Me1

Syllabus Design:Process/product syllabi, synthetic/analytic

syllabi, type A/type B syllabi

Professor: Dr. Bijani

Student: Mansooreh Alavi

[email protected]

http://ztefl.mihanblog.com/

Me.pptx

Introduction

• Difference between Syllabus and Curriculum

According to Longman Dictionary of Language

Teaching and Applied Linguistics, curriculum is an

overall plan for a course or program, as in the

freshman composition curriculum. A syllabus is

more specific and more concrete than a curriculum

and a curriculum may contain a number of syllabi;

For example, a curriculum may cover an entire

school year, while a language teaching syllabus may

make up only one part of the curriculum.

Definitions of Syllabus

Widdowson (1990, p. 127) interprets a syllabus as “the

specification of a teaching program or pedagogic

agenda which defines a particular subject for a

particular group of learners . . . a syllabus

specification, then, is concerned with both the

selection and the ordering of what is to be taught”.

Wilkins (1981) pointed out: "syllabuses are

specification of the content of language teaching

which have been submitted to some degree of

structuring or ordering with the aim of making

teaching and learning a more effective process".

Definitions of Syllabus

Nunan (1988) believes that curriculum is wider term

as compared with syllabus. Curriculum covers all

the activities and arrangements made by the

institution throughout the academic year to facilitate

the learners and the instructors whereas syllabus is

limited to particular subject of a particular class.

Yalden (1987, p. 87) also refers to syllabus as a

"summary of the content to which learners will be

exposed".

Syllabus types

Different approaches to syllabus design are

categorized into two main types:

● Product-oriented versus process-oriented syllabuses

● Analytic versus synthetic syllabuses

●Type A versus Type B syllabuses

Product-oriented versus process-oriented

syllabuses

Product-oriented syllabusi :

●emphasize the product of language learning

●different parts of language are taught separately

●acquisition is a process of gradual accumulation of

parts

●learner is being exposed to a deliberately limited

sample of language

(Wilkins, 1976).


syllabuses

According to Rabbini (2002), Product-oriented

syllabuses ), focus on what the learners will know as

a result at the end of instruction session.

Nunan (1988) explains that product-oriented

syllabuses are those in which the focus is on the

knowledge and skills which learners should gain as

a result of instruction (the product or the end).

The grammatical, lexical, situational and notional-functional

are the examples of product-oriented syllabus.


syllabuses

process-oriented syllabi operate in terms of the

purposes for which people are learning language and

the kinds of language performance that are

necessary to meet those purposes (Wilkins, 1976, p.

13).

These syllabuses, according to Rabbini (2002)

developed as a result of a sense of failure in product-

oriented courses to enhance communicative

language skills. It is a process rather than a product.


syllabuses

That is, focus is not on what the student will have

accomplished on completion of the program, but on

the specification of learning tasks and activities that

s/he will undertake during the course. Procedural,

process and task syllabuses are examples of analytic,

process-oriented syllabuses.

Product-oriented Process-oriented

Structural/Formal Tasked-based

Situational Procedural

Lexical Negotiated

Notional-Functional Proportional

Content-based

Product/Process-oriented syllabi

Analytic versus synthetic syllabus

Wilkins (1976) separates language syllabi into

synthetic and analytical types of

syllabi. Synthetic syllabuses:

● segment the target language into discrete linguistic items

● Different parts of language are taught separately

● The learners’ job is to synthesize the language

● Structural, lexical, notional and functional, and most

situational and topical syllabuses are all synthetic (Long and

Crookes, 1992, 1993; Long and Robinson, 1998).


Synthetic syllabuses, also called "focus on forms" in

Long and Robinson (1998), however, have been

criticized for major problems, which include:

(a) Absence of needs analysis;

(b) Linguistic grading;

(c) Lack of support from language learning theory;

(d) Ignorance of learners' role in language development;

(e) Tendency to produce boring lessons, despite the best

efforts of highly skilled teachers and textbook writers; and

(f) Production of many more false beginners than finishers

(see Long and Robinson 1998 for more detail).


The second fundamental type of syllabus distinguished by

Wilkins is the analytic. The analytical syllabus is a

semantic, meaning-based syllabus, which aims at

developing the learners’ communicative competence.

In analytic syllabuses, the “Analytic approaches are organized

in terms of the purposes for which people … are learning

language and the kinds of language performance that are

necessary to meet those purposes” (Wilkins, 1976:13).

Analytic syllabuses focus on the learner and his needs and on

the kinds of linguistic performance necessary to achieve

those goals (Wilkins, 1976:13-14).


Here a chunk of language is presented to the learner in

the context of a meaning oriented lesson. Analytic‟

refers not to what the syllabus designer does, but to

the operations required of the learner to recognize

and analyze the linguistic components of the

language chunks presented. Long and Crookes

(1993: 11) update

Wilkins definition, points out that “analytic syllabuses

are those that present the target language whole

chunks at a time, in molar rather than molecular

units, without linguistic interference or control.


Procedural, process, and task syllabuses are examples

of the analytic syllabus type.

Some types of analytic syllabuses, also called "focus

on meaning" in Long and Robinson (1998), have

been criticized for, for example,

Lack of needs analysis,

Lack of accuracy attained,

unlearn ability of some grammatical features from positive

evidence only,

And deprivation of the opportunity to speed up the rate of

learning.

Analytic syllabuses Synthetic syllabuses

Tasked-based Structural

Procedural Situational

Notional-functional

[According to Wilkins

(1976)]

Notional-functional

[(According to Long &

Crooks (1992))

Content-based

Negotiated

Analytic/Synthetic-oriented syllabi

Type A versus Type B syllabuses

A broader conceptualization of syllabus types can be

found in White (1988), who presents the differences

between syllabus types from the point of view of

course design, methodology, language learning, and

evaluation. According to White, Type A syllabi are

concerned with what should be learned. Without

considering who the learners may be or how

languages are acquired, they determine a series of

objectives and they ‘pre-package’ the language by

dividing it into small, discrete units.


They are externally imposed on the learner who has no

say in them; the authoritative role is given to the

teacher; they attach importance to the subject-matter

of instruction; and they are product-oriented, so they

evaluate the outcomes in terms of mastery of the

language. All synthetic syllabi, regardless of

whether they have grammar structures, notions and

functions, or lexical items as their units, are

considered Type A syllabi.


Type B syllabi, on the contrary, are concerned with

how the language is learned and how this language

is integrated with learners’ experiences. The

different elements of the syllabus emerge from a

process of negotiation between learners and

teachers; they are oriented toward the process; and

evaluation criteria are set by the learners themselves.

As we will see later, procedural, process, and task-

based syllabi are considered Type B syllabi despite

their differences.

Type B How is it to be learnt?Type A What is to be learnt?

Non-interventionistInterventionist

Internal to the learnerExternal to the learner

Inner directed or self fulfillingOther directed

Negotiated between learners and teachersDetermined by authority

Learner and teacher as joint decision

makers

Teacher as decision-maker

Content = what the subject is to the learnerContent = what the subject is to the

expert

Content = what the learner brings and wantsContent = a gift to the learner from the

teacher or knower

Objectives described afterwardsObjectives defined in advance

Process emphasisSubject emphasis

Assessment in relationship to learners'

criteria of success

Assessment by achievement or by

mastery

Doing things for or with the learnerDoing things to the learner

Conclusion

A good and valid syllabus covers more or less all

aspects of both these types, therefore, proper and

appropriate implementation of syllabus in language

teaching is expected.

Without proper implementation of syllabus, on the one

hand, desired objectives will be hard to obtain and

on the other hand students will suffer from a lack of

appropriate syllabus which could fulfill their

immediate pedagogical requirements.

Thank You !!

Me1

Documents

Transcript of Me1