Delta 3 curriculum & syllabus design and course planning


Published on

Session Three of our Delta Module Three course.

Published in: Education
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Delta 3 curriculum & syllabus design and course planning

  1. 1. Delta Module Three Neil McMahon Delta 3 Extending practice and English language teaching specialisation
  2. 2. Delta Module Three – Curriculum & Syllabus Design Neil McMahon Delta 3 Neil McMahon IH Buenos Aires September 17 2010
  3. 3. <ul><li>Session Thre e: </li></ul><ul><li>Friday September 17th </li></ul><ul><li>3pm – 6 pm </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  4. 4. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum can be defined, as an educational program which states: </li></ul><ul><li>a) “The educational purpose of the program (the ends) </li></ul><ul><li>b) The content teaching procedures and learning experience which will be necessary to achieve this purpose (the means) </li></ul><ul><li>c) Some means for assessing whether or not the educational ends have been achieved.” </li></ul><ul><li>( Richards, Platt and Platt 1993: 94) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  5. 5. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>“ Curriculum is a very general concept which involves consideration of the whole complex of philosophical, social and administrative factors which contribute to the planning of an educational program.” </li></ul><ul><li>(Allen quoted in Nunan, 2000: 6) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  6. 6. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum </li></ul><ul><li>“ Curriculum theory encompasses philosophy and value systems; the main components of the curriculum: purposes, content, methodology and evaluation; and the process whereby curricula are developed, implemented and evaluated”. </li></ul><ul><li>(White, 1993: 19). </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  7. 7. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Course </li></ul><ul><li>A course is “an integrated series of teaching-learning experiences, whose ultimate aim is to lead the learners to a particular state of knowledge”. (Hutchinson and Waters 1996: 65) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  8. 8. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Course </li></ul><ul><li>The distinction between a curriculum and a course is important because some of the areas of concern in curriculum development as: societal needs analysis, testing for placement purposes or programwide evaluation may be out of the hands of teachers who are developing courses. </li></ul><ul><li>(Richards, 2001) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  9. 9. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>“ Syllabus is essentially a statement of what should be taught, year by year – through language – syllabuses often also contain points about the method of teaching and the time to be taken”. </li></ul><ul><li>(Lee 1980:108) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  10. 10. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>“ syllabus is a more detailed and operational statement of teaching and learning elements which translates the philosophy of the curriculum into a series of planned steps leading towards more narrowly defined objectives at each level”. </li></ul><ul><li>Dubin & Olshtain, (1997: 28) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  11. 11. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Articulating your beliefs </li></ul><ul><li>“ Your view of what language is or what being proficient in a language means affects what you teach and how you teach it” </li></ul><ul><li>(Graves, 2000: 28) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  12. 12. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Articulating your beliefs </li></ul><ul><li>What is your view of language? </li></ul><ul><li>What is your view of the social context of language? </li></ul><ul><li>What is your view of learning and learners? </li></ul><ul><li>What is your view of teaching? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  13. 13. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Structural </li></ul><ul><li>Lexical </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  14. 14. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Structural </li></ul><ul><li>Lexical </li></ul><ul><li>Situational </li></ul><ul><li>Topical </li></ul><ul><li>Notional </li></ul><ul><li>Functional </li></ul><ul><li>Skills-based </li></ul><ul><li>Task-based </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  15. 15. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>‘ There is little empirical evidence to warrant commitment to any particular approach to syllabus development. In practice, a combination of approaches is often used.’ </li></ul><ul><li>Richards (1990: 9-10) </li></ul><ul><li>Richards, J, The Language Teaching Matrix, 1990, CUP </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  16. 16. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Course Book Examples </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3 True to Life Multi-Thread: Structural, Lexical, Topical Matters Integrated Skills New Cambridge English Course Comprehensive syllabus (first to include phonology) Fast Forward Functional (Class Book) Structural (Work book) Meanings into Words Notional Streamline Departures Structural
  17. 17. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Product Vs Process </li></ul><ul><li>Synthetic Vs Analytic </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  18. 18. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Product Vs Process </li></ul><ul><li>Product </li></ul><ul><li>syllabuses are those in which the focus is on the knowledge and skills which learners should gain as a result of instruction. </li></ul><ul><li>Process </li></ul><ul><li>syllabuses are those which focus on the learning experiences themselves. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  19. 19. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Synthetic Vs Analytic </li></ul><ul><li>‘ acquisition is a process of gradual accumulation of separately taught parts, building up to the whole structure of the language. The learner is exposed to a deliberately limited sample of language at any time, and has to &quot;re- synthesise the language that has been broken down into a large number of small pieces with the aim of making this learning task easier’ </li></ul><ul><li>(Wilkins 1976:2) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  20. 20. <ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Syllabus </li></ul><ul><li>Synthetic Vs Analytic </li></ul><ul><li>&quot; Analytic approaches ... are organised in terms of the purposes for which people are learning language and the kinds of language performance that are necessary to meet those purposes&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>(Wilkins 1976:13) </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;Since we are inviting the learner, directly or indirectly, to recognise the linguistic components of the language he is acquiring, we are in effect basing our approach on the learner's analytic capabilities&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>(Wilkins 1976:14). </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  21. 21. <ul><li>Session Thre e: </li></ul><ul><li>Friday September 17 th </li></ul><ul><li>3pm – 6 pm </li></ul><ul><li>Curriculum & Syllabus Design </li></ul><ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  22. 22. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Taba’s model of curriculum processes </li></ul><ul><li>Organisation of Content </li></ul><ul><li>Organisation of Learning Experiences </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of Content </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of Learning Experiences </li></ul><ul><li>Diagnosis of needs </li></ul><ul><li>Determination of what to evaluate and means to evaluate </li></ul><ul><li>Formulation of objectives </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  23. 23. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Taba’s model of curriculum processes </li></ul><ul><li>Diagnosis of needs </li></ul><ul><li>Formulation of objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of Content </li></ul><ul><li>Organisation of Content </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of Learning Experiences </li></ul><ul><li>Organisation of Learning Experiences </li></ul><ul><li>Determination of what to evaluate and means to evaluate </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  24. 24. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>From </li></ul><ul><li>Goals </li></ul><ul><li>To </li></ul><ul><li>Objectives </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  25. 25. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Goals </li></ul><ul><li>Task 23 </li></ul><ul><li>In what ways are these statements similar? </li></ul><ul><li>In what ways are they different? </li></ul><ul><li>Based on these statements, how would you define the term ‘Goal’? </li></ul><ul><li>Nunan (1988:25) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  26. 26. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Task 59 </li></ul><ul><li>What distinguishes one list from another? </li></ul><ul><li>Which do you think is most useful? </li></ul><ul><li>What criticisms would you make of the others? </li></ul><ul><li>Can you think of other methods? </li></ul><ul><li>Nunan (1988:62) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  27. 27. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Performance Objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Performance – what they can do </li></ul><ul><li>Conditions – under which they perform </li></ul><ul><li>Standards – how well they are to perform </li></ul><ul><li>Nunan (1988:64) </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  28. 28. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Course Plan Examples </li></ul><ul><li>How easy are they to follow? </li></ul><ul><li>What objectives do you think they are trying to realise? </li></ul><ul><li>What could you borrow from them? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  29. 29. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Examiners’ comments 1 </li></ul><ul><li>The course programme is well designed and reflects the issues raised in the results of the needs analysis. Objectives are numbered and then linked to the plan, which shows which aims are to be addressed, how, and using what materials / resources. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  30. 30. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Examiners’ comments 2 </li></ul><ul><li>The course plan itself is clearly colour coded, sequencing is highlighted, and the course is well-designed. The objectives are suitable and the plan is very clear in showing which areas are addressed and how / when. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  31. 31. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Examiners’ comments 3 </li></ul><ul><li>Well planned and designed course. Information from students is crystallised into 7 course objectives which are relevant and realistic. The plan is impressive in that it shows how the syllabus types discussed are met over the course. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  32. 32. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>In what ways is your proposed course based on or influenced by ideas and information from Parts 1 and 2, and your reading of relevant literature? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  33. 33. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>What are the learning aims and objectives you hope to achieve? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  34. 34. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>What is the content of the proposed course? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  35. 35. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>How is content organised? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  36. 36. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>What approach to teaching will be used? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  37. 37. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>What materials will be used? </li></ul><ul><li>If you propose using published materials, how do these match the aims of the course? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  38. 38. <ul><li>Guiding Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Part 3: Course Proposal </li></ul><ul><li>What institutional requirements or other constraints have you taken into account, e.g. availability of teachers with the relevant skills and experience, availability of materials and resources, timetabling? </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  39. 39. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Advice To Candidates </li></ul><ul><li>Stronger candidates provided a good rationale for the course design in terms of structure and content. They reflected information from learning styles or classroom preferences and commented on this in sections concerning approach, methodology and materials. Course plans were mostly suitable and met stated needs. </li></ul><ul><li>Stronger assignments numbered and colour-coded the objectives and then reflected this coding in the plan itself to show how and when objectives were being met. Stronger assignments typically made reference to at least five or six relevant sources </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  40. 40. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Advice To Candidates </li></ul><ul><li>It is important that the course plan is developed out of the needs analysis and justified explicitly in terms of the results and priorities identified in Part 2 of the assignment. Some candidates presented a course which was clearly already being taught, and which had clearly been designed before writing the assignment. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  41. 41. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Advice To Candidates </li></ul><ul><li>In cases where candidates are conducting a needs analysis for a group which they are already teaching and for which a real course may already have been planned or imposed by the candidate’s institution, it is important that the course designed and presented in Part 3 of the assignment reflects the results of the needs analysis even if this means it differing from the actual course being taught. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  42. 42. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Advice To Candidates </li></ul><ul><li>Candidates are expected to explicitly refer to principles of course and syllabus design and types of syllabus with reference to terminology and sources as appropriate, and to show clearly how this understanding has influenced their choice and sequencing of course content and teaching approach. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  43. 43. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Advice To Candidates </li></ul><ul><li>It is important to outline how the different strands of the course and different lessons relate to one another. Simply allocating different lessons and lesson aims to slots in a 20-hour timetable without sufficient justification is not sufficient. Some candidates simply presented a number of lesson plans for individual lessons without indicating how they related to each other. </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  44. 44. <ul><li>Course Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment Criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Course proposal </li></ul><ul><li>Key principles of syllabus and course design </li></ul><ul><li>Justification of learning aims, teaching approach and the course in terms of learner needs </li></ul><ul><li>Design of the course </li></ul>Neil McMahon Delta 3
  45. 45. Thank you very much. Stay in touch! [email_address] The End Delta Module Three – Course Planning Neil McMahon Delta 3