A Process approach to syllabus design takes into account task demands
and the way language is processed by the leaner.
a) Discussion of the theoretical basis for this approach.
b) Evaluation of the implications for such a syllabus design in a
professional context with which I am familiar.
英文科
陳惠珍
1. Introduction
A syllabus can facilitate the teaching and learning of language and contribute to the
learners’ achievement of communicative competence because it provides a blueprint
for teachers and examiners to follow. Some syllabuses focus on specifications of
content (product syllabuses); others include guidance on teaching and learning as well
as content (process syllabuses).
This essay begins by describing different views of syllabus design, discussing both
product and process approaches. Some examples of each will be included.
Following this, a rationale for the process approach will be discussed in which the
theoretical bases in language description and language teaching and learning are
focused on. The implications and limitations of the process approach will be
considered with specific reference to my own teaching context.
2. A brief literature review
2.1. Syllabus design
Stern (1984:5) adopts a traditional view when he indicates that syllabus design is
‘more or less’ accepted as ‘ the specification of the what of instruction or its content,
the definition of a subject, the ends of instruction, what is to be achieved, and what
will be taught.’ Over the years this traditional focus on content has been modified as
successive educationists have introduced elements to do with the “how” of the
curriculum, including teaching and learning methods. For example, Candlin (1984:3)
proposes that ‘an interactive syllabus suggests a model which is social and
problem-solving.’ Breen (1987:82) goes further when he claims that syllabus design
is ‘a decision-making process’ related to ‘a plan of what is to be achieved through
teaching and learning.’ He (1987:83) concludes that ‘any syllabus is therefore the
meeting point of a perspective upon language itself, upon using language, and upon
teaching and learning’ in a commonly and harmoniously accepted interpretation.
Nunan (1988) in his definition of syllabus attempts to bring together both content and
the interactive elements highlighted by Breen and Candlin. He sees it as ‘a
statement of content which is used as the basis for planning courses of various kinds.’
(op cit:6) He goes (op cit:12) on to specify the elements of the content as
‘grammatical structures, functions, notions, topics, themes, situations, activities, and
tasks,’ indicating that both ‘the learners’ purpose’ and ‘the syllabus designer’s beliefs
about the nature of language and learning can have a marked influence on the shape
of the syllabus,’ which may be product-oriented or process-oriented.
The key issue that has emerged in the development of theory in ELT syllabus design
appears to be managing the tensions between content (product) and process (methods
of teaching and learning). Nunan (1988) points out that this dichotomy can be
viewed either narrowly or broadly. The narrow view sees the syllabus design as
focusing on the ordering of content. The broad view, however, sees syllabus design
as including teaching and learning.
2.2. What value systems have an influence on syllabus design in the wider
educational context?
Decisions influencing whether a narrow or broad view of syllabus is taken may be
orientated by three ideologies: classical humanism, reconstructionism, and
progressivism. White (1988:24) points out that these different values on the nature
and purposes of education have given rise to diverse realizations of syllabus design,
more or less narrow or broad in focus.
2.2.1. Classical humanism
Skilbeck (1982:17) indicates that the orientation of classical humanism ‘is always
towards achieving or recapturing a standard.’ It is the standard that ‘constitutes both
an ideal to be striven for and a heritage to be transmitted.’ Such a value aims to
promote broad intellectual capacities and mastery of controlled knowledge through
conscious understanding, unit-by-unit learning and deliberate practice. In language
learning and teaching this type of syllabus focuses on mastery of the language, often
with the intention of eventually using the language to read the literary canon. The
syllabus would be language focused, accuracy focused, and most probably
grammatically structured. The methodology associated with this might be grammar
translation. This is supported by Clark’s statement (1987:7) that classical humanism
favours a methodology which emphasizes ‘ conscious study and deliberate learning’
under the teacher’s presentation of knowledge elements (i.e. language) and rules,
which are divided and sequenced from the simple to the more complex. Learners are
expected to produce the ends of the instruction in new contexts, for example, create
new sentences using grammatical items and vocabulary learnt in class.
Classical humanism has some points of similarity with Confucian traditions of
learning where a student must formally acquire a body of knowledge for future use.
The traditional processes of learning are similar too - learning the rules, memorizing,
recombining what has been learnt in new contexts and so on. It may be for this
reason that in oriental societies the grammar translation approach is still part of
current practices.
2.2.2. Reconstructionism
Clark (1987:15) states that reconstructionists express a special concern with ‘the
practical aspect of education’ and he emphasizes ‘the promotion of an ability to
communicate,’ indicating that reconstructionism gives rise to a ‘objective-driven’
curriculum, in which predetermined objectives in terms of learners’ needs are
achieved by learners through activities. He (1987:18) further implies that the
methodology related to reconstructionism lays stress on ‘ rehearsal of eventual global
end-objectives’ based on the performance of ‘various part-skills of a particular
behaviour.’ The development of notional-functional syllabuses is an example of
such a value.
White (1988:75) notes that a notional-functional syllabus sets objectives according to
two elements, notions or concepts (e.g. time or space) and functions, with which the
use of language is classified. Thus the syllabus is no longer determined solely by
grammatical content, but also takes into account the communicative functions and
notions that learners may wish to learn. The methodology associated with such
syllabuses encourages activities to rehearse end-objectives so that learners could
eventually achieve objectives. Learners practice notions and functions in realistic
activities, like practicing saying greetings. Widdowson (1990:132) states that the
subject language of notional-functional syllabuses is taught as ‘units of
communicative performance for accumulation.’ Such a syllabus is often cyclical.
In my own teaching context, notions and functions figure in the syllabuses and are
dealt with in progressively detailed ways in successive years. So, for example,
pupils in the first year might practice friendly greetings and interactions in the context
of their classmates, while in year five they might be participating similar functions in
the context of a formal job interview. The teaching method can be set to focus on
rehearsal in class for possible future use.
2.2.3. Progressivism
In Clark’s (1987:49) view, Progressivism offers a ‘learner-centered approach to
education, which attempts to promote the pupil’s development.’ The central idea of
it is ‘growth through experience,’ which learners acquire with their creative
problem-solving capacities. Education is viewed ‘as a means of providing learners
with experience’ which ‘enable them to learn how to learn by their own efforts.’ He
goes further to indicate that progressivism allow the teacher and learners to decide
what to learn and how to learn it. The methodology under such a value focuses on
providing opportunities for learners’ spontaneous learning through engaging in
communicative activities. It is clear that learners’ experience and creativity are
valued. The teacher and learners can participate together the common teaching and
learning activity. In language learning this value appears to be very close to Breen’s
1987 view of process syllabus where learners’ learning process should be valued.
2.3. Definition of the process approach
Breen (1984: 52) notes that process approach is an alternative, which ‘provides a
change of focus from content toward the process of learning in the classroom.’ In
other words, the focus is on the means as well as the ends. For Nunan (1988:40), the
process approach means the activities ‘through which knowledge and skills might be
gained.’ White (1988:46) takes a rather more extreme view when he says that
‘content is subordinate to the learning process and pedagogical procedures.’ This is
an overstatement of the balance in my view. Breen was making the point that the
method through which objectives were achieved was as important as the objectives,
not necessarily more important. Learners need to learn something – words,
structures, patterns – as well as learning effectively. The change in focus from
wholly product-oriented syllabuses design to an approach which acknowledged the
importance of learners, teaching and learning, was an important landmark in
education generally.
Breen (1987:168) summarizes the process syllabus as not only offering ‘a means
whereby the selection and organization of subject-matter become part of the
decision-making process’ but also presenting ‘a framework within which teacher and
learners decide how they should best work upon subject-matter.’ This is a learner
and learning centered approach to teaching and learning where content and method
are closely harmonized.
2.3.1. A Task-based syllabus
One particular type of process syllabus is a task-based syllabus, where the emphasis is
as much on what learners do in order to learn as the eventual objectives. Breen
(1987:161) states that a Task-based syllabus is achieved in two types of tasks:
‘communication tasks’ and ‘learning tasks.’ Communication tasks prioritize ‘the
purposeful use of the target language’ in the real sharing of meaning. Learning tasks
aim to explore ‘the workings of knowledge systems themselves’ especially ‘how these
may be worked and learned.’ That is, a learning task serves to ‘facilitate a learner’s
participation’ in communication tasks while a communication task ‘facilitates the
learning of something new’ and solves a problem. A learning task aiming to prepare
for a communication task or solve an earlier problem can generate real
communication among participants. They both require participants to engage the
underlying competence in undertaking interpretation, expression, and negotiation in
actual communicative events. Breen (1987:162) indicates that ‘learners can cope
with the unpredictable, be creative and adaptable, and often transfer knowledge and
capability across tasks.’ In a Task-based syllabus, communicative abilities and
learning capability are achieved simultaneously through the new language.
2.3.2. A Procedural syllabus
An early example of a task-based syllabus was the Procedural syllabus developed in
the Bangalore Project by Prabhu and his colleagues. They were dissatisfied with the
Structural-Oral-Situational method and developed a task-based syllabus. Basically,
the aim of the procedural syllabus, as Prabhu (1988: 52) indicates, was the
development of ‘grammatical competence,’ which was achieved through a syllabus as
comprising a series of graded meaning-focused activities, where each activity was
divided into a pre-task and a task phase. In Prabhu’s (1987: 53 & 68) statement, the
former is ‘teacher-guided whole –class’ demonstration; the latter is attempted by
learners independently. Learners undergo ‘the process of understanding, thinking
and stating outcomes’ and thus achieve linguistic competence by accomplishing tasks,
which enable them to abstract rules or principles from conveying meaning by trial and
error. In this early task-based approach we find a syllabus which consists of a list of
graded tasks and a classroom methodology which was teacher fronted ( in that the
teacher rehearsed the task for the pupils ), and learner centered ( because the real task
was a challenge for individuals ). The close teacher guidance was appropriate for
the educational context in which the project was located.
2.4. Rationale for the process approach
2.4.1. Changing views of language
We have seen above that classical humanism saw language as a kind of “gold
standard”- a body of knowledge to be learnt. In the 20th century, research into
language use, much of it driven by social economic changes (immigration, mass
production and Americanization of commerce) led to a re-appraisal of language
learning, with a focus on communicative objectives rather than mastery. This was
reflected in syllabus design. For example, as noted above, notional-functional
syllabuses reflected a new awareness of how people use language in communicating.
People also had changing views of language since many of them wanted to learn
languages for work purposes, not to read literature, for example. Unfortunately, the
methodology associated with notional-functional syllabuses was product orientated –
as noted above it was rehearsal for future performance. However, this focus on
learners’ needs and targeted objectives for learning paved the way for later
developments in communicative teaching.
2.4.2. Emergence of communicative methodology
Thus communicative language teaching (CLT) emerged from criticism of notionalfunctional syllabuses, and the product orientated methods used (typically presentation,
practice & production ). Communicative language teaching seeks to explore a
practical, diverse and wide-ranging approach to language teaching, in which the
language is used for real communication during the processes of learning. Teaching
serves to facilitate these learning processes, rather than only being a presentation or
rehearsal of knowledge. Its purpose is to develop learners’ communicative
competence through their engagement with tasks and meaning-focused activities.
CLT is learning language through communication not for communication.
2.4.3. Contributions of learners
The process approach emphasizes learners and their contributions to the learning and
teaching process. Breen (1987: 158) views learners’ underlying abilities of
interpretation, expression, and negotiation as ‘the catalyst for the learning and
refinement of knowledge itself.’ Learners’ communicative abilities and knowledge
and their expectations of language learning contribute to language learning and
teaching processes. Different learners with various expectations, needs, interests,
and motivations adopt different means of interaction in achieving communication.
3. Evaluation
3.1. The profile of my teaching context
The students whom I am teaching major in vocational subjects (e.g. business
management or advertisement design and layout), and are aged from 15 to18. They
grew up in the environment of their first language of Taiwanese or Mandarin. Most
began to learn English at the age of 12 or 13 but some of them started earlier. Most
of them will have received product-orientated instruction. Generally, their
proficiency falls rather below intermediate level. When I have tried to investigate
my learners’ perceived needs, most of them are not interested in learning English,
partly because they rarely have successful experience. They are short of confidence
and unused to taking responsibility for their own learning. The reasons they learn
English are that English is a compulsory subject and good English grades can give
them a better chance to enter vocational college of their choice. At present, they
receive two 50-minute periods of English class per week, in classes of about 40-45
students. This gives teachers limited time to do the work required for the year. The
coursebooks and syllabuses are product orientated in that they mostly offer lists of
vocabulary, grammar, sentence structures, or samples of conversation demonstrating
different functions. Such syllabuses and materials have a strong influence on
options for teaching method, since the focus on learning language content not learning
to use language. In any case, most of the educational administrators would be
unlikely to accept task-based teaching and learning classrooms, which are different
from the traditional ones. There seems to be a conflict in my teaching context.
Although there is an expressed aim for young Taiwanese to become efficient users of
English, the resources and time constraints mitigate against this.
3.2.
Implications of the process approach for my teaching and my students learning
3.2.1. Decisions made by the teacher and learners
In order to create effective learning and appropriate teaching, the teacher, considers
the learners’ characteristics, such as their abilities, needs and interests, and guides
them to make decisions about what they are going to learn, what tasks they are going
to undertake, and especially how they are going to learn it. For the type of students I
teach such involvement in decision-making might be quite intimidating. They would
probably feel that learning is easier if learners know what is taught and how it is
taught, and how they are expected to learn. There is very little scope for students to
participate the choice of teaching materials. However, I can guide them to decide
their own extensive reading, like short stories or magazines. And I could also
provide limited choice of activities at infrequent intervals, e.g. once or twice a year.
3.2.2. Exposure to authentic resources
A variety of authentic materials, related to tasks, activities and real language use, is
adopted to expose learners to English. This involves learners not only acquiring real
language but also accommodating themselves to real communication out of the
classroom. However, most of my students are really false beginners, or at best very
low intermediate, and English is a foreign language to them. In this way, authentic
resources may make them bewildered and demotivated. Nevertheless, authentic
materials can be very motivating to students if they can successfully achieve a task
goal using them. The skill I need to learn is to develop simple tasks using authentic
materials e.g. as one can see in the Cobuild series.
3.2.3. Tasks within meaningful activities elicit learning.
Language teaching can encourage learners to find out means of learning by offering
them abundant opportunities for using the target language to develop their
communicative competence. Learners’ initial capabilities are recognized and
exploited in undertaking tasks. They discover their own routes to learning
independently or cooperatively. In undertaking tasks of problem-solving activities,
learners acquire communicative competence through negotiation of meaning whereas
the target language and unpredicted language occur simultaneously and lead to
acquisition of real language use. When giving tasks, the teacher has to consider
individual learning abilities, for example, that some students may not be able to find
ways to carry out the tasks and fail to learn. They may use Taiwanese or Mandarin.
Nevertheless, task design should direct the students to focus on English; the teacher
has to offer sufficient assistance to them and also to arrange capable students in the
same pair or group.
3.2.4. Teaching is to facilitate learning.
As I noted above, in Taiwan the circumstances of lack of a teaching time, large classes
and an examination culture tend towards a product approach in which teachers present
for learners to learn. This leads to frustration for both teachers and learners since the
learners do not learn to use the language. The introduction of some communication
tasks might enable some real learning to take place. However, this really needs
some impetus from the education ministry e.g. in offering a little more time. Even
out of school English clubs which work well in some countries (e.g. Malaysia ) are
difficult to organize in teaching because pupils have a great deal of homework.
3.2.5.
Learners’ contributions
From the view of the process approach, both learners’ initial capabilities and
involvement in tasks contribute to their own learning. The goal of language learning
is to develop communicative competence, not solely to accumulate language
knowledge for the purpose of passing an exam. In my teaching I may spoon feed my
students too much instead of making them find answers for themselves. I should
encourage the students to value their own abilities and suggest they share the
responsibility for the successful language learning by selecting challenging tasks and
giving them time to work out the answers for themselves.
3.3.
Limitation of the process approach for my teaching context
3.3.1. Are learners’ decisions made appropriately?
A central value in the process approach is that learners have rights to help to decide
the content of learning. However, the maturity of my learners’ decisions and their
awareness of language are in question. Most of them are not proficient language
learners and do not know what language is about. It may lead to aimless learning if
the content is decided according to my students’ interests, imagination, or creativity.
This is the reason why the administration cannot allow students full participation in
the choice of the content. As discussed in 3.2.1., however, I can offer them some
opportunities where they can make choices. Teachers can also act as proxy and
make sure that the content of lessons is appropriate to learners needs. As I noted
above, I regularly try out to find out more about my students needs and interests.
3.3.2.
In a mixed-ability class are all the learners capable of finding their own ways
of learning?
From the process approach, teaching can activate the learners’ autonomy of learning
without the teacher’s intervention. However, it may fail to facilitate learning of the
false beginners or weak learners who lack confidence and self-esteem. For example,
they may feel insecure and bewildered in carrying out tasks. Unfamiliarity may
cause them unable to discover paths to their own learning without my instruction.
Tasks can be designed in pair work or group work of mixed-level learners, and the
weak learners may feel more confident from collaborative learning and learn. My
classes are mix ability and I try to use a wide range of different tasks so that my
learners can experience different ways of learning. Only in this way will they be
able to find their preferred ways.
3.3.3.
Is time sufficient for genuine communication?
Learners are provided with a variety of chances to acquire the target language and
achieve communicative competence through carrying out tasks. Frankly speaking,
the learners may require much more time to practice genuine communication than
lessons allow. Thus I may offer my pupils some clues or support for their
communication. Again the most feasible approach is probably to introduce simple
communication tasks and allow the students to become familiar with each task type
before going on to the next type. This will reduce time wasted. Another technique
is for teachers to use English as the instructional and social language in the classroom.
Again, this can be fairly artificial and graded to begin with (e.g. simple greetings and
instructions, use of mime), and gradually become more natural as students learn to
understand.
4. Conclusion
My students are studying in a vocational senior high school. Their course of study is
job-oriented. Work in Taiwan frequently involves the use of English, and successful
people in business will almost certainly be reasonably proficient. The process
approach, therefore, has much to offer in my teaching context because it aims towards
meaningful language learning and it focuses on the development of learners’
communicative competence. Within the process approach, the learners’ contribution
is valued to maintain their efforts for English learning, which can be developed
through completing tasks within meaningful activities. However, the traditional
product approach is still very widely adopted even though it has received a lot of
criticism. It cannot be denied that the product approach offers pedagogic
convenience for the teachers in Taiwan, where English is taught in a large
mixed-ability class, where learners regard English learning as a subject for entering a
higher better school. I have argued that the ordinary teacher has to adapt the
constraints in which she or he works. This probably means following the
product-oriented approach for much of the time at present. I have shown that in
small increments learning and learner centered tasks and activities can be introduced.
The teachers can combine these two approaches to language teaching and learning.
The adoption of these plural syllabuses in my teaching context can best suit for
learners to learn to use the language, and to prepare them for the national entrance
examination.
References:
Breen, M.P.1987. ‘Contemporary paradigms in Syllabus Design, Part 1.’
Language Teaching Vol.20, No.2 pp 81 – 92.
Breen, M.P.1987. ‘Contemporary paradigms in Syllabus Design, Part 2.’ Language
Teaching Vol.20, No.3 pp 157 – 174.
Brumfit, C.J. (Ed.) 1984.
Oxford: Pergamon.
Clark, J.L.1987.
General English Syllabus Design. (ELT Documents 118)
Curriculum Renewal in School Foreign Language Learning.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
H. G. Widdowson, 1990.
Aspects of Language Teaching.
Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Nunan, D.1988. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Prabhu, N.S.1987.
Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skilbeck, M.1982.
‘Three Educational Ideologies’ in T. Horton and P. Raggat (Eds.)
Challenge and Change in the curriculum.
Sevenoaks: Hodder and Stoughton.
White, R.V. 1988. The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation, and Management.
Oxford: Blackwell.