Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • (David Arthur Wilkins) Notional Syllabuses A Taxo (BookFi) PDF

    Uploaded by

    Evelina Tanasi
    90 views50 pages

    Original Title

    [David_Arthur_Wilkins]_Notional_Syllabuses_A_Taxo(BookFi).pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    90 views50 pages

    (David Arthur Wilkins) Notional Syllabuses A Taxo (BookFi) PDF

    Uploaded by

    Evelina Tanasi

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 50
    Notional Syllabuses Daw Notional Syllabuses A taxonomy and its relevance to foreign language curriculum development D. A. WILKINS. Departmen of Lingus Science ‘ies of Reine OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS fot rivesiy Pre, Wat Sot, Ovid ox 6 1saN 019 437012 (© Osford Univ Tress, 1976 Fi pbb 1978 Reid 1977, 1978 ad 1979 “Al rigs eed, No pert of thi pabation ry be repeated 2 ese eS amit, samy for or ye ea, econ cen chs ong eri hte or Poa a ‘Oxford University Pres Printed and bound in Great Bai The Cameot Pros Lid, Souargton Contents Preface Ghapter One Approaches to Language Syllabus Design 10" Introduction: synthesis and analysis 20. Synthetic approaches 3.0. Reservations about synthetic approaches 4.0. Analytic approsches 4.1 Operational definitions 42. Situational s/labuses 43° Notional ellbuses Chapter Two Categories fora notional syllabus 1.0" Introduction: the components of a notional ylabus 2.0. Semantioogrammatical categories 3.0. Categories of modal meaning 440. Categorie of communicative function ‘Chapter Thee Applications of «notional syllabus LO" Introduction 210. The forms of notional ylabus 24 Global course design 22 Special couse design 23° Lexical content 530 Some implications for the process of teaching 3 Teaching materials 32. Testing ‘ibtiogrpty Iadex of notional catepories (General Index 3B 1 1s 18 a 2 ES a ss 58 8 7 n a as ® For Roberta and Brigid, Alison and Jonathan Preface ‘That this book is published a alia sign ofthe widespread interest thatthe ideas it contains have aeady aroused. These ideas have sained some currency since they wote ist presented in a set of ‘working documents ofthe Counel of Europe and in various conference papers. I was conslous a the time of the essentially Interim nature ofthe proposals and I knew that many years of linguistic and pedagogic research would be needed before the ideas ‘ould be put forward with the authority necessary fora more substantial frm of publication, For this reason Idi not at the tine offer the papers for general publication. If have now changed my ‘mind, it is because s0 much interest hasbeen shown and because | am told that many people are already trying to pu the ides into practice. The original stcles are not easly obtainable and in any case the central paper was not aimed at a general readership ad isnot entirely understandable ast stands. When I was approached bythe Oxford University Press, I agreed to publication ofthis work in the hope that it would succeed in stimulating thought and thoughtful ‘experimentation in the fed ofsyabus design. Certain modifications have been made to the framework of categories which are proposed forthe constuction of notional ylabuses and the justiieaton for 8 notional syllabus, which makes up the fst chapter, relates the isve much more explicitly to general aspects of ryllabus design than was ‘the casein the previous wock. The final chapter is wholly new and attempts to explore the role ofa motional syllabus I various types of language learning situations ‘A wotk ofthis kind can never be the product of one person's research. Lowe far more to others than I can possibly indicate. I must, ‘in particular mention the Coun of Europe which commissioned the ‘orginal study on which this book s based, Jan van Ek, René Richterich itv system Stems Development At Leute Learn Stastour Coucl of Europe 1973, DA Wikis” "Grate unions an ntiona abies In Proteins of the Third etraionl Comps of Applied Loge. ‘Wm A, Vewdod (i) Halon ar Grose 1974, Ba in "Noa ar an toc mim adeue tpumiar”In Coder and Role! edt) igus gn ed iis brass, AIMAY Pa De 1076 nd John Trim, my colleagues on the Council of Europe commie, ‘who encouraged me when [fist put my ideas forward, and Chris Candin and Henry Widdowson much of whose thinking I found to be similar to my own and from whom [have learned a goo dea. ‘Knowledgeable readers wil be aware that some text-book waiters and practising language teachers had steady been working in a similar ‘irecton. [regia my own contribution a having been principally to have provided a taxonomy tlvough which semantically rented language teaching canbe systematically planned and, secondarily, to thie helped to revise our understanding ofthe nature of language learning and teaching in the lght ofthese innoraions. Approschesto Language Slabs Design \ CHAPTER ONE Approaches to Language Syllabus Design 41.0 Introduction: synthesis and analysis ‘ne of the major decisions that has tobe taken in the teaching of fori langues ison what bas we wil sles he language hich the emer wil be exposed ad which we wil expect hin to Aoqule. Ive look at exiting text books, texting abuses and at the dacusions that ave ben conducted in journals and books devoted to the teaching of languages, we wil se that aay of approaches hve been proposed o adopted, In the case of older text books decisions appear to have ben taken ona more ols jective esis wheteas in more recent years the criteria employed have Been sade more and more expliit. To consdeale extent the ieent vaysof structuring cous sels diferent way of looking a the ‘jetves of langue learning and wahig. close analys of objec at been made, the most obvious podagogiosategy to adopt in planning to meet thos objestie so foow the components af th nalyisstep by step, Since the aig of language is most commonly Wentifed with acquiring mastery of garmatica Syste i 01 sarpsing that ros courses havea arate (or ‘Sructrl) pedagoxs oration. OF couse thers enarous ‘sey in the ways in whlch language may be presented in gra tcl stctued teaching materials henselves, but there ze aso ‘quite other way of defining the content of language courses, There fre courses based a the systematic introduction of voabuary and ches whch ae language stations a the starting-point. There ae tbox that adopt functonal approach tat resembles pars ofthe notional slabs tats tobe proposed here. The attempt has ‘been mde to give an operational defn tothe objectives of Janguage learning ad to plan courses accordingly ‘Whe admiting that space thee approacie ae not mca mutually excise, earn them fom the igustc point of ven would wiht argue that they canbe grouped nto {wo conceptual stint types of approach which could abled ‘pacha adele Aay ata eure oF lab cou be placed somentere on te continaum betwen the wholly synthetic an the 2 Notional Sytabuses ‘whlly analytic, but she actual declson procedures that have been followed in the proces of sletion wil show that it tends towards ‘one ple othe othe. "Asynthtilangue teaching setey i one in which the efferent acts of language are nuphtsgpacatly and step-by-step 20 that ‘Squison isa process of gradual acumuation ofthe pars unt tho hole sruture ofthe langue hasbeen but up. I planning the syllabus for sich teaching the pobal language hasbeen broken down probably into an inventory of grammatical stustures. and into 8 ist offexicl tem, These reordered according to crea re discussed inthe next section. At ary onetime the learner [sbeing exposed toa deliberately limited sample of language. The language that is mastered in one uni of learning added to that which thas been acquired in the preceding units. The lamers tak s 19 regynthesize the language that hasbeen broken down into large rb of smaller pgces withthe am of making hi learning esr. [eis only in the al stapes of earning that the global languages established in all its structural diversity. Tn analy approaches there sno atemp at this care inguistic contol of the earning environment. Components of language se not ‘cen as building blocks which ave tobe propresively accumulated, Much greater vavety of linguistic srt is petted from the Begining adh ae tak apoxiat i ov nite 1 more and mote cloely tothe bal langage. Significant Ingo nb tel om erect Beret context in which they occur, 0 that lesrng canbe foctsed on portant aspects ofthe language stricture itis proces which s refereed toa analytic In general, however, structural considerations are secondary when decnions ae being taken abou the way in which the language 1 which the eae wil be exposed ito be selected and ganized. Te stuational, notional nd functional sysbses described below (pp 15-20) ae analytic in hi ens, a are approaches based on operational definitions 2.0. Symthetc approaches ‘The majority of language courses and syllabuses are and probably slways have been constructed on synthetic Hines, Language leanings, ‘complex task, However, «complex task can usualy be broken down {into eres of simple tasks. In recent years and particularly under the influence of advances in the psychology ofetming the Sdenti- cation of the smaller lstring asks hasbeen cated outwith increasing Approaches Language Sylabus Design 3 linguistic sophistcatlon, The tasks are idemified with items derived fom the description ofthe language. In those courses which ae commonly labelled “raditona” the contol of new linguistic items Introdued in anyone text-book leson or unit was not particularly trict Whole paradigms were presented at tine and often quite tnt Hogulstic structures would be treated inthe same fesson. In ‘the lat twenty years or 0 the use made by structural linguists ofthe technique of minimal contrat as eriteron for identiying distinct linguistic structures has encouraged text-book writers and sylabus ‘constructor o simplify the Jarning ask sl further by reducing tos ‘pinimur the quantity of new language in any leaning unit. As rest fearing content is pread over more units and a Tonge period of time. However, although there snow much more ‘explicit recgnitiom of the extra that are involved inthis process of selecting and ordering language, the learning principle that underlies both types of text remains the same. You facta leaning if you present the lamer with pisces of language that have been pre-digested sccording othe eategories found ine desrption ofthe language, T should add too that matters of mathod and the exact form in ‘hich the new language is presented are notin question here. There fe, ofcourse, sme very eal differences. A new linguist structure ‘may be presented in the form of an explicit ue; it may be presented as paradigm; it may be embedded ina dialogue it may oer ina ‘erie of analogous sentences intended t promote inductive laring. None of these difference is relevant to the discussion here. If the content of teaching iin the first place a limitation and an ordering of| ie forms ofthe Inguistc system, the approach is synthetic. ‘As metods of teaching have change, so have the processes by ‘which langage is elected and graded, In the case of older textbooks Aecsions appear to have been taken on a more or ls subjective basis. ‘At lest there i very ite discussion of the criteria that were employed. Tn contrast, the language teaching literature ofthe past thirty yeas or ‘0 fill of iscutsions ofthe various factors tobe taken into consider- stion in desing whic forms of language wee to be taught and in ‘which order. This not the place for artical and dete review of the literature on this tops, But a brief discussion ofthe exteria that have been proposed willbe usful since it will be necosary to rention some of them eter. ‘Although in most modem cours controLof vocabulary and of rammatigl structure go hand-in-hand, the alveation of methodolog {sts was rst directed to voeabulary. This was presumably beease the ‘vocabulary that i needed for predictable day-to-day use of guage 4 Notional Sytabuses ‘vas markedly diferent from the somewhat literary and arbitrary ‘ocabuary thet lamers actually met in their predominantly reading based courses, twas elt that ways shouldbe found of ensuring that the vocabulary learned should be es haphazardly distributed, mor in Keeping with th kay needs ofthe ears and not 20 are 380 constitute a severe leaning burden. The am was to sce thatthe ‘vocabulary content of courses consted of, n shot the most weft words. ‘The erteria that have been used in extsbishing the relative useful “nes of word are requene' range, ealbty®,faiaiy* and coverage’. The notion of frequency ia seven Range slater to the distribution of lexical tem over a numberof differen ype of tet. Anilabilty spon) sceounts for lexical its which may nt be particularly frequen but ste readily avaiable to speaker when he needs thom, As with ama itis measured by ‘means of speaker response rather than by the statistical analysis of texts In esablhing the availablity of lexical items subjects ate asked to tolls the words which they would find most wseful in certain defined seas of interes. The daproeof familiarity ofan itm is asessed by king the subject 1o rank words ina given Ist on a fariiaity scale ‘The coverage ofa lexical item sated high fit expresses range of ‘meanings ore capable of replacing other items of more specific. ‘meaning in particular contexts, _,Pedagogi considerations are not ignored inthe procss of selection. ‘Sore items wil be promoted because they se parteuely useful in egg a wal chan cecal its i a nc ony orto Os rie ec eet eto rey sage inde cars? SEE at scm nace ERE he Pt rt aa att ae teres et re ae ee sia Seeeacecte ith arscreapee a ee cee aa eo ee one rene ol ieee ein rr spel tat oar Awe ay tn cag Sn RS Eran tn ga 10 Approaches io Language Splabus Desen S “thclaoom stuason, Ot ib ase for ns ty, inthe pt othe tiger teaching meanog Mate ait hes to cmply senso the eo eens ocean foc Sample nae very diet och sone men heey ‘apr Aan item mig be dered whe corpasion wih the tothe one get tat might poet sn exception depo of sitet As Riese, ha it hapening es at we ate king ‘othe language behaviour and the language knowledge that we aim to. Trader snes weary he gti component {edad prtraes edt is wale We ase techn tun ese Dy pews pt nT the very potion From which we sad Ti poe often that eq of thelexer toa done eo pr sayin the pt the coun ook wt Tice nt ely fhe ea Bo oft gamma! comet of agg en soy, ‘Stemi darosdon of gannatea elcton ad pig # trent Joven, bu mos waters an eho wos sce tht he amma component cena forse nese tod nye caisson of the pated conten tt poner th ental sure fr couse sd yan. Eesh ant of erang ual fuse on sme utr pet “umm suc and heer orotic xp, cher thems wl wus an iw y ee ‘oe gaat), aD cht fr inkon in gee linge coune so tonal osu of efor encom of he lenge She powen of eton eas ne les import han that of tric m2 te gamma psn a dfn. The ite pa os ener core lb ah tual the hol ofthe grammatical system. Whereas limitation wal be necessary inthe st feu ef or ten tei sa ome {in of sted inne compte, th poten fed in ete: Jrinng th patamaitl teen of genoa courses are move those of ‘Ein an uence By what era Goer one Sse wh frm ct wi av be tno cera tgs dow fay i hae ren svcd in ton one nother win ach stage? "A Role: Langage nag aaa TRAIT 1969 “Pata neta oson of ewe eres MAK Hany, A Melosh snd ED Savers: Opt 9p 207-212, Frequency is 6 Notional Spabuses |The linguistic criteria tha are most often cited in relation tothe ‘amumaical content of teaching ae simply, eur, frequency land contrasive dificulty®, Thre ino pater aficlty in under Standing ny ofthese concepts. Ii suggested thaPlnore simple language shouldbe taut before more complex on the not unreason- able assumption tat simplicity of structure implies ese of sequiiton, Judgements of simplicity are sill made on a largely intuitive bas, sine inguisties hat not yet provided us with a means of meatuing complexity which has proven psycholingulste vali. Tre eiterion oPhequarity requires thatthe most roduetive ingustle structures shouldbe ‘aught before thooe of low productivity. The ‘eaton why the content of the early stages of so many coures i tim tht they desl with thot ingutc forms that have the treater generalizability and whatever typeof linguistic description hasbeen ued to derive the language content, the same, base faci are katy to emerge. Some grammatical forms are so necessary to any use ofthe language that they can only be avoided inthe ealy stages ofa course at the cost ofthe geatst artificiality The eiterion of rely used at al rigidly, It is more often simpy a mater ‘of deferring toa lator stage the learning of forms that ae evidently sscure or rarely used. A great deal hasbeen written onthe subject of tase difculty. Mos of i, however, remains atthe level of description and there i vory itl discussion of how our understanding of particular contrastive probloms influences the detail of course and syllabus design. In general tis suggested thatthe earl stages of Tearing should be devoted to language forms which present the fewest, ontratve dificult, ‘Other criteria once again involve the interaction with pedagoxte “abnaderations. 1 ts intended that new language forms should be presented in a context of day-to-day language use, forms which have Special soot wliy ox probability of occurence ae key tobe ‘TDushov and V. Utbanor A frequency cout of Engh tens wth sppcaton to eching Engl ass fogs gag, x Pao Stacie n ‘ithemartatLngutir 8 Mich Hotber gs. Academia 1967 TV George A reform feqeney cout ELT 18/1 1963, Approeches to Language Sylabus Desig 7 promoted. As with vocabulary, grammatical forms wl have higher or Tower peocty according to their degree of pedagost li, ther ‘appropriateness o the elasroom context and ty n the light ofthe metiods and teciniques thatthe teacher wishes to elopt. Most smportant ofall is the fat thatthe whole ofthis strategy of teaching is based on the principle of working from the f _unfaniar and of sng the fami io each the uta “effcint teaching of ono itom wl presuppose the prior acquisition of | ‘certain other items, The factors involved wl be partly lingulsleand partly pedagogic and they wil eslt in preferred orderings of ‘grammatical forms ~ what have been called reasons of recommended Precedence? ‘One ofthe problems faced in selecting and grading language th ‘the vaigu lexical and gramnat confit with oa ‘soften at they complement one another and there sao way inwhich ‘eons ene open tem, Ay dab eel mm ‘eu grammati gs. Productive forms may nonetheless be Sree Rares no el ofthe esion ming teal, ‘subjective. The india techer, writer, llabue constructor ll, any piven instance, have to decie fr himself to which exitrion he wll attach the greatest importance, ‘The sllbus that results from the appliaton ofthese eriera will = be grommarial slabus. The use of 2 grammatical syllabus canbe, regarded se the conventional sproach ( language teaching since the ‘majority of labuss and published courses have a ther core an cordored is of grammatical structures. The vocabulary content i. ‘esondary in importange and certainly rarely provides he basi stue- ture ofa course. The view is widely field that until the major pat of, ‘he gunmen a ben xed te cable 1X down to wha x pedajoglaly necessary and to what is desirable forthe sake of ensuring adequate variety inthe content of Isaming, Fom tis pont on, the grammatical syllabus wil be resarded a the archetype of asynthetc approach to sylabus desig. 3.0 Reservation about synthetic approaches In recent years a number of arguments of varying degree of importance and valli have been put forward for questioning the adequacy of grammatical syllabus. tis not generally denied that Sc ane Te Speetion of Objective ove Lanoage Ler Stem ‘for Ad Sour Coun of Buape 1973 8 Notional Spabuser what is learned through a grammatical syllabus i oF value tothe learner. It is ater suggested that this & not the necessary or the most effective way of designing language courses and that in any’ case, language learnings not complete when the content ofa grammatical syllabus has bee ‘Resbel, nthe article aleeady refered to above, argues thatthe elaborate procedures of analysis lading to resynthesis ate superfluous since they aim to recreate the very language behaviour that was the starting point of the analysis. In that case, he says, why not base language earingdiretly on the lnguage corps from which the analysis was derived? There are ways of exploiting the language found Ina corpus that could lead to effective lsrrng, However the analysis that underies a grammatical syllabus snot often in practice based on ‘an identifiable corpus. Is more likely to be based on existing descriptions ofthe language and on what, by common consent, ‘course producers have actually included in language learning materials and syllabuses. If one shares Reibl's view, therefor how does one choose the corps of authentic language material on which the leering i tobe bas? The time avaiable for learning i shor and it does not seem reasonable to suggest that a random exposure to language will suffice. The issue of selection wil stil have tobe faced and if one does not want to use exter thi stem from grammatical portant grammatical forms are included and because ican cover all Kinds of language functions, not only those chat typically oceur in certain situations. "The proces of deciding wht to teach is based on consideration of | what the lamers should most usefully be able to communicate inthe orig language, When thi established, we can decile what ar the sans for each type of communication. The Tabelng for the lesrning units now prinaniy semantic, hough there sno reason why the structural realization should not also be indicated, A general language course will concern itself with those ‘concepts and functions tht are Hkely to be of wiest value. In the Same way, in the provision ofa course Fora moe speiliznd language Jeamer, the liitation is onthe types of content that he needs to express and not onthe numberof structures he neds to krow or the ‘ation n which he wil find himself n short, the lnultic content ‘planned according to the semantle demands of tbe leaner. "Athough,a€ we tall ce nthe final chapter, the eats that are ‘sed in establishing a grammatical syllabus need not be wholly tel ‘vant in the creation ofa notional yas, thre is no reason to ‘expect that what we identify 35 being semantically necessary tothe leamer will coincide with what i grammatically the most simple, the most regular or the easiest to lar. To put it nother way, the forms ‘that ae neoded to expres the semantic neds will be extremely varied. yen fone ould identify asimpl’ need, ts unikely that there ‘would be a simple’ form that met it, The learning material derived froma notional syllabus wil, therefor, almost inevitably Be \inguistically heterogeneous. Although we will probably choose to ‘ote parila forms Trim this ich nguistic enviornment fo ensure adequate laming of the grammatical systems, thee willbe no ordered texposice tothe grammar ofthe langage. A notional s/abus i, therefore, tobe clasiied as an example ofan analytic approach to Janguage teaching ‘We can now te the position ofthe notional syllabus in relstion to other forms of syllabus design, We have also seen what considerations pe exact men which the terme wed here expe on p23 20° Notional Sylebuses ‘motivate the proposal that we should approach syllabus construction fom sernantics. The remainder ofthis sty it devoted toa more

    You might also like