Comparison of secondary education mother tongue teaching courses in the International Baccalaureate Program with national program in terms of critical thinking skills

Through school curricula, while students are provided with opportunities to acquire national values, they are also exposed to international viewpoints. School curriculadeveloped and implemented in a country should be designed in line with international standards for their products, students, to be able to find a place in international arena. International Baccalaureate Diploma Program was developed in line with international standards for secondary education and has been implemented in many countries in the world in a standardized format. This diploma program aims at educating individuals who are knowledgeable, thinking, can communicate, have principles, are open-minded, diligent and balanced and can take risks. As of 2005-2006 school year, secondary school curriculagradually changing at subject level are also based on the idea of equipping students, in a similar manner to International Baccalaureate Diploma Program, with critical thinking, creative thinking, communication and empathy, problem solving and decision-making skills. Both programs agree on the basic skills that should be imparted to the people of information age. Among these skills, critical thinking should be paid a special attention for adaptation to the rapidly changing world by educational institutions. Critical thinking skill is emphasized by almost all the programs as a skill to be imparted and when the direct viiiconnection between language skills and thinking skills is considered, it seems to be reasonable to teach critical thinking skills in language teaching programs. The purpose of the present study is to carry out a comparative analysis of the objectives, contents, teaching-learning processes and evaluation components of International Baccalaureate Diploma Program Language A1 course teaching program and those of high school 12th grade Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses in terms of critical thinking skills. The study was conducted in İstanbul Prof. Dr. Mümtaz Turhan Social Sciences High school, which is the only public school where International Baccalaureate Diploma Program is implemented in Turkey. The participants of the study are the students of class 12 D where International Baccalaureate Program is implemented and the teacher giving Language A1 course and the students of class 12 C where national curricula is implemented and the teachers giving Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses in this class. The data of the present study were collected through document analysis, participant observations and video recordings and researcher diary and observation forms, semi-structured interviews made with students and teachers and Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X in the fall term of 2011-2012 school year.While analyzing the data collected from document analysis, participant observations and video recordings and researcher diary and observation forms, semistructured interviews made with students and teachers Nvivo 9.0 qualitative data analysis computer program was used, in the analysis collected from Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X program SPSS 19.00 program package was used. The findings obtained from document analysis and student and teacher interviews show that objectives and anticipated learning outcomes of the Language A1, Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses were designed to have students gain critical thinking skills; yet, especially within Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses, not much emphasis is put on critical thinking skills due to concerns about university entrance exam, while objectives and anticipated learning outcomes are expressed as based on intercultural literary comparisons and in general, objectives and anticipated learning outcomes of Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses were constructed based on the details of the rules of Turkish Language, 42% of the objectives of the course Language A1, 45% of the objectives of Turkish Literature course ixand 21% of the objectives of Language and Expression course are objectives aiming to promote critical thinking; out of the 9 anticipated learning outcomes of Language A1 course, 7 (78%) are oriented to enhancing critical thinking skills, out of 62 anticipated learning outcomes of Turkish Literature course, 27 (44%) are oriented to enhancing critical thinking skills and out of the 37 anticipated learning outcomes of Language and Expression course, 26 (82%) are oriented to enhancing critical thinking skills; the content of Language A1 course was not pre-constructed much rather it is constructed in line with the interest, expectations and needs of students, it includes both the works of world literature and those of Turkish Literature; hence, it contributes more to the development of critical thinking skills and it does not distinguish the contents of language and literature; Turkish Literature has a chronological literary content and Language and Expression course has a content directed to teaching of linguistic rules and it presents the content by distinguishing world literature from Turkish literature. For learning-teaching process,Language A1 course?s teaching program includes literary analyses to be conducted on some certain determined works, Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses consist of four-step learning-teaching process. Lecturing and question-answer methods are used in all the courses, in addition to these methods, Language A1 also makes frequent use of discussion method. While in Language A1 course, question-answer method is mostly used to start discussions, in Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses, it is mostly used in the solution of sample questions. While the teacher assumes the role of guide leading the discussions in Language A1 course, in Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses, the instructor role of the teachers comesto the fore. While the students in Language A1 course are active participants of lessons constructing the lesson, asking questions and criticizing, in Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses, they are usually passive participants listening to the teacher and asking questions to clarify the points not understood. In the learning-teaching processes of the courses, together with the textbooks, resource books, theses, articles written by various authors and service equipmentssuch as computers, projectors and internet are used. While computers, projectors and internet are used to have access to various information and conduct discussions on it, they are used to solve problems in Turkish Literature and Language and Expression. In the assessment ofthe students, while assignments, oral presentations and a xtwo-staged exam are used in Language A1 course, exams consisting of multiple-choice questions are used particularly with 12th graders although in their program it is stated that Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses can employ exams made up of open-ended questions, multiple-choice questions and matching questions and alternative assessment tools and such an assessment is thought not to contribute to the development of critical thinking skills. Participant observations and video recordings with the support of the data obtained from the researcher diary and observation forms revealed that the teachers of Language A1 course think that more activities are carried out in his/her lessonsto promote critical thinking skills when compared to the teachers of Turkish Literature and Language and Expression. Though asking higher level questions, asking students to show proofs for their thoughts, presenting contradictory situations for studentsto think about, having students find the similarities and differences between events-states and the like are demonstrated by the teachers of the three courses, the teacher of Language A1 course exhibits these behaviors more than the other teachers. And behaviors such as directing students to different viewpoints, encouraging students to conduct discussions in class and creating a classroom environment where students are not given negative reactions are exhibited by the teacher of Language A1 course. Moreover, participant observations and video recordings with the support of the data obtained from the researcher diary and observation forms revealed that student behaviors such as asking questions in class and combining information from different fields while expressing their opinions about an issue are observed in the three courses; on the other hand, student behaviors such as providing proofs for the opinions, making inferences, expressing their opinions freely and making comparisons between events-states and the like are observed in Language A1 and Turkish Literature courses. However, behaviors such as participating in class discussions, evaluating the strong and weak points of opposite ideas, creating cause and effect relations, making analysis and synthesis between events-states and the like and evaluating the adequacy of an author or a speaker are only observed in Language A1 course. In light of the findings obtained from Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X, it can be argued that there is no significant difference between the critical thinking skills of xiInternational Baccalaureate Diploma Program students and those of national curriculastudents. As a consequence, it can be claimed that Language A1 course given within the framework of International Baccalaureate Diploma Program contributes more to the development of critical thinking skills at every dimension when compared to Turkish Literature and Language and Expression courses given in national curricula. Key Words: International Baccalaureate Diploma Program, National Curricula, Critical Thinking, Language A1 course, Turkish Literature course, Language and Expression course