2017). English language teaching within the new educational policy of Turkey: Views of stakeholders. International Education Studies, 10(4), 18-30. DOI: 10.5539/ies.v10n4p18.
Hanushek, E. A,. & Wosmann, L. (2005). Does educational tracking affect performance and inequality? Differences- in-differences evidence across countries. Econ. J. 116: C63–76.
Hutchings, P. (2016). Aligning educational outcomes and practices. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, 3-20. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED567005.pdf.
Jackson, N, Wisdom, J., & Shaw, M. (2003). Guide for Busy Academics: Using Learning Outcomes to Design. Available at:
Janssen, T., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Approaches to the teaching of literature: a national survey of literary education in Dutch secondary schools. In Roger J. Kreuz & Mary Sue MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical Approaches to Literature and Aesthetics. Volume 52 in the Series Advances in Discourse Processes (pp. 513-536). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Jenkins, A. & Unwin, D. (2001). How to write learning outcomes. Available online at: https://www.ubalt.edu/cas/faculty/faculty-matters/How%20to%20write%20student%20learning%20outcomes.pdf.
Kırkgöz, Y. (2009). Evaluating the English textbooks for young learners of English at Turkish primary education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.016.
Kırkgöz, Y., Çelik, S. & Arıkan, A. (2017). Designing a Curriculum for Young Turkish Learners: Pedagogical Foundations, Practical Considerations and Procedures. Retreived from: http://eltktu.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Kirkgoz_Celik_Arikan_Designing-an-ELT-Curriculum-for-Young-Turkish-Learners.pdf.
Kurt, A. (2016). Türkçe dersi öğretim programı 6, 7 ve 8. sınıf sözlü iletişim kazanımlarının SOLO taksonomisine göre incelenmesi [Investigation of communicative learning outcomes in Turkish teaching programmes for 6th, 7th and 8th grades based on SOLO taxonomy]. Bitlis Eren University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 5, 215-228.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching (3rd ed.). London, England: Oxford University Press.
Merter, F., Kartal, Ş. & Çağlar, İ. (2012). The evaluation of new high school English curriculum in terms of teachers’ opinions. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 43 – 58. Retreived from: http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/181344.
Neary, M. (2002). Curriculum studies in post-compulsory and adult education. UK: Nelson Thornes.
O’Leary, Z. (2014). The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Osters, S. & Tiu, F. (2018). Writing Measurable Learning outcomes. Article available on: http://www.tamu.edu/qep/documents/Writing-MeasurableLearning-Outcomes.pdf.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sarıgöz, H., & Fişne, F. N. (2018). English language assessment and evaluation practices in the 4th grade classes at main stream schools. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(3), 380-395.
Schoepp, K. (2019). The state of course learning outcomes at leading universities. Studies in Higher Education, 44(4), 615-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1392500.
Scroggins, B. (2004). The teaching-learning cycle: Using student learning outcome results to improve teaching and learning. Workshop Activities & Resource Materials.
Seemiller, C. (2016). Leadership competency development: A higher education responsibility. In Guthrie, K. L. & Osteen, L. (Eds.), New Directions for Higher Education: No: 174. Reclaiming higher education's purpose in leadership development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stanny, C. J. (2016). Reevaluating Bloom’s taxonomy: What measurable verbs can and cannot say about student learning. Education Sciences, 6(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040037 .
Tarman, B., & Kılınç, E. (2018). Poetry in the social studies textbooks in Turkey. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 1(1), 50-62.
Um, E. & Plass, J. L. (2010). Emotional design in multimedia learning. Accessed at http://steinhardtapps.es.its.nyu.edu/create/courses/2174/reading/Um%20&%20Plass%20JEP%20Print.pdf.
Ünsal, S., & Korkmaz, F. (2017). Analysis of attainments and evaluation questions in sociology curriculum according to the solo taxonomy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER), 69, 75-92. Retrieved from: http://ejer.com.tr/0DOWNLOAD/pdfler/tr/fahrttinserkan69.pdf.
Ünsal, S., Çetin, A., Korkmaz, F., & Aydemir, M. (2019). The change in the curricula: Teachers’ perceptions. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 48(1), 623-661. DOI: 10.14812/cufej.479002.
Wagenaar, R. (2018). What do we know – What should we know? Measuring and comparing achievements of learning in European higher education: Initiating the new CALOHEE approach. In: Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia O., Toepper M., Pant H., Lautenbach C., Kuhn C. (Eds.), Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education. Methodology of Educational Measurement and Assessment. Springer, Cham.
Yalçınkaya, Y. (2018). Yenilenen 9. sınıf matematik dersi öğretim programı hakkında öğretmen görüşleri. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(3), 100-110. Retrieved from http://dergipark.org.tr/ekuad/issue/41379/500223.
Zorluoğlu, S. L., Kızılaslan, A., & Sözbilir, M. (2016). Analysis and evaluation of learning outcomes in high school chemistry curriculum according to revised Bloom Taxonomy. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1): 260-279. DOI: 10.17522/nefefmed.22297.
Zumbach, J., Schwartz, N. H., Kestor, L. & Seufert, T. (2008). (Eds.) Beyond Knowledge: The Legacy of Competence (Meaningful learning computer-based learning environments). Vienna, Austria: Springer Science Publishing.
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher. The Editors reserve the right to edit or otherwise alter all contributions, but authors will receive proofs for approval before publication.
Copyrights for articles published in International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction are retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the journal. The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.