Units of analysis: selecting and grading criteria,
and their effects on curriculum development and its stakeholders
Unit of
analysis:
planning,
evaluation
Grammar
and lexis
Selecting and
grading criteria


Syntactic
structures

Notions
Frequency
Contrastive
markedness
Complexity
N/A
Effects on curriculum development and
learning opportunities
Pros
Hard to think of any
because it’s the starting
and primitive point on the
history line of foreign
language teaching.
An attempt to add at least
formal meaning to bare
structures and void forms.
Although, such meaning
remains very decontextualized.
Cons
Hard to learn and
boring. Learners
master the USE of L2
not because of but
despite teachers’
effort.
Pedagogical interface
is in the form of,
grammar rules,
model patterns, rote
drills, repetitions,
memorization,
classroom grade and
norm-referenced test
score.
It’s limited only to
operational (real-time
classroom teaching).
Pedagogical interface
is hard to think of.
It can be used in analytic
syllabi but again only at
the operational level.
Functions
Topics and
content


Frequency
Future practical
needs
N/A
Getting closer to the stage
of Meaning in program
development but still decontextualized and results
in predictable
SYNTHETIC syllabi.
Decontextualized
with little room for
negotiation at the
operational level.
Pedagogical interface
is method-driven
activities, classroom
grade, criterionreferenced tests. No
concern for learner’s
profile and situations.
If interesting-t0-everyone
topics were found (which
is very doubtful), it might
be fun, provided learners
are at fairly advanced
levels of their language
mastery.
Tends to be
vocabulary-driven,
especially in a largesize class. Still decontextualized.
Pedagogical interface
is discussions,
multiple-choice
1
Teachers’ reaction
It takes teachers only
linguistic background. It’s
good for “Experts” in
synthetic syllabi & PPP
teaching model.
Those who seek
professional satisfaction
and development leave
this unit behind.
This unit is more
psychological rather than
linguistic. It can’t be used
to select and grade at the
tactical and strategic
levels because it’s the
most intangible abstract
unit. May not be popular
with critical mass and
totally unacceptable for
late majority, laggards,
and administration.
Teachers who are keen on
methodology may like it.
Postmethod teachers and
autonomous learners will
reject it. Those who like
PPP teaching model love
it. Makes program
evaluation impossible thus
allowing for diversity of
teachers’ attitudes to their
learners’ needs, relaxed
atmosphere.
Good for teachers who
like Norm or Criterionreferenced testing but
aren’t interested in critical
program evaluation. Good
for motivated and
advanced students. It’s
hard for instructors to
Skills
Length of
utterances in the
input
Abstractness of
utterances in the
input
Complexity of
utterances in the
input
It looks like it’s based on
students’ future needs.
But do we really know how
to tap into those needs?
Language teachers are
not supposed to be
prophets.
IndicationalPredicational
Degree of
displacement
Degree of
communicative
stress
Degree of
cognitive load
Degree of
predictionality
Degree of
abstractness
Degree of code
complexity and
interpretative
density
Degree of
unfamiliarity
Degree of
situational
displacement
Task is not only a unit of
analysis at tactical level
but can also serve as a
pedagogical interface at
the operational level.

All of the above
used in task-based
syllabi

Degree of intersubjectivity
between
participants
Degree of
illocution
Extent of
participation in
group interaction
Level of selfawareness and
self-identification
Professional satisfaction
(for teachers) and
ownership of learning
process for students. It’s a
way to foster the sense of
agency and the 3
postmethod autonomies.
Learners should enjoy the
diversity of negotiated
interactional tasks /
activities as a pedagogical
interface and their
outcomes.
Learners at all levels can
benefit from unit (?). They
tend to like it despite more
workload and



Tasks









Learning
events
+



Closer to contextualized
use of language and
farther away from learning
the language as the
ultimate subject-matter.
2
exercises, normreferenced test
score. Beginners
may find it difficult.
Discovered needs
can’t be translated
below strategic level,
and therefore
learners und up with
pedagogical interface
in the form of
vocabulary-driven
rote drills, repetitions,
and memorization.
Still devoid of
personalized
meaning,
significance,
attitudes,
opportunities for
choosing among
possible
interpretations, preplanned, impersonal,
based on artificial
situations.
Convergent tasks
may bore learners
and tasks are hard to
grade. Divergent
tasks maybe too
difficult and
discouraging for less
advanced students.
It’s pedagogical
interface may still
include classroom
grade and test score.
It takes time and
commitment on the
part of teachers and
administration.
reach consensus on what
makes “good” teachinglearning process.
Supported by champions
of CLT. It’s hard to reach a
consensus on selecting
and grading criteria
because those criteria are
very subjective.
There’s a serious danger
that novice teachers may
view it as another method
to be implemented at the
operational level of
curriculum planning.
Hard to reach a
consensus on selecting
and grading criteria in
view of their diversity.
This level of program
development can be
achieved only in bottomup democratic R&D
leadership style with the
focus on “Critical Mass” or
“Early Majority” faculty
members.
Instructors who do not feel
comfortable in letting their
learners have more stakes
in their learning process
may put out some
resistance to such
initiatives.
This unit of analysis has
two facets. The other side
in the learning
process and
opportunities
Degree of learner
autonomy and
sense of agency in
personal learning
process

responsibility for personal
decisions to act in certain
ways and personal
contributions.
is task or activity
embedded in context with
motivation and resulting in
learners’ negotiated
operations. Eclectic.
Based on learners’
emerging motivation,
activity theory of situated
learning.
Definitions:
1. Grading means the process of decision making about the difficulty of pedagogical content on
the basis of certain agreed upon principles.
2. Selecting means the process of decision making about appropriateness and relevance of
pedagogical content on the basis of certain agreed upon principles.
3. Strategic goals are long-term decisions made by program administrators who are informed by
instructors and researchers. Such decisions constitute program policy or curriculum.
4. Tactical objectives, procedures, requirements are decisions reflected in the form of
instructors’ syllabi designed in the process of negotiation between administrators and
instructors. Syllabi can be informed by instructor’s previous experience at the operational
level and should be coherent with goals at the strategic level. Tactical decisions make
technical side of the teaching-learning process. This level of planning is possible if it’s based
on action research, professional development, and instructors’ voluntary participation in
curriculum development initiatives.
5. Operational level of program planning presupposes continuous instructor-learner negotiation
about the learning objectives, contents, and processes. It should be implemented within the
framework outlined in the syllabus (tactical level) and in view of curriculum goals. Necessary
and continuous adjustments on both ends should be encouraged.
6. Pedagogical interface is a construct to be planned at the tactical level and implemented at
the operational level as a contact mode between teachers and students, i.e., language
learning activities, classroom grade, test score. Such interfaces vary depending on concepts
of language and psychological theories currently maintained by early majority of language
instructors and administrators as well as socio-political situation.
7. Early majority (or “Critical Mass”) of teachers is a group of language instructors (usually 25%)
who are more mobile and interested in professional development and satisfaction. They are
more open to try new ideas but at the same time can critically assess them because of their
substantial experience and knowledge in the field. This group should be identified and
worked with first in the process of implementing changes to curriculum or in any of the 5
program areas.
The figure below outlines the structure of a language program which ideally has evolved into the
level of “Meaning” if viewed from Post-method and Progressivist grounds.
Strategic goals
Tactical objectives, procedure, requirements to
be reflected in teacher syllabus
Operational level of planning to be based on negotiation
between learners and the instructors
3