Richards chapter 6 syllabus

Sheila Wallace
Ling 611
Richards Ch6 page 153-165

Syllabus
Grammatical- This type of syllabus is a structural syllabus that centers around grammar typically used for general language courses for beginning level learners. The positive aspect this type of syllabus addresses the sufficient time needed to support the teaching time available and arranges items in sequence to help learning. In addition, it addresses the productive range of grammatical items that supports the development of basic communication skills. The negative aspect to this type of syllabus is that it only addresses partial dimensions of the target language, does not follow a naturalistic language acquisition, focuses on sentences rather than the natural discourse, focus is on form rather than meaning and does not address communicative skills. This syllabus is not similar to my course design as grammar is not the focus of the general course outline.

Lexical- this type of syllabus attempts to increase the learner’s vocabulary acquisition designed in different levels. The positive aspect to this type of syllabus addresses the lexical levels of the target language and attempts to put vocabulary development into levels from and elementary level to advanced levels. Today, this type of syllabus is one strand of a more comprehensive syllabus. A form of this is included in my course design as it addresses the lexical development of language learners but is not a central focus.

Functional- this type of syllabus centers around communicative functions (requesting, complaining, suggesting, agreeing). It is believed that language competence is increased as students mastery increases in individual language functions. This type of syllabus is well known for its comprehensive approach to language teaching (communication) rather than focused on grammar. This type of syllabus can be used concurrently with other content types (vocabulary, grammar) and is well known for its domains on developing skills in listening and speaking. This type of syllabus matches my course design as the focus is developing language functions in different authentic situations (public service announcements, podcasts, etc.). The negative aspects identified for this type of syllabus includes its lack of criteria for selecting or grading language functions, it fails to identify the processes of communication at a higher level, breaks down language ability into components that are generally taught separately, uses a phrase book approach, and learners often have considerable gaps in language development .

Situational- this syllabus centers around language needs for different settings such as the airport, store, hotel, etc. Its course design is arranged around language that is needed for specific situations or settings. The positive aspect to language teaching in this style allows for immediate use of the language in different functions and its use is practical in nature. This style of language learning is criticized for it is too specific in its situation making it difficult to use what is learned in other situations, it lacks fluidity to transfer to other situations, often phrase books are used, and grammatical gaps often occur. I use this approach somewhat when I prepare my students to present specific language functions such as speaking to inform about a specific topic.

Content based- this syllabus focuses on topics and themes is heavily based on content rather than grammar, functions, or situations. The positive aspect to this syllabus is that several different strands of syllabus can be incorporated whether it is focused on situations, language functions, or grammar. This approach incorporates its content to given situations and the language needed for that function. This form encourages comprehension, is meaningful, uses content for specific skills, addresses student needs and provides motivation through the use of authentic material while using the four skills. This approach to language teaching is what I use often times as content is what drives what language is needed for different situations/functions. Issues that arise with this type of teaching is centered around how themes, topics, and content are decided, the balance between content and grammar is not clear, teachers need to be competent to teach a content based style, and the basis for assessment is not clear.

Competency based- this syllabus is specific to situations and activities. Essential skills, knowledge, and attitudes for particular tasks and activities are required for effective performance of the language needed in that setting. This type of approach is advantages in social survival situations and work environment. The disadvantages for this type of learning is that it is limited to specific situations where the given language function is needed and does not transfer to other language situations. This type is used in my classroom to a degree. For example, school survival language is taught (asking to go to the office, bathroom, sharpening a pencil, using the telephone and etc.).

Skills syllabus- this approach is used for the purposes such as reading, writing, listening, and speaking where mastery of specific skills (and sub-skills) are required for specific tasks or activities. The advantage to this is that it is focused on the needed performance to the specific tasks which provides the necessary framework for designing courses and teaching materials. This approach identifies language skills needed for specific outcome. The disadvantage includes the lack of a serious basis for determining language skills and does not develop skills needed on a more global and integrated level. I use aspects of this approach in such task as public service announcement through the radio or newspaper.

Task-based- The second language acquisition process is driven by tasks or activities with a given outcome or goal. This type of syllabus is designed around specific tasks to facilitate second language acquisition. Grammar teaching is not a central focus and the tasks are designed to motivate learners though meaningful activities. Some criticism with this approach is that some task tend to be too broad, the design and selection of task are unclear, and fluency is overemphasized over accuracy. I would like to know more about this type of approach as it seems to encourage language learning through meaningful activities and the assessment of what is being learned is through the final product.

Text based- this approach is centered on texts and extended discourse and is an integrated approach by combining different types of syllabuses. It builds on a five part cycle that includes building the context, modeling and deconstructing, joint construction, independent construction, and linking related texts. The disadvantages are that it may be impractical in may situations and that too much emphasis is place on specific skills rather than on proficiency. I don’t use this approach.

Integrated syllabus- This syllabus combines several different syllabus strands. Several different levels are used (like grammar and skills linked to task and topics) where they are integrated. I use a form of this syllabus in my class where different topics and subtopics are integrated (listening, reading, writing, and speaking). While the advantages for this approach includes an integrated approach, the disadvantages are that skills and subskills can be further narrowed, and the complex goals of the program need to be clear on the types of instructional content to be used. I use a form of this approach but am not entirely competent in the developmental aspect of language teaching through an integrated approach.