Investigating problems of English literature teaching to EFL high school students in Turkey with focus on language proficiency

Ceren Işıklı, Aslı Özlem Tarakcioglu

Abstract


Introduction of English literature as a separate school subject into Turkish high school curriculum has revealed a huge number of problems during its practical applications: students’ low levels of proficiency in English, teacher incompetence, low motivation, lack of confidence, limited resources, lack of materials etc. Given the great extent and multi-sided dimension of the new experience, with the constant interference of a variety of external factors, the focus of this study was narrowed down to identify mainly the primary source of problems in EFL-contextualized English literature teaching. To this purpose, two instruments of data collection were used: a teacher questionnaire and English language proficiency test. Analysis of the questionnaire has revealed that, according to English teachers, student-related problems, and particularly students’ low proficiency levels, constitute the most important source of problems. The language proficiency test was applied to see whether this finding confirmed or not the teacher opinion about low proficiency levels of students. The test has revealed students’ real levels of proficiency in compliance with the Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR). It showed that about half of the students’ proficiency levels were significantly lower than expected, in this way partly confirming the teacher opinion on low proficiency levels, as the proof of the general inadequacy of students for studying English literature at levels prescribed by the national curriculum. The study has been led to conclude that there is an urgent need to re-adjust English literature curriculum so as to take into account students’ real levels of proficiency, and to review or reconsider it in such ways as to prioritize linguistic competence development over the literary.


Keywords


English literature teaching; student-related problems; English language proficiency; linguistic and literary competence; curriculum development

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abdullah, T., Zakaria, M., Ismail, F., Wan Mansor, W. & Abdulaziz M. (2007). A New Teaching Model to Teach Literature for the TESL Pre- Training Service Programme in University Teknologi Malaysia. Project Report. Faculty of Management and Human Resource Development, Skudai, Johor. Retrieved in June 2015 from http://eprints.utm.my/3970/1/75167.pdf

Arvidson, A., & Blanco, B. (2004). Reading across Rhode Island: One book, one state, many successful readers. English Journal, 93(5), 47-52.

Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson

Buyukyavuz, O. & Inal, S. (2008). A descriptive study on Turkish teachers of English regarding their professional needs, efforts for development and available resources. The Asian EFL Journal,10, 215-234.

Çetintaş, B. (2010). Türkiye’de yabancı dil Eğitim ve öğretiminin sürekliliği. [The Sustainability of Foreign Language Education in Turkey]. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 6, (1), 65-74.

Chomsky (1957) Syntactic Structures. Mouton

CUP Cambridge University Press, English Unlimited Placement Test, retrieved online on 10.09.2015 from http://vyre-legacy-access.cambridge.org/br/elt/catalogue/subject/project/custom/item6039738/English-Unlimited-Placement-test/?currentSubjectID=382378

Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methodologies.Oxford: Oxford University Press

Ganakumaran, S. (2002). Reading through literature and literature through reading: The incorporation of a literature component in the Malaysian ESL syllabus, In M. K. David and F. Hashim (Eds.), Developing reading skills (55-74). Petaling Jaya: Sasbadi

Ganakumaran, S., Shahizah, I.H. & Koo, Y.L. (2003) Pedagogical implications of the incorporation of the Literature Component in the Malaysian ESL syllabus. In Ganakumaran S. (Ed) The Malaysian ESL syllabus in Teaching of Literature in ESL/EFL Contexts. (62-87). Sasbadi, Petaling Jaya: Malaysia

Karci, C. & Vural, R.A. (2011). Teachers’ views with regard to teaching English in multigraded classrooms. Elementary Education Online, 10 (2), 593-607.

Katz, S. (2001). Teaching literary texts at the intermediate level: A structured input approach. (ERIC Document reproduction Service No. ED481417).

Krishnasamy, J. (2015). An Investigation of Teachers’ Approaches Employed in Teaching the English Literature. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning (ISSN: 2321 -2454). 2 (3).

Mwape, F. L. (1984). The Objectives of Teaching Literature in Zambian Secondary Schools and the Extent of the Attainment through the Set Book Syllabus. Master Dissertation. The University of Zambia. Lusaka

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (3–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tekin, H. (1996). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Yargı Yayınları, Ankara.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


  Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2017 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies