P IGMS EN Sk7LLBSUS DESIGN

2.0 Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief account of a major development w i t h English

language teaching during the present decade, while examining critically the basic principles of

curriculum and syllabus design. Its subject is the emergence of particular and genuine alternatives

in how we may plan for language teaching and learning.

2.0.1 But before discussing the principles of cunicuiurn and syllabus design, it would be useful to

try and define these two terms. Candlin (1984) suggests that curricula are concerned with making

general statements about language learning, learning purpose and experience, evaluation and the

role of teachers and learners. They will also contain banks of learning items and suggestions about

how these might be used in the classroom A curriculum of an educational institution can be

studied &om various perspectives relating to the curriculum in action, assessment and evaluation

and the management of the teaching institution.

2.0.2 Syllabuses on the other hand, are more locaked and are based on accounts and records of

what actually happens in the classroom as teachers and learners apply a given curriculum to their

own situation. These accounts can be used to make subsequent modifications to the curricuIum,

so that the developmental process is ongoing and cyclical

2.1 &I odels of Curriculum

Educational value systems embodying particular socio-political and philosophical beliefs have

always been reflected in curriculum design and its renewal. Skilbeck identified three broad value

systems: classical humanism, reconstructionism and progressivism. These are of course broad

categorisations, where there is an overlap of principles and practices. In education

..classical humanism is knowledge-oriented and is concerned with promoting intellectual and cultural values; reconstructionism is society-oriented and is concerned with the promotion of agreed social goals; progressivism is concerned with the development of individuals and with the value of diversity (Clark 1987 :3).

Each value system emphasizes diierent principles of curriculum design which shall now be

examined.

2.1.1 Classical Humanism

Classical humanism can be traced back to Plato and to the concept of an elite of guwdians

governins/controlling the state of education. They are characterized by their desire to pramote

broad intellectual capacities, such as memorisation and the analysis, classification and

reconstruction of elements of knowledge. Knowledge is seen as a set of r e v W b u t h s , whose

upderlying -d re-ties should be studied and consciously mastered.

In the classroom, there is much emphasis on study, conscious understanding, reflecbian

and awareness and controlled application of knowledge. Classical humanists are concerned q t h

the maintenance and transmission through education of the wisdom of the previous generations;

the development of intellectual capacities and critical faculties and the maintenance of standards

through an inspectorate and external examination boards controlled by the universities.

The grammar-translation approach is born out of this school of thought. The content to be

taught and learnt is expressed in terms of phonology, grammar and vocabulary that are seen to

constitute any language.

The classical humanist approach towards cumculum renewal places the responsibility with

the universities. They control all examination systems which in turn control all classroom

activities. The principal strategy for effecting curriculum renewal is to change the system of

examinations. This change is slow and is characterised by periodic sudden upheavals followed by

long periods of inactivity. The change is brought about from outside the school. The inspectorate

organises annual in-service training programmes to which a selected few are admitted (usually

heads of departments) and they are expected to update their colleagues.

Classical humanism with its socially divisive pattern is no longer acceptable in an age

determined to promote greater social mobility and equality of opportunity within the education

system. The classical humaaist curriculum emphasizes the mastery of grammatical knowledge and

vocabulary while undermining the importance of the practical skills. The syllabus does not teach

them to decode and encode speech or nesotiate personal meanings appropriate to the context.

The norm-referenced form of assessment associated with classical humanism provides little

information as to what students can or cannot do. It indicates the performance of a learner in

relation to others in a group. In an age of egalitarianism, the social context calls for a more

learner-centred approach and that is why reconstructionism came to replace classical humanism.

2.1.2 Reconstructionism

Reconstructionists envisage that social, economic and intellectual advance can be rationally

planned for and education is the most important agent that can bring about such change. They

also have great faith in the power of planning, of setting goals to be pursued, and of deliberate

intervention in the education system to bring about the necessary change. The reconstructionists

emphasize the practical aspects of education and hence with respect to language learning, they

promote the importance of the ability to communicate.

In contrast to the classical humanist curriculum, which was content-oriented and based on

the structure of the language, the reconstructionists curriculum is objectives-driven, being

founded on the behavioural outcomes that are to be worked towards.

They gave rise to the ends-means approach, emphasizing the mastery learning techniques

in the classroom. Tyler, regarded as the father of the ends-means approach, saw curriculum

deveiopment as an exercise in which particular behaviourd patterns, specified as ends, could be

brought about through an instructional process designed as a means towards them. The structure

of the ends-means cumcuium was stated by Taba as follou~s:

1. diagnosis of needs

2. formulation of objectives

3. selection of content

4. organisation of content

5. selection of learning experiences

6. organisation of learning experiences

7. determination of what to evaluate and the ways of doing it. (quoted in Clark 1987: 16).

This indicates a linear form of curriculum development. Tyler rejected the classical humanist

tradition of simply listing elements of content, since this does not specify what the students are

supposed to do with these elements.

Ideally, methodology in this form of curriculum design was to be determined by the

comparative study of one method with another, to increase its effectiveness. There would be a

control group employing the traditional method and the experimental group with its innovative

approach. The methodology normally associated with reconstructionism emphasizes deliberate

practice of skills. Norm-referenced assessment is replaced by criterion-referenced assessment

whiCfi would provide explicit information as to what the learner can and cannot do.

In the classroom, teachers find value in making their objectives more explicit to themselves

and to the learners, responding to feedback from assessment in a more sensitive manner and

ensuring that learners feel success in the mastery of unit-by-unit objectives. Pupils also benefit

.tiom being helped to approach the learning task in amore purposehl and deliberate manner, to

achieve a feeling of success in every unit and to compete against predetermined criteria rather

than against each other and thus learn to work co-operatively rather than competitively.

In the reconstructionist curriculum, both the teacher and the learner are dictated by the

terms of the cuniculum, which have been determined in advance outside the classroom. The

teacher is solefy concerned with bringing about certain prespecified behavioural changes in the

learners in a predetermined stereotypical manner. AU the teachers and all the learners form two

homogenous groups and there is no notion of the plurality of values or of individually determined

outcomes. Like classical humanism, reconstructionism tends to conceptualize knowledge as

something external to the learner, to be fed in, rather than something which grows within the

individual. The reconstructionist approach is flawed in so far as it sees teaching as able to cause

immediate internalisation of correct behaviour at will.

The greatest flaw of reconstructionism lies in its assumption that if one describes the

product of learning in sufficient detail, then one can choose the related learning experiences.

Describing the products of learning, whether in terms of behavioural objectives or the abiIity to

express certain fUnctionalinotiona1 meanings, or the knowledge of particular forms or

combinations of these does not necessarily indicate the way to reach these products.

In criterion-referenced assessment, the criteria upon which levels of performance are made

are often assumed to be absolute. The criteria should be related to the norms of performance and

to classroom reality. Reconstructionism assumes that what works in one context will

automatically work in another. There is a lack of concern for individual differences in different

contexts. Reconstructionism is more concerned with syllabuses, plans and curricular products than

it is with the teaching, learning and renewal processes. It is thus more concerned with intention

rather than reality.

2.1.3 Progressivism

Progressivism derives its inspiration from Rousseau and a pragmatic support from Piaget. It

emphasizes a learner- centred approach which attempts to promote the pupil's development as an

individual rather than a social being. Learning is envisaged as a continuum which can be broken

up into several broad developmental stages. 'Growth' through experience is the key concept here.

Knowledge is not seen as a set of fived facts, but as a creative problem-solving capacity

that depends upon an ability to retrieve appropriate schemata from a mental store, to utilise

whatever can be brought automaticaily to bear upon a situation and to rnodif;j existing conceptual

structures to offer a working solution to the particular probiem in hand.

Progressi-t.ists are concerned with learning processes and methodology than with

predetermining objectives. Progressivists view the school and the classroom as a self- contained

community, responsible for creating its own subculture and interaction network among the

participants, thereby promoting healthy personal relationships and group responsibility. Language

learning is seen as an implicit, intuitive, developmental process for which human beings have a

natural capacity, rather than as the product of the deliberate study and practice of knowledge

elements and skills towards predetermined objectives.

Progressivism in cumculum design is represented by the process approach. Unlike the

classical humanist approach which emphasizes content, and the reconstructionist approach which

emphasizes objectives, the progressivist approach emphasizes methodology and the need for

principles to govern the teachinflearning process.

Process approaches concentrate on creating the right environment for individual internal

interlanguage development to proceed smoothly. Rather than syllabus definition, there is an

emphasis on the need for a set of methodological principles of procedure designed to set the

learning process in motion. There is also a concern for individual differences among learners and

for developing strategies to respond to them.

The classrooms emphasize inquiry, activity, discussion, reflection and open-ended persona1

interpretations rather than predetermined objectives, content and mastery levels. Learners are seen

as active participants shaping their own learning with the teacher cast in the role of guide or

facilitator. Stress is on the need for learning by doing, rather than being taught.

The active engagement of the learner is also a feature of the progressivist fiom of

assessment, which involves students and teachers negotiating assignments for students to

complete and deciding on the process activities by which to complete them. There is an emphasis

on peer- evaluation and self-evaluation. Thus assessment emphasizes not only the cognitive

aspects of learning, but also invites the learners to express how they feel about what they are

doing. The process approach emphasizes the individuality of each teachinflearning context.

Progressivism in curriculum renewal is concerned with the individual and group

development of teachers, and through this with the renewal of curricula which evolve to suit the

specific requirements of individual schools or groups of schools. Progressivist curriculum renewal

is both teacher-based and school-based. Just as the learners are considered as individuals with

differing aspirations, motivations and interests, so also the teachers must be acknowledged to

have differing attitudes, background experiences and personalities. Thus it is almost unreasonable

to impose a standard teaching style on ail the teachers.

Rather than imposing a change, it is more sensible to help them widen their conceptual and

pragmatic base and thereby extend their potential range of strateges. An effective classroom

practice depends upon teacher comfort and self-confidence. Given the difference in attitudes and

stages of development between individual teachers, the progressivist form of curricuium renewal

tends to piace its emphasis on the need for teachers to work out their own solutions to their own

cumcular problems in the context of their own school. The progressivist model encourages

teachers to diagnose their problems and then offers whatever support seems necessary to assist

them.

The 'feel' about educational practices that teachers develop unconsciously and the

'awareness-t they reach by reflecting upon experiences, can both be used to prevent the

formulation of unrealisable curriculum intentions. They emphasize a shifl from ready-made

top-down curriculum packages to the support of local bottom-up curriculum initiatives involving

teachers in their own development programmes.

We have but recently moved fiom a classical humanist era, in which educational systems

were controlled by the educated elite, into a reconstructionist period in which, owing to a

combination of socio-political and economic factors, educational systems are being made directly

accountable to central and local governments. Little space is being left for individual

interpretation or for classroom-inspired innovation. Even if the political climate and the classroom

conditions of work enabled greater teacherllearner autonomy, many might resist this in favour of a

more directive approach. The teacher's habit of relying on the textbook and the external

examination system is difficult to overcome and any move towards progressivism has to be done

with caution.

2.2 Types of Language Syllabus

We are presently experiencing a salient evolutionary phase in syllabus design in which the

questioning of established and well-tried types of syllabus coincides with a wealth of innovative

proposals from theory, research and classroom experience. The changes in how the

language-teachmg 'profession has thought and acted over the last two decades affect broader

issues than syllabus design alone, but they have influenced and been reflected in syllabus

development (Breen, 1987 : 81).

Here an effort is made to make sense of the alternatives in syllabus design which have

emerged &om a period of fairly intense dialectic, and in a period when the public discussion of

alternatives has dramatically increased. Interesting discussions which reveal areas of conflict

indude Cravford-Lange (1982) and Brurnfit (ed j (1384) Di~erse perspectives on syllabus design

are provided in collections of papers edited by Johnson and Porter (1983).

. b y syllabus is primarily a plan of what is to be achieved through teaching and learning.

Such a plan maps out that body of knowledge and those capabilities which are regarded as

worthwhile outcomes from the work of teachers and learners in a particular situation for which

the syllabus was designed. The plan must provide an accessible framework of what is to be

achieved through teaching and learning which affords continuity and direction for its users. The

plan should aiso fbnction as a retrospective record, a basis for the evaluation of learning, and

should itself be amenable to evaluation and adaptation. And the plan must be appropriate to the

three contexts of curriculum, classroom group and educational-social situation within which it is

to be located.

Virtually all syllabuses are constructed on the basis of four main organising principles. The

designer will focus upon, select, subdivide and sequence the particular knowledge and capabilities

which are seen as appropriate outcomes of language learning.

Particular aspects of target-language knowledge and capability are focused upon. One

syllabus might focus on the linguistic system, the phonological, the lexical and the grammatical

features of the language, whilst another might give priority to the use of the language in a range of

situations. Mihat the syllabus focuses upon will most directly reflect the objectives which the plan

i s intended to serve.

Given a specific focus, a syllabus will reveal the second organising principle in what it

selects for teaching and learning work; such as particular structures, sets of hnctions, or a range

of communication events. This selected content is further subdivided and sequenced.

Subdivision involves the breaking down o f selected content into manageable units. This

analysis is most often hierarchical, with superordinate units containing smaller units.

Sequencing on the other hand involves the marking out of the content along a path of

development. This is achieved often in a step-by-step way through more immediate or

pre-requisite objectives towards some overall achievement. Sequence may be cyclic or linear.

These four principles for the organisation of any syllabus virtually defme what a syllabus is.

qy\\abus designers do not apply the four principles of organisation in an objective manner,

Syllabus designers belong to a community of professionals engaged in language education. In i t s

representation of language knowledge and capabilities for pedagogic purposes, any syllabus can

be viewed as one particular expression of that paradigm which we as a community engaged in

language education, currently share during a period f i e history of q1~0fession.

2.2.1 Structural Syllabus

The structural or grammatical syllabus is the most robust and well-tried type o f syllabus in

language teaching. Having its roots in the description and analysis of the classical languages and

strongiy reliant for many years upon the descriptive accounts of language provided by academic

linguists, it focuses upon the systematic and rule-based nature of language itself Prioritising the

workings of the subsystems of phonology, grammar, l e i s or morphology, this syllabus represents

a primary concern with a impage learner's knowledge of the code of a new language.

In the structural syllabus, the input is selected and graded according to grammatical

notions of simplicity and complexity, though it has now been seen that grammatical complexity

does not necessarily equate with learning difficulty. The most rigid grammatical syllabuses

supposedly introduced one item at a time and required mastery of that item before moving on to

the next. The assumption beyond such syllabuses seems to be that language consists of a finite set

of rules which can be cdmbined in various ways to make meaning. It is fbrther assumed that these

r~ les can be l e h e d in an additive fashion and mastered before being incorporated into the

le;lmerts pre- existing knowledge o f the language. Assumptions are dso made about language

p s f e r , because it is assumed that once the learners have internalised the formal aspects of a

given piece o f language, they will automatically be able to use it in communications outside the

classroom.

During the 1970ts, the use o f grammatical syllabuses came under increasing criticism. One

early criticism was that such syllabuses misrepresented the very nature of the complex

phenomenon, language. They tend to focus on only one aspect of language, formal grammar. But

language fulfils a variety of communicative hnctions, and there is no one- to-one relationship

between form and function. In recent years grammatical syllabuses have been intensely criticised

by researchers in the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). They raised the following

questions :

r Why do learners fail to learn certain grammatical items which have been explicitly taught?

Can syllabus items be sequenced to make them easier to learn?

What learning activities promote acquisition?

Does teaching always result in learning?

Research by Pienemann and Johnston suggest that the acquisition of grammatical

structures will be determined by how difficult those items are to process psycholinguistically.

Language acquisition is a more global than a linear process and grammatical grading distorts the

language available to the learner.

In Rutherford's view the learner needs direct contact with the target language. It is not

possible to expose the learners to all target language constructions. But syllabus designers have

to identify those aspects of the grammatical system from which learners can generate the most

powefil generalisations. These structures must be made available to the learners at the

appropriate time and using appropriate pedagogic aids. Grammar has to be viewed as a process

rather than a product.

In India, the structural syllabus was introduced thirty-five years ago. It spread fast and got

strongly entrenched in the next decade and many state-level and tertiary-level curricula still

depend on it. In this case too, the students who are being targeted at are products of this kind of

a syllabus. So one thing that has to be kept in mind while designing the materials in this case is the

fact that the students have already acquired some structures through the existing syllabus. Hence

building on this, this study aims at using this knowledge of structures in a communicative way.

Structures are not to be taught for the sake of structures alone but the structures will be used for

communicative activities. Given a choice, one would have preferred to start totally with a

communicative approach but with the given constraints it will not be possible in this case.

2.2.2 Functional-Notional Syllabus

Since the mid-70s, the fbnctional syllabus has probably been the alternative to structural syllabus

types which has received the most attention. There is no doubt that much work has been put into

i t s implementation and development The hnctional syllabus is a propositional plan of language

knowledge and capabilities based upon a distinctive view of the nature o f content for language

pedagogy The assumptions it represents lead to different applications o f the organising principles

of syllabus design from those of the structural syllabus.

In the late '60s and early '70s, a new branch of linguistics emerged which represented a

strong interest in the study of language, not merely as a phenomenon somehow separable from its

use in everyday life, but as something which served a central role in social events and social

structure. Sociolinguistics - and its more recent offspring, Pragmatics - are concerned with the

analysis of language in use and with the relationships between the language code or textual system

and how people behave with language in social groups in certain social situations.

In critically evaluating the narrowly formal nature of Chomsky's view of what constitutes

our knowledge of language (linguistic competence), the sociolinguist Hyrnes (1 97 1,1972)

proposed that our knowledge of language also embraced a knowledge of how to use language in

appropriate ways in order to achieve particular purposes and participate in particular everyday

events and situations. More importantly, Hymes emphasised that communicative competence

represented how we related our linguistic competence to our social use competence and that the

two systems of knowledge were interdependent.

In 1973, Wilkins proposed a notional or semantic approach which would reflect the

behavioural needs of learners, would take the communicative facts of language into account from

the beginning, without losing sight of grammatical and situational factors and would attempt to

set out what the learner might want to do and say through language He thus emphasised that

what people want to do through language is mare important than mastery of the language as an

unapplied system. He drew upon Austin's (1962) speech act theory which suggested the

illocutionary value of all utterances. There is no simple one-to-one relationship between particular

forms and the illocutionary values that should be attached to them Values must be interpreted in

the light of the context in which the forms occur.

But W i l h s felt that it was worthwhile attempting to predetermine the language content to

be taught in semantic rather than purely grammatical terms. He called such a syllabus a 'notional'

one. This syllabus might be set out in two basic parts: one covering hnctions or functional

meanings and the other one covering concepts or conceptual meanings. In answer to the criticism

that semantic categories would give rise to heterogenous unsystematic components, Wilkins said

that systemticity could be retained by focusing on some part of the grammatical system within an

environment that i s not controlled linguistically.

A learner works within a hctional syllabus in order to learn how to achieve certaiin

purposes with the language. Such a syllabus intends that the learner will not only become accurate

in using the language but that she will learn how to be socially appropriate in language

performance.

The functional syllabus does not select and sub- divide language on the basis o f the

inherent system of language and the rules which reflect i ts systernaticity. This syllabus is

categorical in the sense that it identifies main types of language purposes in sets and sub-sets with

a range of superordinate fitnetions containing their own subordinate functions-and it further

specifies how these functions may be reaiised in various ways through the language code.

The functional syllabus, because it presents language in terms of major and subordinate

categories o f uses of language, does not move from fkite knowledge which is generative, but

moves from general sets of functions to more specific hnctions and from the most common

linguistic realisations o f certain functions to more varied realisations of these functions. In this

way, sequencing is cyclic in nature. The learner is assumed to acquire certain key fhctions as a

basic repertoire o f uses of language. The learner is fiuther assumed to gradually refine this

repertoire in a re-cycling and accumulative way.

Functional-notional syllabuses are basically synthetic. When such syllabuses began to

appear, they looked very similar to the structuraI syllabuses they were meant to replace. While the

units in the books have functional labels the content itself is similar to those they replaced. Instead

of leaming about 'the simple past' the learners were now required to talk about 'what they did last

'weekend'. .Analytic syllabuses, where there i s no linguistic gradation, experiential rather than

linguistic content becomes the starting point for syllabus design. Such content may be defined in

terms of situations, topics and themes. The stimulus for content-based syllabus is the notion that

language is more a vehicle for communication rather than being a subject in i t s own right.

In our country, the functional-notional syllabus was adopted in the 80's. West Bengal

adopted it in schools and the work is still on and textual materiaIs foregrounding functions and

notions are replacing those that enveloped structures inside situations. This study focuses only on

the functional aspect and tries to design tasks based on the structures already aquired by the

students as stated in the previous section.

2.2.3 Situational and Topic-based Syllabus

Language may not be the only way to organise a syllabus. Teaching can also be based on a

number of situations-at the bank, at the railway station, for example. Such a syllabus is help@l if

students are likely to be in those situations. But usually such situational organisation may be a bit

restrictive sigce it limits the amount of vocabulary available and may produce language use w%h

only works in that situation.

For topic-based syllabuses, the experiential content of the learner provides the point o f

departure and it is usually derived fkom some fairly well-defined subject area. There might be

other subjects in a school curriculum such as science or social studies, or specialist subject matter

relating to an academic or technical field such as mechanical engineering or computing.

~opic-based syllabuses take a subject or topic as their organising principle. Thus unit 1 might deal

with health, unit-2 with fashion, unit3 with families etc. Such organisation allows for a wide

range of language and activities. Within the topic of health, for example, students can talk about

the body, illnesses, sickness and cure, healthy living, environmental dangers to health etc. Such

syllabuses are certainly more usehl at advanced levels since with limited language, it i s dScul t to

sustain a topic over a length of time.

By selecting subject areas such as the ones mentioned before, the syllabus is given a logic

and coherence which might be missing to rn analytic syllabuses which are little more than a

random collection of tasks. In addition, the logic of the subject may provide a non- linguistic

rationale for selection and gradation of content. In Australia, much of the teaching in adult ESL

classes is content-oriented. Topic-based syllabuses facilitate learning not merely through language

but with language.

In general, the danger with topic-based syllabuses is that they demand the students'

continuing interest in the topic-something which we cannot take for granted. Nevertheless, they

provide a way of organising the syllabus which many teachers and students find attractive

precisely because they do not insist on the teaching of language for its own sake, but use it in the

service of interesting subjects.

In this case, broadly speaking, the materials will be theme-based rather than being topic-

based. The same theme runs though all the units. In topic- based syllabuses, the content assumes

greater importance than the fbnctions and hence it becomes momory- based. But in this case the

theme is only a prop for the functions.

For instance, in the current ELT scenario, there is a great deal of talk on selecting the

content of the language syllabuses in such a way that it is related to current global issues. In this

context, the SEAMEO Regional Language Centre (Singapore) has published some papers on

integrating environmental education in second language instruction. 1990s have seen a

tremendous increase in environmental concern in all sections of the population. Young people in

particular want to know more about how they can contribute to the conservation of the planet.

Education related to environment can be viewed from three angles:

education ABOUT the environment which seeks to discover the nature of area under study

through investigatory and discovery approaches;

* education FROM the environment which uses the environment as a resource for education;

@ education FOR the environment which emphasizes the development o f an informed concern

for the environment.

The inclusion of such current issues would ensure the active participation of the learners

who now become involved in debates, discussions and decision-making. The topic syllabuses thus

emphasize the process and the quality of learning and the knowledge acquired is contextualised.

Such syllabuses allow for curricular integration, co- operative learning and widening o f classroom

activities.

Figure 1. The interrelated components o f environmental education.

-? the enwonment ! i

--i

Figure 2 . Model for teachingflearning in environmental education.

I

:Education FOR the environment ;

i Individual holistic

, ,Exprience - t2 Action . ' -\.

r ! development: i ,KnosledgdSkills/ i Understanding/ i

1 , Concxpts/Attiudes I

2.2.4 Skill-based Syllabus

In order to become competent language-users, the learners have to acquire the basic language

skills and skill-based syllabuses are arganised around these language skills. The four basic

language skills are listening, speaking, reading and writing (LSRW). Speaking and writing involve

language production and are therefore often referred to as productive skills. Listening and

reading, on the other hand, involve receiving messages and are therefore often referred to as

receptive slalls. Language users of course employ a combination of skills at the same time. The

four major language skills can be summarised in the following manner:

The Four Language Skills

S killWIedium

Receptive

Productive

The skill-based syllabus identifies a number of categories (or genres) within each language

skill. The skill of writing can provide a good example o f this, since there are many different kinds

of writing. Writing an informal letter is different from writing a report or an essay. The various

categories can be summarised in the following way:

&... " - - .. _..-I - I..*.* '-1

( ,bl -* m%4 'e...

& c .P-- .L --z +,* - -.

4.J.b'-

.-. b'uq I*.%"

.-1 _1

r<*- .I -

7%.

I -._ '-. - <#+, .-b-*-- .-. .-+.,. -. j- 1

> r"i..lJ" f*. ".?<.

"C, - 4 * $

~cientifilre~orts travel brochures informal iett er note t&ing poems etc.

Speech

Listening and understanding

Speaking .

Written word

Reading and understanding

Writing

Study-skills include inferencing, note-taking and using the library. These skills are more

commonly used with advanced level learners who have already acquired the four basic language

skills. A learner works within such a syllabus in order to learn how to be correct or accurate in the

production of the new language. This type of syllabus characterises the capabilities we need in a

language in terms of our being linguistically correct in our use of the four skills. It i s assumed that

listening and reading skills must serve and contribute to our productive skills. On the basis of this

reasoning, this syllabus identifies language use with skill use and typically proposes that the skills

be worked upon in a sequence from the receptive to the productive.

2.2.5 Task-based Syllabus

The task-based syllabus can be interpreted as particular expression of changes iri view regarding

syllabus design through its representation o f communicative competence as the undertaking and

achievement of a range o f tasks, its direct reliance on the contributions of learners in tems o f the

mobilisation of the prior communicative competence which learners bring to any task and its

emphasis upon the learning process as appropriate content during language learning. In this last

characteristic, the task-based syllabus explicitly crosses the theoretical divide between content and

methodology.

The task-based syllabus enables the learner to know the rules and conventions governing

how meaning, its textual realisation, and interpersonal communicative behaviour are all

systematically related in any communicative situation For the designer of the task-based syllabus,

this implies that knowledge of linguistic form or knowledge of diEerent hnctions of a language

are surface and partial definitions of what i s to be learned The task- based syllabus does not,

therefore prioritise either or both of these alone, but approaches communicative knowledge as a

unified system wherein any use of the new language requires the learner to continually match

choices from hidher linguistic repertoire to the social requirement and expectations governing

communicative behaviour and to meanings and ideas slhe wishes t o share.

In addition to focusing upon knowledge of the sub-systems o f code, behaviour and

meaning> and in particular, knowledge of their systematic relationship, the task-based syllabus also

focuses upon the learner's own experience and awareness of language learning. Therefore,

knowing what language learning is like, what it involves, and how it may be undertaken to

facilitate the development of a new language are also addressed in the plan o f tasks which this

kind of syllabus typically provides. The task- based syllabus plans what i s to be achieved in terms

of two major task-types: (i) communication tasks and (ii) learning tasks. The former focus upon

the actual sharing of meaning through spoken or written communication while the latter focus on

the explorations of the workings of the knowledge systems themselves and how these may be

worked upon and learned. It is a syllabus of communic&ion tasks and a syllabus of

learning-for-communication tasks which serve to facilitate a leamerls participation in the former.

Given its dual focus upon communicative knowledge and its development, the task-based

syllabus also prioritises communicative abilities and learning capability A learner works within a

task-based syllabus in order to learn how to be socially appropriate and meaningful This type of

syllabus unlike the skill-based one, does not take the four skills as the important manifestation of a

language user's capabilities, but calls upon those abilities which underlie all language use and

which the four skills reflect in an indirect way (Breen 1987: 162). The ability to interpret meaning

and the ability to express meaning both rely on the crucial ability of negotiating meaning. One

major assumption of this type of syllabus is that learning tasks cdl upon and engage the same

abilities which underlie communication itself The assumption behind its dual focus upon using

abilities to communicate and using the same abilities to learn in that they both mutually contribute

to the learner's overall capacities as a communicator.

Given the planning distinction between communication tasks and learning tasks as

mutually supportive routes within the task-based syllabus, two points of reference exist for the

selection and subdivision of what has to be achieved. Comunication tasks derive fiom an

analysis of the actual tasks which a person may undertake when comm~cating through the target

language. Although this analysis of tasks may reveal a task appropriate repertoire o f language

perfbrmance, the priority of the syllabus- designer is to engage the underlying competence

required of a participant in a range of communicative events. Tie designer also looks beneath the

skill-use or patterns of skill-use to the ways in which a participant may need to undertake

interpretation, expression and negotiation. From the analysis of actual tasks which exemplifjr

target language communication, the designer will select those tasks which are most common in

the target situation or most relevant in tems of learner need and interest.

Learning tasks are selected on the basis of metacomunicative criteria. They serve to

provide a groundwork for the learner's engagement in communication tasks and deal with learner

difficulties which emerge during these tasks. They address the two issues of how the knowledge

systems work and how abilities are to be used in communication, and how the learning and the

development of these things may be best done. They also focus upon the ways in which

interpreting, expressing and negotiating may be undertaken. In a sense, learning tasks are

analytical in relation to both communication and learning.

Task-based syllabuses are sub-divided on the basis o f task-types. One form of subdivision

involves the mapping of facilitative learning tasks onto or around one or more communicative

tasks. Another subdivision may represent a cluster of obviously related comunication

tasks-perhaps those which occur within a single, larger communicative event. Further, these may

link with supportive learning tasks. A third form of subdivision may be in tems o f a single large

activity which naturally entails subordinate tasks which together contribute to the completion of

the overall activity.

We have seen that the structural syllabus is accumulative in sequence and the hnctional

syllabus is cyclic The sequencing o f the task-based syllabus relates to two things: the nature o f a

task and the emerging learning problems which are revealed during participation in a

communication task. Sequencing here can hence be characterised as cyclic in relation to how

learners move through tasks and problem-based in relation to the on-going difficulties of the

learners. Thus this is a sequence of ' diagnosis and remediation' preen 1987: 163).

Therefore sequencing of learning and communication tasks are planned as a syllabus in

advance on the basis of two sets o f criteria: (i) the relative familiarity of the task to the learner's

current communicative knowledge and abilities, and (ii) the relative inherent complexity of the

task in terms of the demands placed upon a learner.

The sequencing o f tasks in relation to emerging learner problems, cannot be worked out in

advance. Sequencing here depends upon the identification o f learning problems as they arise, the

prioritiskg of particular problems and the order in which they may be dealt with and the

identification of appropriate learning tasks which address the problem areas. This implies that

sequencing on the basis of learning problems will derive &om the learner's own syllabus and from

the learner's experience of working with the new language.

The task-based syllabus is both means focused and ends-focused. It exploits a learner's

current competence and learning difficulties as dual means towards the development of

competence in a new language. It also provides tasks which derive from relevant everyday

communicative activities and events which may be undertaken by users o f the target language.

Finally the task-based syllabus assumes that learning is necessarily both a metacornmunicative and

a communicative undertaking. It rests on the principle that rnetacommunicating is itself a powerfir1

springboard for language learning (Breen 1987: 164).

2.2.6 Process Syllabus

A major characteristic which distinguishes task-based and process syllabuses fiom the earlier

types is their focus upon how something is done rather than the mere provision of a plan of the

knowledge of language as subject matter to be worked on. Task-based syllabuses, as we have

seen, are concerned with how communication may be undertaken and how the learning of the

rules and conventions of communication can be facilitated through tasks. The process syllabus

goes hrther than the task-based syllabus by providing a bridge between content and methodology

and in offering a means whereby the actual syllabus of a classroom group may be made more

accessible to each of its members. This type of syllabus focuses upon three things:

communicating, learning, and the purposefbl social activity o f teaching and learning in a

classroom. It is primarily a syllabus which addresses the decisions which have to be made and the

working procedures which have to be undertaken for language learning in a group. It assumes,

therefore, that the third process- how things may be done in the classroom situation-will be the

means through which communicating and learning can be achieved.

The process syllabus is a plan for classroom work and, in this concern, is quite distinctive

Erom the other types of syllabus so far described. Here, the syllabus designer is not directly

concerned with organising the subject matter o f the language. A major priority of the designer is

to provide a framework which enables teachers and learners to do these things themselves, and

hence create their own syllabus in the classroom in an on-going and adaptive way (Nunan

1988:46).

The designer of the process syllabus provides two things: (i) a plan relating to the major

decision which teachers and learners need to make during classroom language leaming and (ii) a

bank of classroom activities which are themselves made of sets of tasks. The plan which identifies

decisions for classroom language learning is presented in terms of questions which require shared

consj@rations by learners and teachers together. Regarding participation it has to be decided

s@@&ctr the teacher will work with individual learners, with small groups or with the whole class,

Regarding procedures it has to be decided how a task will be worked upon and what resources

should be used during the activity. Regardmg the subject-matter the focus of the work has to be

decided upon. In being involved in deciding together on appropriate answers to these questions,

this syllabus provides teachers and learners with the explicit task of prioritising, selec$in&

subdihiding and sequencing what is to be achieved in an on-going and negotiated way (Breen

Clearly, decisions made about parthpation, procedure and subject matter will relate one

to the other and they will generate the particular process syllabus of the classroom group They

mil also lead to agreed working procedures within the class, a working contract to be followed

for an agreed time, evaluated in terms of its helphlness and appropriateness, and subsequently

refined and adapted for a hrther agreed period of time Thus this decision-making will lead to a

particular selection of activities and tasks (Nunan 1988 46)

Perhaps the key element of the process syllabus is its emphasis upon evaluation Once

purposes, content and the working-procedure have been agreed upon, teachers and learners

together share the outcomes from the work Achievements and difficulties have to be carefblly

identified so that they may be related back to chosen procedure, purposes and content. It is from

this crucial evaluation phase that adaptations or alternatives in each of these things can be

proposed and sought by teachers and leamers together This syllabus thereby involves teachers

and leamers in a cycle of decision-making through which their own preferred ways of working are

realised in the classroom.

The process syllabus is obviously unconventional in that it does not provide a plan of what

is to be achieved through teaching and learning. It assumes that teachers and learners will all have

varying views as to what might constitute the most appropriate content for learning. It fbrther

assumes that learners' views will change as learning progresses and that the emerging learning

problems cannot be planned for in advance. Given variation, change and unpredictability regarding

the appropriate content, the process syllabus offers a means whereby the selection and

organisation o f subject matter become part of the decision- making process in the classroom.

Participation in a process syllabus leads to the creation of a particular syllabus of content

in an on-going way by the classroom group. At &st glance the adoption of a process syllabus by

the teacher may seem inappropriate but its appropriateness is proven by the fact that this type of

syllabus in proposed as a means whereby external and internal syllabuses are negotiated and

through such negotiation how a synthesised classroom syllabus can be created (Breen 1987: 109).

This study argues in favour of a syllabus that is eclectic in nature. There is a hnd of

structures on which the functions are superimposed. The materials are both task-based as well as

skill-based. The students are engaged in a number of tasks aimed at a higher cognitive level

wherein they aquire both vocabulary and functions while negotiating with them. Though the

syllabus i s process oriented in the classroom, there is a tension between process-syllabus and

product-syllabu~ for the course designers as the evaluation is product-oriented. The Indian

scenario i s not yet ready for process oriented evaluation.

2.3 Language Instruction in India

As noted in the previous chapter (vide 1 A), this study argues a case for the right placement of ET

in our present curriculum. Language instruction in India has mainly been based on the traditional

grammar-rhetoric foundations. During the last thirty years, in the case of ELT, the structural

syllabus (vide 2.2.1) has been in vogue. While during the earlier part of the 2 0 ~ century language 1

teaching was rule-focussed, the stru&ral syllabus made it fom-focussed. But in today's world,

language i s necessary for communication. And for effective communication, language competence

and interactive effectiveness are required. The communicative approach focusses on meaning.

Language is seen as a means of communication- communicating ideas, wishes, feelings and

knowledge. Learning is seen as an organic process of participation and negotiation.

For so long, language teaching-learning has been confined to the classroom alone. As such the

focus happens to be the teacher, be it cumculum construction, syllabus design or teacher

preparation. In the school context, the teacher is the model. It is believed that the teacher is the

best medium through whom the best in language communication can be imparted to the pupils

leading to the desired modification of their behaviour. However, experience has shown that it is

ineffective to depend solely on the teacher totally. The continued fall in the attainment levels, the

poor quantum of knowledge, information and skills our students possess are sufficient evidence.

We have been witness to the overall narrowing down of our educational goals and we seem to

have compromised on the question of' exceilence'

Technological advancement obviously has had an impact on teaching-learning situations

all over the world. It has had it's effect on the processes and procedures of cumculum

development, syllabus design, teacher-training and materials production. All educational

curriculum is developed in the light of the specific and overall needs of a gven society. For

English too,why do we need it? What do we want to do with the language? The official attitudes

towards English in India are still ambivalent though no one questions the value and usehlness of

it in banking, navigation and international trade. In terns of language instruction, the entire

exercise is perhaps to enable the learner to acquire abilities to use the language meaningfully.

In any educational programme, materials play a vital role. The f?amework o f materials

prepared certainly affects classroom methodology and the choice of techniques.Unfortunately the

present syllabus is based on the classical stimulus-responsereinforcement theory md places

emphasis on repetition, pattern-practice, drills, exercises and memoisation. Such materials are

bookish; they lack vitality as they present language in pseudo situations. What the learners

actually need is exposure to speech events, actual interaction in order to see how comunication

becomes e f f i v e . The materials must help them to realise that language i s malleable, that an

utterance is much more than the mere sum of it's individual words, that it can be used in

a variety of ways and that there exists no 1:l correspondence between the linguistic form and

the meaning it is intended to convey. The materials must also help the learners to see the gap

between the intended meaning of the utterance and the listener's comprehension of it. All learning

need not be confined to the classroom alone and a redefinition of the curriculum is called for.

The learning experiences to be provided to the pupils and syllabus details need to be so organised

that classroom work, television features, self-learning tasks and co-curricular activities- all complement

and reinforce each other. A new curriculum should therefore represent the totality of learning

(vide 2.2.3).

As will be explained in details in the next chapter, in certain areas of language instruction,

the television with its powerful modality can be more persuasive and can have a greater impact

on the learners. It is for this reason that this study argues in favour of integrating video materials

in our present language curriculum. Effective learning evolves only when students assemble, analyse

and interpret diverse infomation thus moving towards the creation of personal meaning. Educational

technology can be potential force in transforming the entire educational system. Language labs

in schools with video and computer facilities can help learners work on projects and undertake

remedial learning. Learners should be given opportunities in the classrooms to go beyond traditional

discourses. They should be encouraged to interact with the teacher and other fellow-learners

by giving feedback to speakers, through turn-taking and expanding on topics and dl this can

be done quite effectively with the help of interactive video material, Interactive video allows

for intense collaborative learning, increased student participation, decentralisation of the teacher's

role and improved thinking and creativity among learners. Comprehension, coherent thought and

the use of cohesive linguistic references and expressions also resdt horn learning through video.

Video presentations would certainly highlight language in real contexts offering insights into the

paralinguistic features as part of speech phenomena; they would enrich the learner's understanding

of who uses the language where, when and how. Self instructional materials in terms of rnulti

media packages can muster the required effort on the learner's part. Twelve sets of auto-instructional

materials were successfuhly experhented with in two hundred schools irn Gujarat. Such self learning

activities remove the cobwebs in the learner's mind and help him gain insights in the right use

of language. Auto-instructional materials therefore need to be thought of as a set of activities

integral to the syllabus-textbooks-cu~~icu1um with certain areas clearly marked for them.

2.4 Conclusion

In. has thus been seen that the structural syllabus focuses on linguistic competence while the

functional syllabus focuses on communicative performance. However, the more recent types of

syllabuses give priority to communicative competence. The task-based and process syllabuses

are shaped by new challenges to the designer which are motivated by currently held views of

language, teaching methodology, the contributions of learners and views concerning how we may

best plan for classroom work. The present decade in syllabus design has been characterised

by atleast the beginnings of a paradigm shift which is expressed in a set of design features

which are distinctive from those features that realised the established paradigm. It is possible

the future syllabus designs will more explicity recognise the syllabus as not merely a pedagogic

plan but also a socially constructed schema (Breen 1987:171). And such recognition would entail

closer communication between designers, teachers and learners. Breerl 6 19873 anticipates six areas

of innovation in syllabus development the coming decade. First, our views of the nature of

language, appropriate methodology and of ways of planning will evolve in similar directions as

in relation to the process syllabus. Second, there will be programmes of tasks which are assimilated

into propositional plans rather than programmes which express genuine new dkections. Third,

particular teachers in particular teaching situations svill initiate and develop process syllabuses

and their experimentation will itself refine what is meant by such a syllabus.

Fourth, there is likely to be a growing emphasis upon the implementation of those changes

in viewpoint which began to emerge in the last decade and to which task-based and process-

syllabuses are only a partial response. The issue should be how content can be planned in

a way that maximises its accessibility during implementation. Fifth, the current growth of classroom-

oriented research or action research by the teachers will tell us much more than we presently

know about the actual nature and use of syllabuses in the language class. Finally, a new synthesis

would be possible among the structural, functional and process syllabuses and tis challenge implies

that the designer must consider how amenable the plan may be to the reinterpretations of its

users and the teaching/leaming activities which will convert the plan into action.