Curriculum & Material for International Journal -myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theCurriculum Material Designing for International Journal. Answer: Importance of syllabus in teaching English language is of intriguing importance as it outlines the knowledge to be imparted along with keeping a focus on the procedures applied in the teaching process. The syllabus takes both the teacher and students or readers to through the entire structure of the curriculum aiming to accomplish some skill to be acquired. The theories related to linguistic and language are both covered in syllabus design that further gets utilized in classroom teaching atmosphere. Based on different factors underlying the need or purpose the syllabus can take form of different types like situational, skill-based, formal, multi-dimensional, task-based, process, learn-led, proportional, content based, notional or functional and lexical. Not a single individual type of syllabus is sufficient enough to consolidate the teaching process. Rather a combination of various aspects of syllabus structuring can bring out best teaching method as well as make the syllabus teachab le (McGee Reis, 2012). Taking into account different characteristics of English language syllabus two broader category of syllabus can be identified: Product oriented syllabus: The syllabus that is formed keeping orientation toward product, often focuses more on the outcome of a learning process has been conducted. The syllabus initiates after the learning process has taken place already. Some of the example of product based syllabus method is grammatical, lexical, functional-notional syllabus type since they focus on outcomes that having basis in grammatical, lexical and notional approach (Van den Akker, et al., 2012). This type of syllabus makes an emphasis on the product or outcome of the program that has aimed to impart knowledge. Thus, it outlines the entire impact of the program which is more of inclined toward structural approach. Structural approach focuses on selection and grading of content having its basis on how simple or complex the grammatical items are. Each of the structural steps are mastered by learners and that further is added to the collection of grammar he has. There are problems to be found in the grammar of spoken and writing tone of language which is identified and incorporated into the approach while framing the syllabus. The situational approach under this kind of syllabus focuses on the needs generated on the situation basis. This includes the various types and ways of behavioral signs and language skills are used outside the premise of classroom. This situation based design of the syllabus draws links to the situations from structural theories. Notional or functional app roach highlights the importance of concepts and their meaning. It helps greatly in communicating purposes. The approach concerns most what are the needs of the learners and operates in line of that in order to create effective knowledge outcome. Process-oriented syllabus: Process oriented syllabus is just the reflection of its name with having primary focus on the processes and skills approaches associated and implemented in learning process. Here the designer of the syllabus puts more emphasis on how the student and teachers compete their tasks regarding information collection, idea organization, making drafts and get a revision of them in contrast to the focus made on notes and reports compositions (Van den Akker, et al., 2012). The syllabus structure outlines factors like pedagogy, learner and learning as core of the design. This attempts to make focus on encouraging students to practice, interact and use language following strong communication (Creswell, 2013).. This type of syllabus focus on learn-led and proportional approach (Richards Rodgers, 2014) . While the former makes attempt to highlight the process of learning by the learners the latter attempts to develop overall competence creating dynamicity along with flexibility. The learn led approach lacks aim but the proportional approach always have link at the core with units taught (Cullen, Harris Hill, 2012). The best outcome in terms of absorption of knowledge gain lies in the clarity and care adopted in designing the language curriculum. Array of influences and directions has been reflected in language teaching with major focus being on corpus research, task based instruction and common European framework. The development of second language has been turning complex with the advent of communication based language teaching since 1980s (Richards Rodgers, 2014) . The communicative intention now takes the attention more towards competence level build through communication than focusing on the grammar. The development can be traced through three different teaching programs approached in multiple ways keeping in mind the difference of curriculum designs. These three approaches are forward, central and backward approach having the basis of difference based on the input, processing and output of the designs (Abbaspour Zare, 2013). Forward: The approach initiates the program with focusing on the planning of syllabus and structuring the methodology. This is further followed by the assessment of the outcomes emanating from learning process. The major tradition of the English language curriculum development in forward design focuses on resolving regarding the problems in content and sequencing of the syllabus as the first step to taken care of. This design has its basis on the assumptions of linearity among input, process and output. This requires decisions regarding methodology and structure of output to become secondary and issues of solving instructional contents are primary focus. The design of the curriculum is done following sequencing manner also know as waterfall model. This model suggests how the inputs of one stage are derived from the output of other stages. As per the traditional approach followed in syllabus, development involves subject matter understanding of one as the core of the initiation with planning. It requires one to start with the field or arena of subject based knowledge one is going to impart others. It can include wide variety of subjects ranging from marketing, business, and contemporary history of Europe to literature of different language. Next comes the selection of concept base, skills, knowledge requirements that consolidate while shaping the field of knowledge (Richards, 2013). This is done so as to make the course content depend and develop around it. Assessment of the learner or student has its basis on referencing norms. This implies on the gradation made upon the students following single scale. The expectation is to derive scattered range of scores conforming to pre-set distribution. An example elaborates the concept lucidly. Suppose a teacher makes a choice of the topic that he decides to teach. Then he finds out a proper resource for that. Then he builds the instructional methods based on the chosen topic and resources. Lastly the teacher structures an essay question in order to conduct an assessment. Central: This approach focuses more on procedures and methodology followed in the class room. This does not include the issues in the syllabus with detailed specification. The design reflects the process between initiation and ending of programs reflecting various innovative methods. In this approach the curriculum design and development starts with making selection of the activities regarding methods and techniques of teaching. It does not involve the elaboration of detailed syllabus on language and outcomes specific to any language program. Initially a primary focus is vested upon choosing roper methodology and then issues related to input, process and output are analyzed and incorporated into the action. The model is greatly fixated on the process of learning. Since the emphasis is more on the discussion, critically thinking ability and decision making capability; it creates a fuzz in being able to make the assessment. The time of them can be stated but not the measurement regarding the in tensity can be captured as these are subjective skills. The central design is known as learner based method since greater emphasis is on the active learning process leading to individual achievement of the students (Richards, 2013). This method is highly essential in developing syllabi in humanities and social science subjects. The subjects like art, public speaking requires creative contemplation that makes extensive use of central design as the course requirement follows a subjective nature. Thus focusing on the subjective skills development plays important goal in central design of the syllabus in language curriculum. Backward: The educational curriculum design that sets goal prior choosing the methods or instructions and ways of making assessment. The backward design starts with specifying the outcomes from learning program and decisions made regarding methodology. Based on the outcomes the development of syllabus is made. Specification of outputs from learning process is used further to develop the input and instructional processes. This approach makes a start following. Statement of expected or desires result. Based on that teaching activities found appropriate are derived. This method has been prominent in developing curriculum in recent years. The general education structure of the syllabus traditionally employs this approach. This approach is also known as end-mean approach. The process of this design consists of needs diagnosis, objective formulation, content selection, content organization, learning experience selection and its organization, determination of the evaluation focusing on devising ways to complete the task (Richards, 2013). The biggest advantage of the method students dont get lost with too much factual details This makes them keep up the zeal of studying the base topic. The instructions designed under this follows global context than daily contextual activities. The assessments are designed to be conducted prior the planning of the lesson takes place. This leads the student toward appropriateness of their knowledge, which they require to know specifically. The starting point of this design is to become familiar with the grades in the curriculum that would be given to students. The second stage involves planning of curriculum and designing backward in order to come up with proper assessment techniques. The assessment involves the process that help student locate their position in terms of improvement and gaining the knowledge (Richards Rodgers, 2014) . This also identifies how hooked the students are with the topic. The opportunity provided to students to refine their work and knowledge along with allowing them to make evaluation is prime focus of the assessment process included in backward design of curriculum development. Reference: Abbaspour, E., Zare, J. (2013). A critical review of recent trends in second language syllabus design and curriculum development.International Journal,2(2), 63-82. Boschman, F., McKenney, S., Voogt, J. (2014). Understanding decision making in teachers curriculum design approaches.Educational technology research and development,62(4), 393-416. Creswell, J. W. (2013).Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. Cullen, R., Harris, M., Hill, R. R. (2012).The learner-centered curriculum: Design and implementation. John Wiley Sons. Dempster, J. A., Benfield, G., Francis, R. (2012). An academic development model for fostering innovation and sharing in curriculum design.Innovations in Education and Teaching International,49(2), 135-147. Ismagilova, L. R., Polyakova, O. V. (2014). The problem of the syllabus design within the competence approach based on the course English for Master Degree Students in Economics (advanced level).Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,152, 1095-1100. McGee, P., Reis, A. (2012). Blended course design: A synthesis of best practices.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,16(4), 7-22. Rahman, M. (2015). English for Specific Purposes (ESP): A Holistic Review.Universal Journal of Educational Research,3(1), 24-31. Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design.Relc Journal,44(1), 5-33. Richards, J. C., Rodgers, T. S. (2014).Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press. Wu, Y. (2012). An Empirical Study on Needs Analysis of College Business English Course.International Education Studies,5(2), 216-221. Rosenblatt, H. J. (2013).Systems analysis and design. Cengage Learning. Van den Akker, J., Branch, R. M., Gustafson, K., Nieveen, N., Plomp, T. (Eds.). (2012).Design approaches and tools in education and training. Springer Science Business Media.