1er Congreso Universal de las Ciencias y la Investigación

← vista completa

Análisis de los niveles de inglés de los profesores de inglés como lengua extranjera en Ecuador

An analysis of the levels of English of EFL teachers in Ecuador

Resumen

Introducción The development of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) has become almost mandatory in most countries of Latin America. Latin American governments recognize English as the lingua franca not only for technological, scientific, and academic purposes but also for the integration into the global economy and international competitiveness (Cronquist and Fiszbein, 2017). In Ecuador, EFL is part of the national curriculum, and the curriculum overall objectives are “to ensure high-school graduates reach a minimum B1 language proficiency level according to the Common European Framework (CEF). Learners should reach communicative competence in its linguistics, sociolinguistics, and pragmatic components through the development of the four skills….” (National Curriculum Guidelines, 2014). In the Ecuadorian tertiary education, all the students from the different university programs are required to achieve a CEFR B1 level (Academic Regime Regulation, 2015). In 2012, the government announced that English Language Teachers must reach a B2 level of proficiency according to the (CEF). One of the aims of the English language reform is to increase the number of teachers at B2 level and to ensure that teachers are skilled in a variate of teaching methods to improve teaching quality (Council British, 2015). Since then, the government has been promoting teaching training with the purpose of improving the English language level. The purpose of this study is to investigate and determine the strategic planning zones of Ecuador in which teachers of English Language have reached the highest and lowest levels of proficiency.

Objetivos The purpose of this study is to investigate and determine the strategic planning zones of Ecuador in which teachers of English Language have reached the highest and lowest levels of proficiency.

Método This is a quantitative study as data collection procedures resulted in numerical data that was analyzed by statistical methods. It is also an empirical study as it relies on the experience. Secondhand data was used to carry out the current research. Pre-existing material that comes from different sources to answer new or additional research questions may result quick, timeless, free of charge and useful for descriptive analysis by using different approaches and perspectives from the original study. Quantitative data was gathered from a local newspaper that reported the results of the proficiency levels of English that EFL teachers got after taking a standardized test (EF SET) given by Education First Company. The original report shows the results and levels the participants obtained which are classified by strategic planning zones of Ecuador.

Principales resultados The statistics illustrate that 79% of the population evaluated in the zone 8 reached the A2 level. As it is observable in the bar chart most of the teachers from the 9 strategic planning zones are basic users of English language as the total average indicates that it corresponds to 12% of the overall population. Only 37% of educators reached the B2 level of proficiency and they belong to the strategic planning zone 3. Teachers from zone 8 obtained the lowest scores in this CEFR level. In reference to the statistics results, less than 1% of sample obtained the C1 or proficiency level of English. The strategic planning zone 9 is where 0.21% population had a proficient level. In conclusion, the strategic planning zones with the highest levels of English proficiency (B2 and rarely C1) are zones 3 and 9.

Conclusiones This study did a descriptive analysis of the results obtained by EFL teachers in Ecuador. Secondary data was used for this purpose. According to the information gathered the test was distributed by strategic planning zones. These result lead to conclude that the regulations and curriculum requirements are not met; and therefore, it gives room to question what the teacher training centers and the authorities in charge of the EFL programs are doing regarding this situation. It is important to conduct further research in order to determine the causes of this problem.