MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117753475 · doi:10.35452/caless.1782505

COMPARISON OF THE TURKISH LANGUAGE TEACHING PROGRAM WITH THE MOTHER LANGUAGE TEACHING PROGRAMS OF THE CONTINENTAL OF PISA 2018

2025· article· W7117753475 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adil İLKİN, Bekir Direkci

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Current Approaches in Language Education and Social Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishCurriculumFirst languageReading (process)National curriculumNative-language instructionLiteracyLanguage proficiency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various national exams are administered in Turkey to evaluate academic achievement and identify areas in need of improvement. In addition to these national assessments, Turkey also participates in several global evaluation projects to determine its position in the international education arena. One of these initiatives is the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). PISA evaluates students' reading skills as well as their literacy in mathematics and science. This study comparatively examines the mother tongue curricula of countries that ranked first in reading skills on each continent according to the 2018 PISA results, alongside the Turkish Language Curriculum implemented in Turkey. In this context, the mother tongue curricula of South Korea (Asia), Estonia (Europe), Australia (Australia), Chile (South America), Canada (North America), and New Zealand (Oceania) were analyzed. These curricula were evaluated based on key components such as goals, instructional practices, content, assessment methods, and grade levels. The similarities and differences between the programs were identified. Data for the research were gathered by translating documents obtained from the official websites of the ministries of education of the respective countries. Since grade levels vary among countries, no restriction was applied to a specific grade level during the comparison process. The findings indicate that there are similarities in the outcome-oriented structure of mother tongue curricula. However, significant differences exist in terms of the supporting skills, values, instructional materials, teaching methods and techniques, and assessment approaches incorporated within these programs. These differences are discussed in detail in the conclusion section, along with various suggestions for updating the Turkish Language Curriculum.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.400 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Current Approaches in Language Education and Social SciencesSame topicEducational Methods and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207