Bernard M.

Paderes
UG2010125154
TESOL 109 (Language Materials Preparation & Evaluation)
Ms. Manicio

A curriculum is broadly defined as the sum of all the planned experiences

of an educational system. Tyler specifies what educators should consider in
developing a curriculum, namely: syllabus design, the teaching methodology that
should be used, as well as methods on how to assess and evaluate learning.
In language teaching, designing a syllabus includes the selecting,
sequencing, and justifying of the content such as linguistic features, topics, and
even themes. In the reading, Nunan presented the different existing language
syllabuses such as grammatical, notional-functional, content-based and
integrated curriculum.
A grammatical syllabus operates under the assumption that language has
fixed set of rules that could be combined to convey different meanings. The role
of the learner is to master rules according to how they are arranged in the
syllabus. However, this type of syllabus has been under attack especially when
the communicative language teaching was introduced. First, language is too
complex to be structurally arranged. Secondly, researches in second language
acquisition showed that language is not necessarily acquired in the order specified
by the grammatical syllabus. Other critics argue that a particular grammar item is
not acquired according to its grammatical complexity, but by how the learners
use them in terms of speech. However, grammatical syllabus shouldn’t be so
linear. The reading made mention of the “organic” approach to the teaching
grammar. This approach is based on the idea that learners do not acquire each
grammatical item perfectly, one at a time, but numerous items imperfectly, all at
once.
A notional-functional syllabus is not that different from grammatical
syllabus except that in this kind of syllabus the grammatical item is taken in
context. For example, instead of teaching the learners about the simple past
tense, learners may be taught about how to talk about what they did last
weekend.
In a content-based syllabus, language is not explicitly taught, but it is
taught through the content of other subjects such as science, history, and
mathematics. Learners acquire the language by learning other things. Advocates
of this approach believe that active engagement in communicating in the target
language is the best way to acquire it.
A task-based syllabus provides learners with a lot of communicative tasks.
These tasks are divided into two categories, namely: target tasks and
pedagogical tasks. A target task is something that a learner might do outside of
the classroom such as filling up forms or ordering in a restaurant. On the other
hand, a pedagogical task is done inside the classroom in order to fuel the
acquisition of the language. In addition to this, tasks are also classified into
reproductive and creative tasks. A reproductive task is something that a learner
should reproduce following a model such as a teacher, a textbook, or a tape
recorder. Such tasks are predetermined and predictable and not necessarily
communicative in nature. On the other hand, there are also creative tasks in
which less predictable.
Finally, there’s an integrated syllabus. This type of syllabus combines the
teaching of grammar structures and the situation which specific structures might
b needed. For example, in introducing oneself, the learners must be able to know
and make use of the simple present tense and wh-questions, or in introducing
other people learners must be able to know and make use of the demonstratives
this and that.
Aside from the different syllabus designs, the reading also discusses the
importance of needs analysis and competence-based language teaching. It
stresses out the importance of determining the learners’ communicative needs or
the situations in which they would apply the language they would be studying like
language-for-tourism, language-for-clerical workers, language-for-engineers, etc.
However, this needs-based design was criticized for being limited to specific
situations. Therefore such syllabus is more of training than educating since
learners are only taught do things they are specifically prepared.
The reading also mentioned something about the competency-based
language teaching. This approach to language teaching stresses out the use of
competencies or what a learner is expected to do at the end of instruction than
what should they achieve in relation to a group. However, because of the hairline
boundary between objectives and competencies, these two terms are simply
referred to as standards. These standards are based on indicators and
descriptors.

Reflection
 I think I would still stick with the traditional grammatical syllabus. I think
that, up to now, it’s the only systematic way of teaching the language. Although,
in my work, I also try to integrate notions and functions with grammar teaching
since context is very important for the learners to make learning more
meaningful. However, I also believe the content-based would be effective
provided that they set a clear standards and procedure approach since learning a
language for EFL learners would be more interesting if it is taken in the context of
their respective field of interest.
I think that the part about needs analysis is a must-read for every EFL
teacher because the book provided a good sample on how to survey the learner’s
communicative needs.
In terms of the part about competency-based language teaching, I agree
with the critics that this type of approach is too specific and even limiting. I agree
that it is more of training learners to do specific tasks than educating them what
they need to know. But in a way, CBLT approach might be more meaningful for
EFL learners who have immediate and specific needs for the language.