2024 Ortaokul Türkçe Dersi Öğretim Programı’na Yönelik Öğretim Elemanı, Öğretmen ve Öğretmen Adayı Görüşleri
Views of Teacher Educators, In-service Teachers, and Pre-service Teachers on the 2024 Middle School Turkish Course Curriculum

Summary/Abstract: Due to the constantly evolving demands of the modern world and the new needs arising from these changes (Direkçi, Akbulut, & Şimşek, 2019), curricula must be regularly updated (Ekmen & Demir, 2024; Korkmaz & Kalaycı, 2019). In this context, the Turkish language curriculum was revised again in 2024 (MEB, 2024) within the framework of the Türkiye Century Education Model. The present study aims to identify the views of teachers, academics, and prospective teachers regarding the 2024 middle school Turkish language curriculum. The study employed a phenomenological qualitative design. Ten interview questions prepared by the researchers were asked to 10 faculty members specializing in Turkish language education, 10 Turkish language teachers, and 10 pre-service Turkish language teachers. Data were collected through face-to-face and online interviews during the 2024–2025 academic year and analyzed using content analysis. Participants were first asked about their initial reactions to the curriculum change and its applicability. All participant groups predominantly expressed negative emotions, and the most frequently reported theme was dissatisfaction (f = 8). Regarding applicability, the most common themes were overcrowded classrooms (f = 9), insufficient classroom or school resources (f = 8), time constraints (f = 7), difficulty understanding the curriculum (f = 4), and too many activities (f = 4). Participants also compared the 2024 curriculum with the 2019 version. The most frequently mentioned similarities were the four core language skills (f = 9), the studentcentered approach (f = 5), and assessment and evaluation processes (f = 4). The most common differences were learning outcomes (f = 5), production workshops (f = 4), and grammar instruction (f = 4). Positive aspects of the 2024 curriculum included studentcenteredness (f = 7), production workshops (f = 6), differentiation activities (f = 4), and cognitive and metacognitive strategies (f = 4), whereas negative aspects included themes (f = 3), lack of practicality (f = 3), and language structures (f = 3). When asked what they would change if they were part of the curriculum development committee, participants indicated that they would revise the themes (f = 5) and learning outcomes (f = 4), while some stated that they were unwilling to serve on the committee (f = 3). Regarding the textbooks prepared in line with the new curriculum, the most frequent themes were that the texts were well written (f = 7), there were too many activities (f = 6), and the instructions were not appropriate for students’ level (f = 4). Concerning in-service training, most participants stated that it was insufficient (f = 11) or that they did not consider it sufficient (f = 3). Finally, the gradual release of responsibility model was generally viewed as suitable for language education (f = 4) and studentcentered (f = 4). Based on the findings, several recommendations are proposed for the Ministry of National Education and curriculum developers. First, comprehensive and targeted training should be provided to educators implementing the curriculum. Second, classroom conditions and sizes should either be improved or the curriculum should be adapted to existing school realities. Third, textbooks should offer greater flexibility in thematic content. Fourth, the number of activities should be aligned with classroom resources, and instructions should be clear and appropriate for students’ levels. Fifth, educational materials should be written in clear and accessible language for teachers and prospective teachers. Finally, learning outcomes should be revised in line with current literature and teacher feedback to better meet classroom needs.

• Details
• Contents