Academia.eduAcademia.edu
European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching ISSN: 2537 - 1754 ISSN-L: 2537 - 1754 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu doi: 10.5281/zenodo.437574 Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Esin Dündar, Ali Merç Anadolu University, Turkey Abstract: This study was designed to compile the studies conducted on curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL contexts and to specify their general characteristics through content analysis. The studies were chosen in line with the inclusion criteria through which online articles and dissertations were included. No specific timeline, context or research design was set for the literature search. As a result of the review of the related literature, 86 studies were reached and analyzed in terms of their contexts, sample type and size, data collection tools, data analysis techniques. All the studies were coded through a protocol and the results were tabulated. As well as the characteristics of the studies, their findings were also analyzed through content analysis and common points were presented and interpreted. As a result of the analysis, it was revealed that the curriculum evaluation studies were more popular than the curriculum development studies. It was also found that the studies were mainly about primary and secondary levels; they mostly employed Likert-type scales; semi-structured interviews were more common; descriptive statistics were applied more frequently. Finally, common findings were detected among the studies conducted in different contexts with different grades of study. By taking the findings as the basis, some suggestions are provided for further studies. Keywords: curriculum development, curriculum evaluation, ESL, EFL, ELT Introduction In order to see the tendencies of the studies in a specific field, to organize the findings, and to see the points that have not been researched yet, researchers can make critical reviews on the general characteristics and findings of the studies on the same topic. This helps the researcher to examine the big picture of the field and see the tendencies Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 136 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT of the studies in a specific field. Understanding the content of the studies of a specific topic in the field can guide researchers and accelerate the further studies. Curriculum development and evaluation is one of the core topics in English language teaching. This issue is important and getting the attention of the researchers as it is directly related to the presentation of the language in a systematic way and teaching learning situations. Although the metaphor of manual can be used to describe the curriculum, designing a curriculum is not easy as just writing down what to teach and how to teach. Curriculum design and evaluation, as a part of the development process, is at the center of English teaching and other matters as it contains the approaches, methods, techniques, activities followed to teach the language as well as the content and it is based on a policy (Brown, 1995). 1. Significance of the study First of all, considering the fact that no critical analysis study has been encountered in English language teaching literature on curriculum design and evaluation, this study is supposed to be an important source of information. Second, the present study has a substantial value as it combines and evaluates both quantitative and qualitative findings in one analysis in order to support the statistical data driven from the findings of the quantitative studies with qualitative data to draw a clear picture of the issue. Finally, the study reveals the tendency of the research on English language curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL context by not only documenting the general characteristics of the studies, presenting statistical information about the most frequently used data collection tools, sample types and research designs, but also by summarizing the common findings of the related studies. 1.1. Curriculum Development The number of the children and adults laboring over second or foreign language learning, which has been one of the biggest educational enterprise worldwide, has reached over millions (Richards, 2001: 1). Not only the learners but also the teachers as components of the educational system put a lot of effort into this educational attempt through organizing the lessons, selecting or adapting the teaching materials and applying their plans in the classroom (Richards, 2001). No matter what approach the teachers follow, there is something universal in deciding on what to teach the learners and in every single approach it is kind of a rule to put the subjects to be taught in an order (Brown, 1995). At this point, it is crucial to mention an umbrella term, which contains approach, method, technique, syllabus, activity, and exercise within itself: curriculum. Curriculum means much more than subjects to be taught, transmitted or European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 137 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT delivered (Kelly, 2004: 4). An effective definition of the curriculum should provide the information on why are we teaching, what could be the possible effects of the transmission of the information, what are the outcomes (Kelly, 2004). Curriculum can be seen as a detailed manual for teaching and learning process: Curriculum refers to the specific blueprint for learning that is derived from desired results that is, content and performance standards (be they state-determined or locally developed).Curriculum takes content (from external standards and local goals) and shapes it into a plan for how to conduct effective teaching and learning. It is thus more than a list of topics and lists of key facts and skills the input . It is a map of how to achieve the outputs of desired student performance, in which appropriate learning activities and assessments are suggested to make it more likely that students achieve the desired results (Wiggins & McTighe, 2006: 5-6). Drawing a distinction between education and curriculum, Null (2011) states that curriculum has a crucial place if how effective an institution is the question. The curriculum contains many questions within itself and Null (2011) lists the questions that curriculum holds within itself What should be taught, to whom, under what circumstances, how, and with what end in mind? Put more concretely, what should be taught to these students, in this school, at this time, how, and to what end? What process should we use to decide what our curriculum ought to be within a particular school, college, or university context? p. . Eisner (1994) classifies the curriculum as: (a) explicit curriculum which has the publicly explicit goals or opportunities provided by the schools and they are stated in curriculum guides of the schools or n the materials provided, (b) implicit or hidden curriculum, which stands for the intentional and unintentional functions of the school and these are not advertised contrary to the explicit curriculum, they just arise in the context through learning opportunities, and (c) null curriculum, which deals with intellectual processes and content neglected by the schools. Null curriculum is related to what is not taught in the school or not provided. From a different point of view, Kelly (2004: 2- classifies curriculum as educational, total, hidden, the planned and the received, the formal and the informal . The main focus of curriculum development is on deciding which knowledge, skills and values to be taught, how to reach the intended outcomes, and the learning and teaching processes (Richards, 2001). An effective language curriculum is not just related to the pure action of teaching; it also includes the procedures of planning, designing and implementation (Richards, 1990). Constructed on the main principles of development, conducting and evaluation, curriculum development has six main steps: needs analysis, goal setting, syllabus design, methodology, testing and evaluation (Richards, 1990, p. 1). European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 138 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Philosophical, theoretical and practical constructions give shape to the curriculum development in other words, science, society, moral doctrine, knowledge, and the learner are the sources of the curriculum Ornstein & Hunkins, Richards (199 , ‛rown suggests that . Similar to needs analysis, objectives, testing, materials, teaching and evaluation are the basic components of curriculum design. Figure 1: Systematic Approach to Designing and Maintaining Language Curriculum (Brown, 1995, p. 20) As presented in Figure 1, the first step is needs analysis, the concept which focuses on the learners and concerns with the language structures which are likely to be needed (Brown, 1995). In language curriculum development needs analysis helps; (1) providing a systematic approach for the selection of the input, constructing the content of the program by taking the opinions of members of designing process, (2) specifying the language needs, (3) providing a base for the assessment of the present program (Richards, 1990). When it comes to the goals and objectives, we should make a clear distinction between these two terms. Goal is a more general term defining what should we do to meet the expectations of the learners and objective is a more specific term related to the structures that learners should know to reach a specific goal (Brown, 1995). The objectives can be behavior, content, proficiency or skill based (Richards, 1990). Goals and objectives, the second step rings the need for the third step language testing. In a language program, tests can be applied in the need for placement of the students, identifying the levels of the students through diagnostic tests, or testing the European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 139 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT achievements of the learners (Brown, 1995). Then it comes to the last step before the classroom implementation of the language curriculum, material design. Another model of curriculum design is suggested by Macalister and Nation (2011). The model, which is shown in Figure 2, is constructed with three outer and one inner circle, which is also divided into three sub-circles. Figure 2: A Model of the Parts of the Curriculum Design Process (Macalister & Nation, 2011, p. 2) Starting from the inner circle, the model puts the goals into the center of the curriculum design in order to emphasize their crucial role in a course and here the sequence and content represents what and in which order to teach, the part, format and presentation, is generally deals with how to present the language structures to the learners, the part we plan the lesson which includes the techniques and activities and the last component of the inner circle is monitoring and assessing in which we check the outcomes and evaluate the learning activity and the success of the teaching (Macalister & Nation, 2011). Before giving information about the outer circles and what they stand for, it is important to mention that they all have sub-factors. Environment analysis can reveal the factors related to the learners, teachers and teaching-learning situations , needs analysis has tree sub-factors lacks, wants and necessities and the last one, principles, is divided into assessment content and sequencing, format and presentation, and monitoring and Macalister & Nation, -4). The last component of the model is evaluation, which encircles the whole model, and it can provide detailed information about every piece and component of the model and can show the lacks and necessities or the parts to be developed, and generally this component is neglected in curriculum development (Macalister & Nation, 2011). European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 140 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 1.2. Curriculum Evaluation After designing the curriculum, conducting the needs analysis and the actual implementation of the designed curriculum, the development is not totally over as there are still lots of things to be considered. We need to deal with some questions like whether the curriculum really meets the expectations of the people affected by it, or we can reach our objectives through this curriculum, what is the situation in the class in which we carry out the curriculum we designed, compared to the other examples, whether we achieve to design a better curriculum (Richards, 2001). In order to find an answer to all these questions or the concerns we have, we need to evaluate the whole process of our curriculum design. Compared to needs analysis, evaluation is a broader notion dealing with every process in the curriculum development from the specification of the objectives, to the design or adaptation of the materials and in-class implementation, and processing all the information gathered during the stages of development and application (Brown, 1995). The concern of evaluation is not just the results. Weir and Roberts (1994) approach evaluation with some basic questions such as why, what, how long. There are so many aspects we can evaluate in a curriculum such as the needs of the curriculum as a whole or of the learners, sources, the system including curriculum, in-class implementation, the achievement and motivation of the learners, the success of the school staff including teachers and principal, and the conditions under which learningteaching situation is carried out (Weir & Roberts, 1994). The main reason behind conducting an evaluation is to provide beneficial information to a larger audience and a theoretical base and a context based information on particular implementations (Weir & Roberts, 1994). Literature provides some approaches to evaluate the curriculum. For example, Brown (1995: 219) summarize them under four main categories product oriented approaches , which focus on the extent of reaching the objectives, static characteristic approaches, conducted by an outsider to evaluate the efficacy of the program, and process oriented approaches , which answer the questions of how to improve or revise the current curriculum, and decision facilitation approaches, based on collecting information before making decisions. When it comes to the types of evaluation there are two main types: formative and summative (Weir & Roberts, 1994; Brown, 1995; Richards, 2001; Nation & Macalister, 2010). Formative evaluation is conducted throughout the process and the main purpose of using formative evaluation is to gather data to improve the curriculum during the development and implementation of it (Weir & Roberts, 1994; Brown, 1995; Richards, 2001; Nation & Macalister, 2010). The data collected through a formative evaluation is mostly detailed, related to the process itself, and used for the improvement of the staff or the material and specifying the goals (Nation & Macalister, European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 141 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 2010). Formative evaluation is in a way checking the quality in each stage of curriculum development and getting the feedback regularly and thus, it provides justification for the changes made by the staff during the process (Weir & Roberts, 1994). Summative evaluation is conducted at the end of the process and it helps to determine to what extent the curriculum or the course is successful, it deal with how effective the curriculum is (Weir & Roberts, 1994; Brown, 1995; Richards, 2001; Nation & Macalister, 2010). Brown (1995) criticizes summative evaluation as it ignores the fact of language program s being a continuing structure and suggests that the administrators of the program can stop the process and ask the questions related to summative evaluation while the program is being applied. However, summative evaluation still has a crucial place as it helps to see the bigger picture, and gives information on what has been accomplished in a period of time. Together with formative evaluation, summative evaluation can save the school staff from the troubles and stress of being evaluated by an outsider (Brown, 1995). Another crucial aspect is how to conduct the evaluation. Post-modernity resulted in a paradigm shift and this has caused the redefinition of achievement and this shift puts more responsibility on the evaluation process in terms of giving effective feedback on the best choice under the policy based conditions (Kiely & Rea-Dickins, 2005). With this shift, the emphasis on basing the curriculum on an ideology has changed into an understanding of bearing the values, other dimensions and factors putting a great responsibility on the stakeholders, participants of the curriculum (Kiely & Rea-Dickins, 2005). The determination of the criteria for the evaluation is another challenge. According to Kiely and Rea-Dickins (2005: 13), there are three approaches to decide on criteria theory based, policy based and constructivist or ethnographic approach and as well as providing benefits, these approaches also make it hard to specify such a criteria that is covering both the experience of the participants in the program and its rationale. The other two challenges are dealing with a big amount of data, knowing what to do and where to use it, and as the results of the evaluation are expected to support or construct a theory or provide information for the other programs in a broader sense, it is also challenging for the stakeholders how to deal with results and report them (Kiely & ReaDickins, 2005). According to Nation and Macalister (2010: 123-4) the steps of the evaluation are as follows: 1) specify the audience of the evaluation and what they expect from this, 2) specify the field in which the findings will be used, 3) decide whether there is really a need for the evaluation, 4) find out the time span and sources necessary for conducting the evaluation, 5) specify the aspects to be evaluated in the program, European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 142 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 6) create connections to get the help of the people in the system, 7) specify the participants and data gathering tools, 8) decide on how to report the evaluation results, 9) check whether a follow up evaluation is appointed. There are numbers of tools for gathering information, presented in Table 1, which a scholar can choose in line with the focus of aim such as interviews, checklists and tests, observations, meetings, and self-reports (Weir & Roberts, 1994; Brown, 1995; Nation & Macalister, 2010). Table 1: Focus and Tools for Evaluation of Teaching and Learning (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 129) Focus Amount of learning Quality of learning Quality of teaching Quality of course book Tools Achievement and proficiency tests Learner self-report scales Analysis of course book content Interviewing learners Achievement and proficiency assessment Lesson observation Interviewing learners Teacher diaries Study of research reports Systematic lesson observation Interviewing teachers-retrospective accounts Learner self-report scales Teacher self-report scales Study of research reports Achievement tasks Listing of staff qualifications Systematic coursebook evaluation checklist Teacher and learner questionnaire Quality of curriculum design Systematic course evaluation checklist Analysis of the syllabus Evaluation of the course materials Degree of later success of graduates of the course Interviewing employers or questionnaires Interviewing graduates or questionnaires Later achievement records such as GPA Teacher, learner or sponsor satisfaction Self-report scales Questionnaires Interviews Learner re-enrolment statistics European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 143 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 1.3. Previous Studies on Curriculum Development and Evaluation Studies conducted on the issue of curriculum development and evaluation in different contexts has provided variety into the field. Some examples are in-class curriculum application in Taiwan elementary schools (Lai, 2007), the effect of learner driven motives on the development and implementation of the curriculum (Shawer, Gilmore & Banks-Joseph, 2009), designation of a curriculum with art based medium for kindergarten level in Puerto Rico (Perez, 2009), the design of kindergarten English curriculum based on DAP assumptions (Sowers, 1996), the analysis of backward design process in foreign language curriculum (Korotchenko, Matveenko, Strelnikova & Phillips, 2015), the investigation of English curriculum in Asia Pacific Region (Nunan, 2003) as well as some curriculum evaluation studies (Abu-Ghararah, 1986; Alwan, 2006; Burgos, 2012; Harris, 2010; Hillberry, 2008; Hu, 2007; Krekeller, 1993; Powell, 2008; Sun, 2007; Wang, 1996). In Turkey, the tendency is to evaluate the curriculum of English language courses from different levels along with the perspectives of teachers and students, and quite rarely the parents and inspectors. These are mainly about the evaluation of 2nd grade English curriculum (Kandemir, 2016; K(ç(ktepe, K(ç(ktepe & ‛aykın, Maviş & ‛edir, ‚ybek, 5z(doğru & ‚dıg(zel, Yıldıran & Tanrıseven, 2015), the evaluation of 3rd grade curriculum (Çankaya, 2015), the evaluation of 4th and 5th grade English curriculum (Er, 2006; Erkan, Seçkin, 2010), 6th, 7th, 8th grades Çelen, Yanık, Yiğit, Yör(, Demirlier, Mersinligil, Orakçı, 5zer, , the difficulties experienced by the teachers during the application of English curriculum ‚rı, Karcı, G(neş, , the evaluation of , CEFR-related curriculum Zorba & ‚rıkan, English curriculum in G(lhane Military Medical ‚cademy Sarı, th grade curriculum , and development of . ‚lthough there are several studies on the issue of curriculum development and evaluation in English language teaching, no critical analysis has been encountered in the literature. As the reviewed literature suggests, there is a need to have a better understanding of the current studies and their findings to be able to conduct more effective studies in future. In revealing the neglected parts of the issue, this study has a significant role. Instead of evaluating a curriculum through a Likert-type scale form the perspectives of the teachers and students, which is the general tendency of the studies especially in Turkey, drawing a general picture of the related literature will help us to make sense of the findings and meet the needs of the field. 1.4. Research Questions The main objective of the present study is to conduct a critical review of the studies on curriculum development and evaluation conducted in ESL/EFL contexts, to European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 144 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT find out the general characteristics of the studies and to present a synthesis of the qualitative studies based on the same issues. In line with this aim, the study is an attempt to answer these research questions; 1. What are the general characteristics of the studies on curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL context? 2. What is the general pattern of the findings of the studies on curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL context? 2. Method 2.1. Research Design Many independent studies providing lots of different findings on any specific issue can sometimes be misleading; therefore, there is a need for a further, comprehensive and reliable research in order to interpret fund of knowledge (Demirel, 2005; Özcan, 2008). Card (2012) claimed that the need for organizing the existing studies is more urgent than conducting further studies in social sciences. This need has resulted in the combining the findings on the same issue and analyzing them within a one single study. In order to analyze the studies on curriculum development and evaluation in ELT, this study adapted document analysis, which involves the analysis of written documents presenting information on the phenomena to be investigated Yıldırım & Şimşek, . 2.2. Data Collection Procedure The study was conducted through the following steps; (1) specification of the topic, (2) defining selection criteria, (3) searching for the studies, (4) specifying the final set of data, (5) coding the studies, (6) calculating descriptive statistics (7) tabulating and reporting the findings (8) interpreting the findings and making conclusions. 2.2.1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria. When the researcher specifies the topic of the study, the second step before searching for the primary studies to be analyzed, is setting the inclusion/exclusion criteria. For this present study, these criteria were set; Timeline Not a specific period of time has been set for the present study. Publication type Articles and dissertations that are available online have been included in the study. Research design The studies with both quantitative and qualitative research design are included. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 145 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Context This study utilized the studies conducted in Turkey and in any country where English is taught as a second or foreign language. 2.3. Data Collection The process of searching the literature conducted following the steps offered by Card (2012). The steps are given in Figure 3. Figure 3: Basic Steps for Searching the Literature (Card, 2012, p. 35) As the first step, an overall literature search was conducted in order to construct the frame of the study. The second step was to specify the inclusion/exclusion criteria. At this point, the timeline, publication type, research design, statistical value and context were determined as inclusion/exclusion criteria. After the third step, which was organization of the search, the literature search was conducted through online databases. In this step, in order to specify the studies to include for the analysis, certain keywords were determined. According to Card (2012), the selection of the key words can be specified through the knowledge of the researcher either by investigating the key words of the studies on the issue to be analyzed or taking thesauri as a base. The key words used for the search were curriculum development (f=11), curriculum evaluation European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 146 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT (f=10), English language curriculum (f=13), curriculum (f=10) . ‚s the studies in Turkey might have been written in the native language, the key words in Turkish were defined as program geliştirme f= , program değerlendirme f= , İngilizce dersi öğretim programı (f=6) . ‚ll these key words were determined based on the frequency among the key words of the studies found out during the overall search of the literature and they were checked through UNESCO IBE Glossary of curriculum terminology (2013). Next, online research databases were scanned to obtain the studies. In order to find the articles, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) was used as the search engine as it is one of the rich databases for educational journals. For the dissertations, YÖK theses and dissertations database and Proquest were searched. After writing down the initial list of the studies, backward and forward searches were followed as the sixth and seventh steps. During these steps, the reference lists of the studies and the ones citing the studies reached were analyzed to find out more studies as well as to be certain that not all but most of the possible studies were reached. At the end, the initial list was revised and a final list of studies was prepared. As a result of the whole process, 86 studies were included for the present study (See Appendix): 24 articles (28%) and 62 theses and dissertations (72%). 2.4. Coding the Studies After searching for the studies and specifying the ones to be analyzed in line with the inclusion/exclusion criteria, a coding protocol was designed based on the article classification form developed by Tatar, Kağızmanlı, and ‚kkaya . This coding protocol consists of two parts: the identity and the content of the study. The identity of the study describes the author, publication date, and the title of the studies while the content mainly deals with the sample types and size, research design, data collection tools, and data analysis. 2.5. Data Analysis In order to reveal the general characteristics of the studies, the quantitative data were coded using the protocol form adapted from Tatar et al. (2013). The qualitative data, on the other hand, were analyzed through content analysis, which enables to summarize the data in a categorical and systematic way (Büyüköztürk, Çakmak, Akgün, Karadeniz, & Demirel, 2011). The steps of the content analysis were as follows: 1. The findings of the studies were listed down. 2. All the findings were reviewed. 3. The common answers were determined and grouped. 4. The semantically identical ones were coded and categorized. 5. All categories were given a theme. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 147 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 3. Results and Discussion This critical review investigated the studies on curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL for their context, grade, publication date, research design, sample type and size, data collection tools, and data analysis techniques. The first finding is the distribution of the studies based on the context that they had been conducted. As a result of the analysis, 19 different contexts were identified and their frequencies are presented in Table 2. As two different contexts were compared in some studies, the total number was found to be more than the number of the studies analyzed. It was revealed that nearly more than half of the studies analyzed were conducted in Turkey (51%) followed by Taiwan and USA (8%) and China (7 %). It would not be correct to interpret the high frequency of the studies of Turkey as a sign of leading the literature of curriculum development and evaluation. The present study mainly focused on the context of Turkey and Turkish key words were used during the literature search; therefore, the frequency of the studies conducted in Turkey outnumbered the ones in other contexts. Table 2: The Distribution of the Studies Based on Their Contexts Contexts Turkey Taiwan USA China Korea Saudi Arabia Japan Puerto Rico Thailand Vietnam Hong Kong Nigeria Kuwait Malaysia Canada United Arab Emirates Libya Djibouti Brazil TOTAL f 46 7 7 6 4 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 89 % 51 8 8 7 4 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100 As mentioned before, not a specific timeline was determined for the present study. The results of the analysis showed that the studies analyzed were published between 1985 and 2016. Comparing the number of the publications according to their publication period, 67 studies were published the years between 2006 and 2016 (78%). There were European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 148 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 14 studies conducted during the period of 1995-2005 (16%), and there were only five (6%) studies in the years between 1985 and 1994. Table 3: Distribution of the Studies Based on Their Publication Date Publication Date 1985-1994 1995-2005 2006-2016 TOTAL f 5 14 67 86 % 6 16 78 100 The increase of the studies starting from the beginning of the 21st century can be explained with the curriculum innovations of the countries, especially in Turkey (Dönmez, 2010), China (Lee, 2007), and Taiwan (Chen, 2013). With the policy changes in Turkey, in 2006-2007 academic year English, was decided to be given starting from the 4th grade. In 2012, it was taken to the 2nd grade Yıldıran & Tanrısever, 2015). From the second half of the 19th century to 21st century, China has also made changes in its English language policy and started to give more importance to English language teaching day by day (Liu, 2015). Hence, there can be a correlation between the time of policy changes of the countries and the number of the studies conducted in the field of education. In Table 4, the sample types used in the studies are presented. According to results, the researchers mainly investigated the opinions of the teachers/instructors about the curriculum they were applying both in Turkey and in other ESL/EFL contexts. Table 4 also shows us that other stakeholders affected by the curriculum have been neglected in studies, especially parents. There is only one study in Turkey and two studies in other contexts including parents to the curriculum development and evaluation. As a part of the system, parents should be more involved in giving feedback and sharing opinions about curriculum development and evaluation processes. None of the analyzed studies in Turkey dealt with the officials, policy makers, or the program directors, the studies including these stakeholders in other contexts are quite rare. It is also evident that there are fewer studies conducted with students compared to the ones with teachers both in Turkey (31%) and other contexts (22%). Table 4: Distribution of the Sample Types Sample Types Teachers/Instructors Administrators Parents Inspectors Supervisors Turkey f 38 2 1 1 0 European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 Others % 62 3 2 2 0 f 31 5 2 0 3 % 47 7 3 0 4 149 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 61 Program facilitators Program directors Officials Policy makers Coordinators Publishers Students TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 100 1 2 4 1 1 1 15 66 2 3 6 2 2 2 22 100 Listening to the voice of the teachers is important as they are the ones who are applying the curriculum in a real classroom environment. They are good feedback sources for the policy makers. Here, the factor affecting the sample choice of the researchers can be that reaching a sample group especially the parents, inspectors or officials is not as easy as reaching the teachers or students. Thus, many researchers may have a tendency to use convenient sampling to conduct their studies. As it is presented in Table 5, more than half of the studies conducted in Turkey mainly dealt with 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (51%). Because more than one grade was evaluated in some studies, total number of the grades is different from the number of the studies. 28% of the studies investigated the curriculum of 6 th, 7th, and 8th grades. In other words, the studies mostly focused on the primary and secondary school contexts in Turkey. High school (15%) and college (6%) are the least covered levels in Turkish context. For the other contexts, the studies covering the grades from kindergarten to 5th grade and high school level have an equal percentage (26%) while 38% of the studies were dealing with 6th, 7th, and 8th grades. There were 11 studies about the curriculum of college level in other contexts (10%). Table 5: The Distribution of the Grades Investigated Grades Kindergarten 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 College TOTAL Turkey f 0 0 10 1 12 12 7 6 6 4 2 2 2 4 68 European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 Others % 0 0 14 1 18 18 10 9 9 6 3 3 3 6 100 f 3 4 5 6 4 6 10 15 16 12 5 5 6 11 108 % 3 4 5 5 4 5 9 14 15 11 5 5 5 10 100 150 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT The important point to be highlighted is that there is no study related to the kindergarten curriculum in Turkey. This can be explained within the fact that English is not an official course for kindergarten in Turkey yet although some private schools have been giving English courses at this level. We can state that curriculum design and evaluation for kindergarten level is a neglected issue both in Turkey and other contexts as a result of the educational policies of the countries. The distribution of sample sizes is presented in Table 6. The analysis showed that among 86 studies, 75 of them had a sample group and 11 of the studies conducted document analysis. According to Table 5, among the studies with a sample group, 19% of them have a sample size from 0 to 10, 17% of them have between 11-30, 11% of them have between 31-60, 9% of them have between 61-100, 31% of them have between101500, and 13% of them have a sample size more than 500. Although no certain number is given for the sample size of the studies in the literature, it is ideal to have a sample size of 300- as it is advantageous to have a sample size more than Karasar, 2012). We can state that 44% percent of the studies have an advantageous or ideal condition in terms of their sample size. Table 6: The Frequencies of the Sample Size Sample size 0-10 11-30 31-60 61-100 101-500 501-< TOTAL f 14 13 8 7 23 10 75 % 19 17 11 9 31 13 100 Classifying the studies in terms of their research design, the analysis revealed that 46% of the studies have qualitative research design, 41% of them have quantitative methods, and 13% of the studies have mixed method design. Table 7: The Frequencies of Research Design Research Design Qualitative Quantitative Mixed TOTAL f 40 35 11 86 % 46 41 13 100 Compared to the other designs, there are fewer studies with a mixed design although mixed method (1) has the strong features of qualitative and quantitative designs, (2) can answer research questions with a larger scale, (3) can provide the insight and European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 151 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT understanding that a single design do not have, (4) and provides with the opportunity for the quantitative data to be interpreted visually and verbally and to digitize the qualitative data Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, . The reasons behind the researchers choosing other designs over mixed method design can be due to the facts that (1) the workload can be too much for a researcher to handle alone, (2) that there is a need for the expertise to combine qualitative and quantitative designs, (3) and that researcher may need more time to conduct a mixed design research compared to other designs (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Table 8 summarizes the ratio of the data collection tools. The analysis shows that there is a dominance of qualitative data collection tools such as interviews (32%), documents (13%), journals 81%), and field notes (2%). As nearly half of the studies (46%) have qualitative research designs, which is not surprising. Among the quantitative data collection tools, Likert-type scales are the ones that are mostly preferred by the researchers (25%). 25% of the studies used semi-structured interviews, 5% of them used structured interviews, 1% used unstructured and focus group interviews. The reason behind the popularity of the semi structured interviews might be the belief that semi structured interviews provide a deeper insight and control over the responses (Karasar, 2012). 13% of the studies made use of documents to collect data. Among these documents were lesson plans of the teachers, reflections, textbooks, teachers guide, tests, and curriculum reports. While the observations % were mainly used to check whether the classroom application of the curriculum was parallel with the way it was reported, achievement tests (5%) were used to determine the proficiency level of the students. Table 8: The Frequency of Data Collection Tools Data collection Tools Questionnaire Achievement test Interview Others Sub-category Open-ended Likert Yes/No Open-ended Multiple choice Structured Semi-structured Unstructured Focus group Observation Documents Journals Reports Field notes TOTAL European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 f 12 41 2 2 6 8 40 2 2 19 21 2 1 4 162 % 8 25 1 1 4 5 25 1 1 12 13 1 1 2 100 152 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT The issue to be highlighted here is that there is no experimental design among the ones quantitative studies. This shows us that the general tendency of the studies is to evaluate ELT curriculum through similar Likert-type scales from the perspectives of teachers and students. Investigating these scales that are mainly dealing with the opinions of English teachers and students of different grades about ELT curriculum, it is revealed that the main factors of the scales are goals, content, teaching/learning process and assessment, especially for the ones conducted in Turkey ‚dıg(zel, Alkan and Arslan, 2015; Amorim, 2010 Çankaya, 2015; Çelen, 2011; Demirlier, 2010; Er, Erkan, ‚dıg(zel, İnam, Sak, Kandemir, Topkaya & K(ç(k, Lu, 5rmeci, Yanık, 5z(doğru & Yör(, . Table 9 presents the data analysis techniques applied in the studies analyzed. The most frequently used analysis type is the content analysis (26%) followed by frequency and percentage (25%). The studies utilized t-tests (8%), ANOVAs (6%) as the parametric tests and Kruskal Wallis (2%), Mann Whitney U ( 2%) tests as the nonparametric ones to see whether there was a relation between independent variables such as gender, years of experience, taking an in-service training, the time spent in an English speaking country, age, the program graduated, and the opinions of the teachers on the curriculum (Abu-Ghararah, 1986; Altaieb, 2013; Burgos, 2012; Çankaya, 2015; Çelen, Demirlier, Kartal & Çağlar, Er, 5rmeci, Erkan, İnam, Kershaw, Merter, Tom-Lawyer, 2014; Topkaya & Küçük, 2010; Wang, 2006; Yörü, 2012). Table 9: The Frequency of Data Analysis Data Analysis Frequency/percentage Mean/standard deviation Graphs T test Correlations ANOVA Regression Factor analysis Chi Square Kruskal Wallis Mann Whitney U Cronbach Alpha Content analysis Descriptive Analysis TOTAL f 45 24 4 15 2 10 1 3 6 4 3 4 46 13 180 % 25 13 2 8 1 6 1 2 3 2 2 2 26 7 100 Content analysis dealing with the findings of the studies has shown that regardless of the publication date, context, and grade, there were common issues that the studies European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 153 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT came up with. These shared findings were coded and the categories are presented in Figure 4. Figure 4: Classification of the Common Findings As mentioned above the studies share a common pattern in terms of their findings no matter which grade they are dealing with or in which context they are conducted. These common findings can be classified under the themes of teacher, parents, assessment, practical issues, content, and material related issues. Starting with the practical issues, most of the studies were consistently stating that the weekly class hours of English lesson were not enough to achieve the goals of the curriculum. The relevant examples were the study by Dönmez (2010), analyzing the 8th grade English curriculum, the one carried out by Erkan (2009) dealing with the curriculum of 4th grades, the study of Karcı (2012) investigating the 9th grade curriculum in Turkey, the study of Al-Darwish (3006) evaluating the elementary school English curriculum of Kuwait, or the one conducted by Nakaprasit (2010) investigating ESL curriculum of a university in Canada. Moreover, the limited time given for English lessons caused teachers to neglect the four skills, especially speaking and listening, to focus more on grammar, and not to have enough time for in-class assessment G(neş, Kandemir, Kefeli, Yanık, . The other findings under the practical issues were the crowded classrooms, lack of inservice training for the teachers, and lack of needs analysis (Altaieb, 2013; Çankaya, European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 154 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 2015; Dönmez, 2019; Dudzik, 2008;Ege, 2006; Er, 2006; Erkan, 2009; Harris, 2010; İyitoğlu & ‚lcı, Jan, Karcı, Kefeli, Mersinligil, Nam, Örmeci, 2009; Powell, 2008; Restivo, 2012; Seçkin, 2010; Wang, 2006). The most commonly mentioned findings about the parents in the studies are that the parents had no idea about English curriculum; they were not supporting their children or did not have a good communication with the teachers (Burgos, 2013; Krekeler, Restivo, Wu, Yanık, . When it comes to the teacher- related findings, it was revealed that the teachers were not proficient enough especially to use English as a medium of instruction during the class hours, they had no responsibility during the curriculum design, and their opinions were not valued by the program facilitators (Almalki, 2014; Alwan, 2006; Kim, 2008; Lundien, 2009; Nunan, 2003; Tsai, 2007; Zaid, 1993). Other common points mentioned in the studies were the negative impact of the public examinations on the application of the English curriculum and the lack of assessment tools and examples, especially for measuring the listening and speaking skills. It was found out that public examinations forced English teachers to base their teaching on training students to get high marks from the public tests which put pressure on the teachers (Alkan & ‚rslan, Dönmez, İnam, G(neş, Jan, 1985; Karakoyun, 2008; Kim, 2008; Nonthaisong, 2015; Tsai, 2007; Wang, 2006; Wu, Yiğit, . Some common findings on the content of the curriculum were also revealed as a result of the analysis. It was stated that the directives of the curricula were not clear, therefore, every teacher conducted their lessons based on the perspective they got form those vague directions. Moreover, it was mentioned that the focus of the curriculum was on grammar and the attainments were too ideal for a classroom environment and above the level of the students (Al-Darwish, 2006; Carroll, 2005; Erdoğan, Erkan 2009; Glasgow, 2014; Hillberry, 2008; Hu, 2007; Kandemir, 2016; Kershaw, 2009; Lai, Nunan, Wang, Orakçı, Yanık, 5rmeci, Restivo, Sak, Wang, . Finally, it was mentioned by most of the studies that the textbooks and teachers guides were inefficient and were irrelevant to the curriculum itself. There was a need for extra material and equipment, or in some situations, those textbooks could be seen as the curriculum itself. It was also claimed that the content of the materials were overloaded and not prepared in line with the interest and level of the students (Çankaya, 2015; Demir & Duruhan, Jan, Karakoyun, 2002; Seçkin, 2010; Tom-Lawyer, Dönmez, Ege, Er, K(ç(ktepe, K(ç(ktepe, & ‛aykın, Yaman, Yanık, G(neş, Mersinligil, Yıldıran & Tanrısever, 2015; Yörü, 2012; Zaid, 1993). European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 155 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT The underlying reason for the common findings obtained by the aforementioned studies might result from the fact that the policy of ESL/EFL contexts have changed through the time, mainly at the approach level. It is evident that findings are mainly on the practical issues as the policy and curriculum mainly do not deal with the practical sides such as the classroom size, the supportive materials, or the proficiency levels of the teachers. In other words, as the implementation challenges have remained and the curricula designed in ESL/EFL contexts do not pay attention to those challenges, it is not surprising that teachers, especially the ones in Turkey, are stating the same opinions again and again. 4. Conclusions The present study intends to specify the tendency of the research on English language curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL contexts. Main conclusions drawn from the results obtained in this analysis are as follows: 1. The studies have mainly focused on curriculum evaluation rather than curriculum development. 2. There is a relation between the changes in the education policy of the countries and the grades evaluated. 3. The studies generally concerned with the opinions of English teachers and students. 4. Likert-type scales, semi-structured interviews and documents have been the main data collection tools. 5. The studies presented common findings regardless of their context, publication time and the grade evaluated. This study can provide a base for further studies and for a better investigation of the research on curriculum development and evaluation in ESL/EFL as it shows the general profile of the studies and reveals the points that have not been covered yet. Thus, the study can show the researchers what has been done so far and the points to be researched. Being the first of its kind, this study is able to provide future researchers with the following suggestions: 1. In any context, curriculum development studies should be increased. 2. The studies should not only deal with the opinions of the teachers or students, but also the opinions or experiences of the parents, program facilitators, academic staff, and officials. Teachers are not the only stakeholders of the curriculum design and evaluation process. In order to have detailed information on the design and implementation of English language curriculum, more studies European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 156 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT are needed considering the opinions of the other stakeholders like students parents, and educational administrators. 3. Researchers should pay attention to reliability and validity of the data collection instruments. 4. Researchers can also attend to the issue of in-service training on the implementation of the curriculum. 5. Experimental studies can also be conducted in order to develop an English language curriculum and measure its efficacy. 6. Meta-analysis studies can be conducted in order to calculate the effect size of gender, experience, in-service training, and grades on the evaluation of the curriculum. 7. The number of critical analysis studies should be increased in the field of English language teaching. As a last word, the present study is limited to 86 studies conducted in ESL/EFL contexts from 1985 to 2016 on the issue of curriculum development and evaluation. Only the articles and theses available online were included in this review. The studies that are not available online, conference papers, and or book chapters were not included. Therefore, the results of the study should be considered and generalized bearing these limitations in mind. References 1. Abu-Ghararah, A. H. (1986). Analysis of the status of the English language curriculum and instruction in the public secondary schools of Medina, Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California. Los Angeles. 2. ‚dıg(zel, O. C., & 5z(doğru, F. . İlkokul . Sınıf İngilizce öğretim programına yönelik aydınlatıcı değerlendirme modeline dayalı program değerlendirme ölçeği çalışması. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fak(ltesi Dergisi, 4(2), 124-136. 3. Al-Darwish, S. (2006). An investigation of teachers' perceptions of the English language curriculum in Kuwaiti elementary schools (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Denver, Denver. 4. ‚lkan, M. F., & ‚rslan, M. . İkinci sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının değerlendirilmesi. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 4(7), 87-99. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 157 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 5. Almalki, M. M. (2014). Teacher Perception of a new English as a foreign language (EFL) curriculum in Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). State University of New York, Fredonia. 6. Altaieb, S. R. (2013). Teachers' perception of the English language curriculum in Libyan public schools: An investigation and assessment of implementation process of English curriculum in Libyan public high schools (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Denver, Denver. 7. Alwan, F. H. (2006). An analysis of English language teachers' perceptions of curriculum change in the United Arab Emirates (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Exeter, Exeter. 8. Amorim, G. B. (2010). Getting down to business: An EFL curriculum design for the business setting (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). West Virginia University, West Virginia. 9. ‚rı, ‚. . Teacher opinions about evaluation of th Grade English lesson curriculum in primary schools. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 7(2), 172194. 10. ‚ybek, ‛. . İlk okul ikinci sınıf İngilizce dersinin İngilizce öğretmenlerinin gör(şlerine dayalı olarak değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Studies, 10(15), 67-84. 11. Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers. 12. Burgos, S. (2012). Behind classroom doors: Consistency between policy and practice in the English as a second language classroom (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Universidad Del Turabo, Puerto Rico. 13. ‛(y(közt(rk, Ş., Çakmak, E., ‚kg(n, 5. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. . Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem. 14. Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York: Guilford Publications. 15. Chen, A. H. (2013). An evaluation on primary English education in Taiwan: From the perspective of language policy. English Language Teaching, 6(10), 158-165. 16. Çankaya, P. (2015). An evaluation of the primary 3rd grade English language teaching program: Tekirdağ case (Unpublished Master Thesis). Çanakkale 18 Mart University, 17. Çelen, G. Çanakkale. (2011). İlköğretim altıncı sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur. 18. Demir, Y. & Yavuz, M. . Finlandiya, Japonya, Kore, Çin Şangay ve T(rkiye deki İngilizce dersi öğretim programlarının karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities, 4(1), 115- 128. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 158 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 19. Demirel, D. (2005). Klinik çalışmalarda metaanaliz uygulamaları (Unpublished MA Thesis . Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun. 20. Demirlier, H. (2010). Students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards the newly developed curriculum of primary schools Unpublished M‚ Thesis . Muğla University, Muğla. 21. Dönmez, Ö. (2010). Implementation of the new eighth grade English language curriculum from the perspectives of teachers and students (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara. 22. Dudzik, D. (2008). English policies, curricular reforms, and teacher development in multilingual, Postcolonial Djibouti (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. 23. Ege, İ. . Kars meslek y(ksek okulu turizm rehberliği programında İngilizce öğrenimi gören öğrencilerin program geliştirmeye yönelik ihtiyaç analizi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Kafkas University, Kars. 24. Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination. New York: Macmillan. 25. Er, K. (2006). İlköğretim değerlendirilmesi . ve (Unpublished . Sınıf İngilizce öğretim programlarının Doctoral dissertation). Ankara University, Ankara. 26. Erkan, M. A. (2009). İlköğretim okulları . ve . Sınıflar yeni İngilizce öğretim programının uygulanmasında karşılaşılan sorunların incelenmesi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Gaziantep University, Gaziantep. 27. G(neş, T. . İlköğretim . Sınıf İngilizce dersi öğretim programına ilişkin öğretmen gör(şleri (Unpublished MA Thesis). Hacettepe University, Ankara. 28. Harris, L. S. (2010). A case study of the English second language programs of a North Carolina school district (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). The University of North Carolina, Charlotte. 29. Hillberry, M. M. (2008). An Examination of the effectiveness of English language learner programs at the elementary level (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Oakland University, Rochester. 30. Hu, Y. (2007). China's foreign language policy on primary English education: From policy rhetoric to implementation reality (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Purdue University, Indiana 31. İnam, G. . İlköğretim okulları . Sınıf İngilizce dersi öğretim programının değerlendirilmesine ilişkin öğretmen gör(şleri (Unpublished MA Thesis). Adnan Menderes University, ‚ydın. 32. İyitoğlu, O., & ‚lcı, ‛. . ‚ qualitative research on nd grade teachers opinions about 2nd grade English language teaching curriculum. Elementary Education Online, 14(2), 682-696. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 159 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 33. Jan, M. A. (1984). An investigation of the problems of the English program in the intermediate boys' schools of Saudi Arabia (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Michigan State University, Michigan. 34. Johnson, B. J. & Onwuegbuzie, J. A. (2004). Mixed method research: A research paradigm whose time has gone. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. 35. Kandemir, A. (2016). İlkokul 2. Sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının katılımcı odaklı program değerlendirme yaklaşımıyla değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Pamukkale University, Denizli. 36. Karakoyun, S. (2008). İlköğretim programınındeğerlendirilmesine ilişkin II. kademe öğretmen yabancı gör(şleri dil dersi Adapazarı öğretim örneği (Unpublished MA Thesis). Sakarya University, Sakarya. 37. Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel. 38. Karcı, C. . Orta öğretim dokuzuncu sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının öğretmengör(şlerine gore değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Adnan Menderes University, ‚ydın. 39. Kefeli, H. (2008). Exploring the perceptions of teachers, students, and parents about the new 4-year Anatolian high school English program (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara. 40. Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: Theory and practice. London: Sage. 41. Kerdshaw, P. J. (2009). Highpoint or low point: the effectiveness of the high point curriculum as used for English language learners (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of La Verne, La Verne. 42. Kieley, R., & Rea-Dickins, P. (2005). Program evaluation in language education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 43. Kim, E. A. (2014). English language education in two kindergarten classes in Korea: pedagogical practices and insiders' perceptions (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas, Austin. 44. Krekeler, C. F. (1993). An evaluation of the elementary English-as-a-second language program in Klein, Texas Independent School District (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Texas A&M University, Texas. 45. Korotchenko, T. V., Matveenko, I. A., Strelnikova, A. B., & Phillips, C. (2015). Backward design method in foreign language curriculum development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 215, 213-217. 46. K(ç(ktepe, C., K(ç(ktepe, S. E., & ‛aykın, Y. . İkinci sınıf İngilizce dersi ve programına ilişkin öğretmen gör(şlerinin incelenmesi. Hasan Âli Y(cel Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 41-58. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 160 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 47. Lai, C. C. (2007). Examination of the implementation of English as a foreign language curriculum in Taiwan's elementary schools (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Fordham University, New York. 48. Lee, F. K. J. (2007). Implementation of the new English curriculum in China: Using big books and shared reading. TESL Reporter, 40(2), 14-26. 49. Liu, Y. (2015). Foreign Language Education Planning in China since 1949: A recurrent instrumentalist discourse. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 30(1), 65-85. 50. Lu, J. (1995). Traditions of Chinese education and TEFL in China: A case study of a modern college English curriculum (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Columbia University, New York. 51. Macalister, J., & Nation, I.S. P. (2011). Case studies in language curriculum design. New York: Routledge. 52. Maviş, F. 5., & ‛edir, G. . nd year students and their teacher s perspectives on English language program applied for the first time in 2012-2013 academic year. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 5(4), 205-215. 53. Mersinligil, G. (2002). İlköğretim programının değerlendirilmesi ve . sınıflarda uygulanan İngilizce dersi öğretim Adana ili örneği (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Fırat University, Elazığ. 54. Merter, F., Kartal, Ş., & Çağlar, İ. . Orta öğretim İngilizce dersi yeni öğretim programının öğretmen gör(şlerine gore değerlendirilmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fak(ltesi Dergisi, 1(23), 43-58. 55. Nakaprasit, T. (2009). Identifying language needs of ESL students in a Canadian University based intensive English language program (Unpublished MA Thesis). Ontario University, Canada. 56. Nam, J. M. (2005). Perceptions of Korean college students and teachers about communication-based English instruction: Evaluation of a college EFL curriculum in South Korea (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Colombus. 57. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge. 58. Null, W. (2011). Curriculum: From theory to practice. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 59. Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the ‚sia‐Pacific Region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589613. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 161 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 60. Orakcı, Ş. . İlköğretim . Sınıflar için uygulanan 200 İngilizce öğretim programının öğretmen gör(şlerine gore değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished MA Thesis). Gazi University, Ankara. 61. Ornstein, A., & Hunkins, F. (2009) Curriculum: Foundations, principles and issues. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon. 62. Örmeci, D. (2009). An evaluation of English language curricula implemented at the 4th, 5th, and th grades in respect of teachers’ opinions (Unpublished MA Thesis). Trakya University, Edirne. 63. 5zcan, Ş. . Eğitim yöneticisinin cinsiyet ve hizmetiçi eğitim durumunun göreve etkisi: Bir metaanalitik etki analizi (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University, İstanbul. 64. 5z(doğru, F., & ‚dıg(zel, O. C. . İlkokul . sınıf İngilizce öğretim programının değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Studies, 10(11), 1251-1276. 65. Perez, A. N. (2009). Kindergarten English teaching through the arts (KETTA): Curriculum development (Unpublished MA Thesis). University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico. 66. Powell, J. M. (2008). English language learner programs and services: A case study of Nebraska middle schools (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln. 67. Restivo, S. (2012). Perceptions of English as a second language (ESL) teachers on the impact of ESL programs on ESL student high school graduation (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Shenandoah University, Winchester. 68. Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 69. Sak, Ö. (2008). İlköğretim I. kademe İngilizce programının öğretmen gör(şlerine gore değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished M‚ Thesis . ‚bant İzzet ‛aysal University, ‛olu. 70. Sarı, R. . A suggested English language teaching program for Gülhane Military Medical Academy (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara. 71. Seçkin, H. (2010). İlköğretim . Sınıf İngilizce dersi öğretim programının değerlendirilmesi (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara. 72. Shawer, S., Gilmore, D., & Banks-Joseph, S. (2009). Learner-driven EFL curriculum development at the classroom level. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 125-143. 73. Tatar, E., Kağızmanlı, T. ‛., & ‚kkaya, ‚. . T(rkiye deki teknoloji destekli matematik eğitimi araştırmalarının içerik analizi. Buca Eğitim Fak(ltesi Dergisi, (35), 33-45. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 162 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 74. Tom-Lawyer, O. (2014). An evaluation of the English language curriculum of the Nigeria certificate in education: A case study of a college of education. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 69-79. 75. Topkaya, E. Z., & Küçük, Ö. (2010). An evaluation of 4th and 5th grade English language teaching program. Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 52-65. 76. Tsai, T. H. (2007). Taiwanese educators' perspectives on the implementation of the new English education policy (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Alliant International University, San Diego. 77. UNESCO IBE (2013). Glossary of curriculum terminology. Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/IBE_GlossaryCu rriculumTerminology2013_eng.pdf. 78. Wang, H. (2006). An implementation study of the English as a foreign language curriculum policies in the Chinese tertiary context (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Queen s University, Canada. 79. Wang, L. H. C. (1996). A formative evaluation of the English language program in Fong Shin senior high school, Kaohsiung country, Taiwan (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Florida State University, Florida 80. Weir, C. J., & Roberts, J. (1994). Evaluation in ELT. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 81. Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design. Virginia: Ascd. 82. Wu, W. (2013). Towards a new intercultural methodology in response to teachers’ challenges from the new curriculum innovation in China (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Alberta, Edmonton. 83. Yaman, S. (2010). İlköğretim birinci kademe İngilizce dersi öğretim programının öğretmen gör(şlerine gore değerlendirilmesi Gaziantep ili örneği (Unpublished MA Thesis . Fırat University, Elazığ. 84. Yanık, ‚. . A study of English language curriculum implementation in 6th, 7th and 8th grades of public primary schools through teachers’ and students’ perceptions (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Middle East Technical University. Ankara. 85. Yıldıran, C., & Tanrıseven, I. . İngilizce öğretmenlerinin ilkokul . sınıf İngilizce dersi öğretim program hakkındaki gör(şleri. International Journal of Language Academy, 3(1), 210-223. 86. Yıldırım, ‚., & Şimşek, H. . Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. 87. Yörü, B. (2012). İlköğretim sekizinci sınıf İngilizce öğretim programına ilişkin öğretmen gör(şleri Eskişehir örneği (Unpublished MA Thesis). Osmangazi University, Eskişehir. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 163 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT 88. Zaid, M. A. (2005). Comprehensive analysis of the current system of teaching English as a foreign language in the Saudi Arabian intermediate schools (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Colorado, Boulder. 89. Zorba, M. G., & ‚rıkan, ‚. . ‚ study of Anatolian high schools th grade English language curriculum in relation to the CEFR. Uşak Üniversitesi Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 13-24 European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 164 Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT APPENDIX List of the studies taken for the critical review Author(s) Jan, M. A. Abu-Ghararah, A. H. Kaewsanchai, N. Krekeler, C. F. Lu, J. Sowers, J. L. Wang, L. H. C. Karataş, N., & Türkoğlu, A. Fang, Y. Mersinligil, G. Nunan, D. Sarı, R. Haznedar, B. Büyükduman, F. İ. Carroll, K. S. Erdoğan, V. Gerede, D. Nam, J. M. Zaid, M. A. Al-Darwish, S. Alwan, F. H. Ege, İ. Er, K. Wang, H. Hu, Y. Lai, C. C. Sun, L. Tsai, T. H. Yanık, A. Date 1984 1986 1988 1993 1995 1996 1996 1997 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007 Publication Type PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. Article PhD Diss. PhD Diss. Article PhD Diss. Article Article MA Thesis MA Thesis MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 Country Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Thailand USA China Japan Taiwan Turkey Taiwan Turkey Asia Pacific Region Turkey Turkey Turkey Puerto Rico Turkey Turkey Korea Saudi Arabia Kuwait United Arab Emirates Turkey Turkey China China Taiwan Taiwan Taiwan Turkey 165 Grade/Level Intermediate boy’s school Secondary School College Elementary level College Kindergarten High School College Primary and secondary level 4th and 5th Grades All levels College Primary level Primary Secondary School 4th and 5th Grades College College Intermediate School Elementary School Secondary School College 4th and 5th Grade College Primary School Elementary school From 1st to 9th Grades Junior high school 6th, 7th and 8th Grades Focus CE CE CE CE CE CD CE CE CE CE CE CD CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Dudzik, D. Hillberry, M. M. Karakoyun, S. Kefeli, H. Powell, J. M. Sak, Ö. Spencer, C. H. T. S. Erdem, A. Erkan, M. A. Güneş, T. İnam, G. Kerdshaw, P. J. Lundien, K. Nakaprasit, T. Örmeci, D. Perez, A. N. Amorim, G. B. Demirlier, H. Dönmez, Ö. Harris, L. S. Seçkin, H. Topkaya, E. Z., & Küçük, Ö. Yaman, S. Yiğit, C. Çelen, G. Qiao, X. Tucker, T. Burgos, S. Karcı, C. Merter, F., Kartal, Ş., & Çağlar, İ. Orakcı, Ş. Özer, Ö. Restivo, S. 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 PhD Diss. PhD Diss. MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. MA Thesis PhD Diss. Article MA Thesis MA Thesis MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. MA Thesis MA Thesis MA Thesis PhD Diss. MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. PhD Diss. Article MA Thesis MA Thesis MA Thesis PhD Diss. Article PhD Diss. MA Thesis Article MA Thesis MA Thesis PhD Diss. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 Djibouti USA Turkey Turkey USA Turkey Taiwan Turkey, Ireland Turkey Turkey Turkey USA USA Canada Turkey Puerto Rico Brazil Turkey Turkey USA Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey China Korea Puerto Rico Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey USA Middle School Elementary level Secondary level High school Middle school Primary level College Primary and secondary level 4th and 5th Grades 5th Grade 4th Grade Middle school Secondary level College 4th, 5th and 6th Grades Kindergarten College Primary school 8th Grade High School 4th Grade 4th and 5th Grades Primary level 6th Grade 6th Grade College College Elementary ,Junior, High School 9th Grade Secondary level 7th Grade 8th Grade High School 166 CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CD CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Yörü, B. Altaieb, S. R. Wu, W. Adıgüzel, O. C., & Özüdoğru, F. Almalki, M. M. Arı, A. Demir, Y. &Yavuz, M. 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 MA Thesis PhD Diss. PhD Diss. Article PhD Diss. Article Article Glasgow, G. P. Kim, E. A. Kozikoğlu, İ. Küçüktepe, C., Küçüktepe, S. E., & Baykın, Y. Maviş, F. Ö., & Bedir, G. Tom-Lawyer, O. Alkan, M. F., & Arslan, M. Aybek, B. Çankaya, P. Demir, O., & Duruhan, K. Demirtaş, Z., & Erdem, S. İyitoğlu, O., & Alcı, B. Nonthaisong, K. Özüdoğru, F., & Adıgüzel, O. C. Yıldıran, C., & Tanrıseven, I. Kandemir, A. Zorba, M. G., & Arıkan, A. 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 Article PhD Diss. Article Article Article Article Article Article MA Thesis Article Article Article PhD Diss. Article Article MA Thesis Article European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 Turkey Libya China Turkey Saudi Arabia Turkey Turkey, Finland, Korea, China Japan Korea Turkey Turkey Turkey Nigeria Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Thailand Turkey Turkey Turkey Turkey Japan, 167 8th Grade High School Junior high school 2nd Grade Secondary School 6th Grade Primary and secondary level CE CE CE CE CE CE CE Senior high school Kindergarten 7th Grade 2nd Grade 2nd Grade College 2nd Grade 2nd Grade 3rd Grade 2nd Grade 5th Grade 2nd Grade Secondary level 2nd Grade 2nd Grade 2nd grade 9th Grade CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE CE Esin Dündar, Ali Merç A CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION IN ELT Creative Commons licensing terms Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 168