Syllabus Planning Essay Example

Syllabus Planning Essay Syllabus Design Syllabus: A syllabus is an expression of opinion on the nature of language and learning; it acts as a guide for both teacher and learner by providing some goals to be attained. Hutchinson and Waters (1987:80) define syllabus as follows: At its simplest level a syllabus can be described as a statement of what is to be learnt. It reflects language and linguistic performance. This is a rather traditional interpretation of syllabus focusing on outcomes rather than process. However, a syllabus can also be seen as a summary of the content to which learners will be exposed (Yalden. 1987). It is seen as an approximation of what will be taught and that it cannot accurately predict what will be learnt A language teaching syllabus involves the integration of subject matter and linguistic matter. Difference between Syllabus and Curriculum Curriculum is wider term as compared with syllabus. Curriculum covers all the activities and arrangements made by the institution through out the academic year to facilitate the learners and the instructors. Where as Syllabus is limited to particular subject of a particular class. Syllabus Design To design a syllabus is to decide what gets taught and in what order. We will write a custom essay sample on Syllabus Planning specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Syllabus Planning specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Syllabus Planning specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer For this reason, the theory of language underlying the language teaching method will play a major role in determining what syllabus should be adopted. Theory of learning also plays an important part in determining the kind of syllabus used. For example, a syllabus based on the theory of learning evolved by cognitive code teaching would emphasize language forms and whatever explicit descriptive knowledge about those forms. A syllabus based on an acquisition theory of learning, however, would emphasize unanalyzed and carefully selected experiences of the new language. The choice of a syllabus is a major decision in language teaching, and it should be made as consciously and with as much information as possible. There has been much confusion over the years as to what different types of content are possible in language teaching syllabi and as to whether the differences are in syllabus or method. Several distinct types of language teaching syllabi exist, and these different types may be implemented in various teaching situations. TYPES OF SYLLABI Although six different types of language teaching syllabi are treated here as though each occurred purely, but in practice, these types rarely occur independently. Almost all actual language teaching syllabi are combinations of two or more of the types defined here. For a given course, one type of syllabus usually dominates, while other types of content may be combined with it. Furthermore, the six types of syllabi are not entirely distinct from each other. For example, the distinction between skill-based and task-based syllabi may be minimal. In such cases, the distinguishing factor is often the way in which the instructional content is used in the actual teaching procedure. The characteristics, differences, strengths, and weaknesses of individual syllabi are defined as follows: 1:- Product-Oriented Syllabus This kind of syllabuses emphasizes the product of language learning and is prone to approval from an authority. There are three types of syllabus described in the following: (i) The Structural Syllabus Historically, the most prevalent of syllabus type is perhaps the structural or grammatical syllabus in which the selection and grading of the content is based on the complexity and simplicity of grammatical items. The learner is expected to master each structural step and add it to her grammar collection. As such the focus is on the outcomes or the product. One problem facing the syllabus designer pursuing a grammatical order to sequencing input is that the ties connecting the structural items may be rather weak. A more fundamental criticism is that the grammatical syllabus focuses on only one aspect of language, namely grammar, whereas in truth there exist many more aspects of language. Finally, recent research suggests there is a isagreement between the grammar of the spoken and of the written language; raising complications for the grading of content in grammar based syllabuses. (ii) The Situational Syllabus The limitations found in structural approach led to an alternative approach where situational needs are emphasized rather than grammatical units. Here, the principal organizing characteristic is a list of situations which reflects the way language is used in everyday life i. e. outside the classroom. Thus, by linking structural theory to situations the learner is able to grasp the meaning in relevant context. One advantage of the situational Syllabus is that motivation will be heightened since it is learner- rather than subject-centered (Wilkins. 1976). However, a situational syllabus will be limited for students whose needs were not encompassed by the situations in the syllabus. This dissatisfaction led Wilkins to describe notional and communicative categories which had a significant impact on syllabus design. (iii) The Notional/Functional Syllabus Wilkins criticism of structural and situational approaches lies in the fact that they answer only the how or when and where of language use (Brumfit and Johnson. 1979:84). Instead, he enquires what it is they communicate through language Thus, the starting point for a syllabus is the communicative purpose and conceptual meaning of language i. e. notions and functions, as opposed to only the grammatical items and situational elements. In order to establish objectives of such a syllabus, the needs of the learners will have to be analyzed on the base of communication need. Consequently, needs analysis has an association with notional/functional syllabuses. White (1988:77) claims that language functions do not usually occur in isolation and there are also difficulties of selecting and grading function and form. The above approaches belong to the product-oriented category of syllabuses. An alternative path to Syllabus Design would be to adopt process oriented principles, which assume that language can be learnt experientially as opposed to the step-by-step procedure of the synthetic approach. 2:- Process-Oriented Syllabuses Process-Oriented Syllabuses are developed as a result of a sense of failure in product-oriented courses to enhance communicative language skills. Syllabus is a process rather than a product. That is, focus is not on what the student will have accomplished on completion of the program, but on the specification of learning tasks and activities that s/he will undertake during the course. (i)Procedural/Task-Based Syllabus Prabhus (1979) Bangalore Project is a classic example of a procedural syllabus. Here, the question concerning what becomes subordinate to the question concerning how. The focus shifts from the linguistic element to the educational, with an emphasis on learning or learner. Within such a framework the selection, ordering and grading of content is no longer wholly significant for the syllabus designer. Arranging the Syllabus around tasks such as information- and opinion-gap activities, it was hoped that the learner would perceive the language subconsciously whilst consciously concentrating on solving the meaning behind the tasks. There appears to be an indistinct boundary between this approach and that of language teaching methodology. A task-based syllabus assumes that speaking a language is a skill best perfected through practice and interaction, and uses tasks and activities to encourage learners to use the language communicatively in order to achieve a purpose. Tasks must be relevant to the real world language needs of the student. That is, the underlying learning theory of task based and communicative language teaching seems to suggest that activities in which language is employed to complete meaningful tasks, enhances learning. (ii)Learner-Led Syllabus The notion of basing a syllabus on how learners learn language was proposed by Breen and Candlin (1984). Here the emphasis lies on the learner, who it is hoped will be involved in the implementation of the syllabus design. By being fully aware of the course they are studying, it is believed that their interest and motivation will increase, coupled with the positive effect of nurturing the skills required to learn. However, as suggested earlier, a predetermined syllabus provides support and guidance for the teacher and should not be so easily dismissed. Critics have suggested that a learner-led syllabus seems radical and utopian in that it will be difficult to follow as the direction of the syllabus will be largely the responsibility of the learners. This leads to the final syllabus design to be examined ; the proportional syllabus as suggested by Yalden (1987). (iii)The Proportional Syllabus The proportional syllabus basically attempts to develop an overall competence†. It consists of a number of elements within the main theme playing a linking role through the units. This theme is designated by the learners. It is expected initially that form will be of central value, but later, the focus will turn towards interactional components. The syllabus is designed to be dynamic, not static, with sufficient opportunity for feedback and flexibility. The shift from form to interaction can occur at any time and is not limited to a particular stratum of learners. As Yalden observes, it is important for a syllabus to indicate explicitly what will be taught, not what will be learned. This practical approach with its focus on flexibility and spiral method of language sequencing leading to the recycling of language, seems relevant for learners who lack exposure to the target language beyond the classroom. Practical Guidelines to Syllabus Choice and Design It is clear that no single type of content is appropriate for all teaching settings, and the needs and conditions of each setting are so particular that specific recommendations for combination are not possible. However, a set of guidelines for the process is provided below. Steps in preparing a practical language teaching Syllabus Choice: 1. Determine, to the extent possible, what outcomes are desired for the students in the instructional program i. e. what the students should be able to do as a result of the instruction. 2. Rank the syllabus types presented here as to their likelihood of leading to the outcomes desired. Arrange the six types with preference you going to give to each type. 3. Evaluate available resources for teaching, needs analysis, materials choice and production and in training for teachers. 4. Rank the syllabi relative to available resources. That is, determine what syllabus types would be the easiest to implement within available resources. . Compare the lists made under Nos. 2 and 4. Making as few adjustments to the earlier list as possible, produce a new list of ranking based on the availability of resources. 6. Designate one or two syllabus types as dominant and one or two as secondary. 7. Review the question of combination or integration of syllabus types and determine how combinations will be a chieved and in what proportion. In making practical decisions about syllabus design, one must take into consideration all the possible factors that might affect the teachability of a particular syllabus. By starting with an examination of each syllabus type, tailoring the choice and integration of the different types according to local needs, one may find a principled and practical solution to the problem of appropriateness and effectiveness in syllabus design. Suggested Steps for Planning Syllabus: †¢Develop a well-grounded rationale for your course. †¢Decide what you want students to be able to do as a result of taking your course, and how their work will be appropriately assessed. †¢Define and delimit course content. †¢Structure your students’ active involvement in learning. Identify and develop resources. †¢Compose your syllabus with a focus on student learning. Suggested Principles for Designing a Syllabus that Fosters Critical Thinking: †¢Critical thinking is a learnable skill; the instructor and class fellows are resources in developing critical thinking skills. †¢Problems, questions, or issues are the point of entry into the subject a nd a source of motivation for nonstop inquiry. †¢Successful courses balance the challenge to think critically with supporting students’’developmental needs. †¢Courses should be assignment centered rather than text and lecture centered. Goals, methods and evaluation emphasize using content rather than simply acquiring it. †¢Students are required to formulate their ideas in writing or other appropriate means. †¢Students should collaborate to learn and to stretch their thinking, for example, in pair problem solving and small group work. †¢Courses that teach problem-solving skills nurture students’ metacognitive abilities. †¢The developmental needs of students are acknowledged and used as information in the design of the course. Teachers in these courses make standards explicit and then help students learn how to achieve them. Syllabus Functions: Establishes an early point of contact and connection between student and instructor †¢Describes your beliefs about educational purposes †¢Acquaints students with the logistics of the syllabus †¢Contains collected handouts †¢Defines student responsibilities for successful course work †¢Describes active learning †¢Helps st udents to assess their readiness for your syllabus †¢Sets the course in a broader context for learning †¢Provides a conceptual framework †¢Describes available learning resources †¢Communicates the role of technology in the course †¢Can improve the effectiveness of student note-taking Can include material that supports learning outside the classroom †¢Can serve as a learning contract Checklist Syllabus Design: †¢Title Page †¢Table of Contents †¢Instructor Information †¢Letter to the Student †¢Purpose of the Course †¢Course Description †¢Course and Unit Objectives †¢Resources †¢Readings †¢Course Calendar †¢Course Requirements †¢Evaluation †¢Grading Procedures †¢How to Use the Syllabus †¢How to Study for This Course †¢Content Information †¢Learning Tools Course Objectives: †¢What will the students know and be able to do as a result of having taken this course? What le vels of cognitive thinking are required from students to engage in? †¢What learning skills will the students develop in the course? †¢Instructional Approaches: †¢Given the kind of learning Id like to encourage and foster, what kinds of instructional interactions need to occur? Teacher-student, student-student, student-peer tutor? †¢What kinds of instructional approaches are most conducive to helping students accomplish set learning objectives? †¢How will classroom interactions be facilitated? In-class? Out-of-class? Online? Electronic discussion? Newsgroups? Chatroom? Course Requirements, Assignments: †¢What will students be expected to do in the course? †¢What kinds of assignments, tests do most appropriately reflect the course objectives? †¢Do assignments and tests bring forth the kind of learning I want to foster? Assignments (frequency, timing, sequence)? Tests? Quizzes? Exams? Papers? Special projects? Laboratories? Field trips? Learning logs? Journals? Oral presentations? Research on the web? Web publishing? Electronic databases? †¢What kinds of skills do the students need to have in order to be successful in the course? Computer literacy? Research skills? Writing skills? Communication skills? Conflict resolution skills? Familiarity with software? Course Policies: †¢What is expected of the student? Attendance? Participation? Student responsibility in their learning? Contribution to group work? Missed assignments? Late work? Extra credit? Academic dishonesty? Makeup policy? Classroom management issues? Laboratory safety? Grading, Evaluation: †¢How will the students work be graded and evaluated? Number of tests? In-class? Take-home? Point value? Proportion of each test toward final grade? Grading scale? How is the final grade determined? Drop lowest grade? †¢How do students receive timely feedback on their performance? Instructor? Self-assessment? Peer review? Peer tutors? Opportunities for improvement? Ungraded assignments? Texts/Resources/Readings/Supplies: †¢What kinds of materials will be used during the course? Electronic databases? Electronic Course Reserve? Course Webpage? Software? Simulations ? Laboratory equipment? †¢What kinds of instructional technologies will be used? †¢Course Calendar: †¢In what sequence will the content be taught? When are major assignments due? Fieldtrips? Guestspeaker? Schedule for Term Examination? Result? Vacations? †¢Study Tips/Learning Resources: †¢How will the student be most successful in the course? †¢What resources are available? Online quiz generator? Study guides? Lecture notes online? Lecture notes on reserve in library? Guestspeaker to explain/demonstrate online resources? TA? Peer tutors? Study groups? Academic Services Center? Writing Center? Evaluation of online resources? Citation of web resources? Student Feedback on Instruction: †¢Anonymous suggestion box on the web and E-mail. Student feedback at midterm for instructional improvement purposes. †¢End-of-term student feedback. Supplement to departmental student feedback form. Bibliography 1. Brumfit, C. J. and Johnson, K. (1979) The Communicative Approach To Language Teaching. Oxford University Press. 2. Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987) English For Specific Purposes: A Learning Centred Approach. Cambridge University Press. 3. L ong, R. W. and Russell, G. (1999) Student Attitudinal Change over an Academic Year. The Language Teacher. Cambridge University Press. 4. Nunan, D. (1988) Syllabus Design. Oxford University Press. 5. Prabhu, N. S. (1987) Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford University Press. 6. Richards, J. C. and Rodgers, T. S. (1986) Approaches And Methods In Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. 7. White, R. V. (1988) The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation And Management. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 8. Widdowson, H. G. (1978) Teaching Language As Communication. Oxford University Press.. 9. Wilkins, D. A. (1976) Notional Syllabuses. Oxford University Press. 10. Yalden, J. (1987) Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.

A Biographical Sketch of William Morris Davis

A Biographical Sketch of William Morris Davis William Morris Davis is often called the Father of American Geography for his work in not only helping to establish geography as an academic discipline but also for his advancement of physical geography and the development of geomorphology. Life and Career Davis was born in Philadelphia in 1850. At the age of 19, he earned his bachelors degree from Harvard University and one year later earned his Masters degree in engineering. Davis then spent three years working at Argentinas meteorological observatory and subsequently returned to Harvard to study geology and physical geography. In 1878, Davis was appointed an instructor in physical geography at Harvard and by 1885 became a full professor. Davis continued to teach at Harvard until his retirement in 1912. Following his retirement, he occupied several visiting scholar positions at universities across the United States. Davis died in Pasadena, California in 1934. Geography William Morris Davis was very excited about the discipline of geography; he worked hard to increase its recognition. In the 1890s, Davis was an influential member of a committee that helped to establish geography standards in the public schools. Davis and the committee felt that geography needed to be treated as a general science in primary and secondary schools and these ideas were adopted. Unfortunately, after a decade of the new geography, it slipped back to being rote knowledge of place names and eventually disappeared into the bowels of social studies. Davis also helped to build geography up at the university level. In addition to training some of Americas foremost geographers of the twentieth century (such as Mark Jefferson, Isaiah Bowman, and Ellsworth Huntington), Davis helped to found the Association of American Geographers (AAG). Recognizing the need for an academic organization composed of academics trained in geography, Davis met with other geographers and formed the AAG in 1904. Davis served as the AAGs first president in 1904 and was reelected in 1905, and ultimately served a third term in 1909. Though Davis was very influential in the development of geography as a whole, he is probably best known for his work in geomorphology. Geomorphology Geomorphology is the study of the earths landforms. William Morris Davis founded this subfield of geography. Though at his time the traditional idea of the development of landforms was through the great biblical flood, Davis and others began to believe that other factors were responsible for shaping the earth. Davis developed a theory of landform creation and erosion, which he called the geographical cycle. This theory is more commonly known as the cycle of erosion, or more properly, the geomorphic cycle. His theory explained that mountains and landforms are created, mature, and then become old. He explained that the cycle begins with the uplift of mountains. Rivers and streams begin to create V-shaped valleys among the mountains (the stage called youth). During this first stage, the relief is steepest and most irregular. Over time, the streams are able to carve wider valleys (maturity) and then begin to meander, leaving only gently rolling hills (old age). Finally, all that is left is a flat, level plain at the lowest elevation possible (called the base level.) This plain was called by Davis a peneplain, which means almost a plain for a plain is actually a completely flat surface). Then, rejuvenation occurs and there is another uplift of mountains and the cycle continues. Though Davis theory is not entirely accurate, it was quite revolutionary and outstanding at its time and helped to modernize physical geography and create the field of geomorphology. The real world is not quite as orderly as Davis cycles and,  certainly, erosion occurs during the uplift process. However, Davis message was communicated quite well to other scientists through the excellent sketches and illustrations that were included in Davis publications. In all, Davis published over 500 works though he never earned his Ph.D. Davis was certainly one of the greatest academic geographers of the century. He is not only responsible for that which he accomplished during his lifetime, but also for the outstanding work done across geography by his disciples.