Approaches to

Syllabus Design


What is the purpose of a syllabus?


What is in a syllabus? What are the
components of a syllabus?

Content
Behavioral or learning objectives
Specifications of how content will be taught
How content will be evaluated

which definition of language will be assumed

by the instruction and what choice of linguistic
content will form the basis and the
organization for the instruction (Krahnke,
1987)

method vs. approach

vs. design vs.

procedure
Method

Approach

Cover term for all language

teachingfrom theory to
practice

Divided into theories of

language and theories of
learning

Design

Procedure

Selection of content (roles of

materials, learners, and
teachers)

Specifics of the activities that

are actually used in the
classroom
Richards and Rodgers,

Approaches to
syllabus
design

Synthetic vs. analytic

A priori vs. A
posteriori
Cyclical vs. linear

Synthetic approach

Language is assumed as having discrete parts

to be taught separately and step-by-step.
Acquisition is a gradual accumulation of the
parts until the whole structure has been built
up.
Learning is facilitated by presenting predigested pieces of language (Wilkins, 1976)
Syllabus is an inventory of grammatical
structures.
The goal is accuracy in form.


Criteria in choosing structures (Wilkins, 1976)

Simplicity
Regularity
Frequency
Contrastive difficulty

Problems with
syntheticapproach
Language learning is not complete when
grammatical units are mastered.
Forms are to be taught as they are not for the
value they have for the learners.
Gives the impression that form and meaning
are in a one-to-one relation. There is lack of
situational relevance.
Synthesis is not automatic for learners.

Analytic approach

A list of purposes for language learning and

the means to meet those purposes.
Task-based approach to creating meaning and
fluency contexts.
Language is presented as whole chunks
without linguistic interference or control.

Problems with
analytic
approach
It is difficult to express what it is that people
do with language.
Accuracy may be compromised.
The process of limitation and selection can
take place in choosing what structure can be
extracted from texts/language performance.

Approaches to
syllabus
design

Synthetic vs. analytic

A priori vs. A
posteriori
Cyclical vs. linear

A priori approach

Syllabus is designed before the course starts

complete with materials and activities to
cover.
Objectives are pre-determined.

A posteriori approach

Syllabus emerges from the course as it

progresses.
The teacher takes note what has been covered
and what has been achieved.
Community Language Learning uses a
posteriori syllabus.

Approaches to
syllabus
design

Synthetic vs. analytic

A priori vs. A
posteriori
Cyclical vs. linear

Linear approach

Syllabus adds new blocks of information

creating a greater whole.
Assumes that the more blocks are added in
succession, the more learning (Murphy, 2013)
Topics are arranged in order and learners
cannot move on to the next topic unless
previous topic is learned.

Cyclical approach

Also called recycling.

Based from the fact that language acquisition
is an organic, natural process.
Items/topics are repeated in progressing depth
and learners are expected to always
remember them.

Six types of
Language
Syllabus

Structural
Notional/Functional
Skill-based
Task-based
Content-based
Situational
Combined/integrated syllabus

Structural Syllabus

Structural Syllabus

Content is a collection of form and structures

of the language being taught.
Analysis of language and language behavior is
done at the beginning and teaching is
presentation of the analysis to the learner.
Assumes that structure of the language is
most useful and important.
It is synthetic.

Positive
characteristics

Problems on selecting content is minimal.

Structure/form is the most general component
of communicative competence.
Content is easy to describethere is no
confusion in terms or concept.
Evaluation of learning and feedback on
accuracy is easy.
Syllabus is value- and culture-free (Krahnke,
1987)

Drawbacks

How do you arrange the topics?

Problems on usability, applicability, and
transferability of structural knowledge.
Learners are misled to thinking they learned
the language when form is mastered.
Instruction can be limiting.

References

An ELT Notebook. (n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2016, from

http://eltnotebook.blogspot.com/2015/10/an-elt-glossary-priori-syllabus.html
Community Language Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2016, from
http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative methods/community language teaching.htm
Darabi, M. (2014, November). The effect of linear versus cyclical approach on language
proficiency of iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language Learning and
Applied Linguistics World, 7(3), 617-634. Retrieved from
http://ijllalw.org/finalversion7346.pdf
J. R., & Rodgers, T. (1982, June). Method: Approach, design, and procedure. TESOL
Quarterly, 16(2), 153-168. doi:10.2307/3586789
Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Murphy, R. S. (2013). Critical Review of Five Major L2 Syllabus Designs. Center of
Fundamental Education (Kiban Center) Kiyo, Journal of the University of Kitakyushu, 15,
169-221.
Wilkins, D. A. (1976). Notional syllabuses: A taxonomy and its relevance to foreign
language curriculum development. London: Oxford University Press.