Designing a task based speaking syllabus for elementary english majored students of a university in ha noi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES

VŨ THANH LOAN

DESIGNING A TASK-BASED SPEAKING SYLLABUS
FOR THE ELEMENTARY ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS
OF A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI
(Thiết kế chƣơng trình dạy kỹ năng nói theo nhiệm vụ
cho sinh viên chuyên ngành tiếng Anh trình độ sơ cấp
của một trƣờng đại học ở Hà Nội)

MA THESIS

Major

: English Teaching Methodology

Code

: 8140231.01

HANOI, 2018


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

VŨ THANH LOAN

DESIGNING A TASK-BASED SPEAKING SYLLABUS
FOR THE ELEMENTARY ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS
OF A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI
(Thiết kế chƣơng trình dạy kỹ năng nói theo nhiệm vụ
cho sinh viên chuyên ngành tiếng Anh trình độ sơ cấp
của một trƣờng đại học ở Hà Nội)

MA THESIS

Major

: English Teaching Methodology

Code

: 8140231.01

Supervisor : Dr. Hoang Ngoc Tue

HANOI, 2018


DECLARATION
I hereby certify that the M.A thesis entitled “Designing a Task-based
Speaking syllabus for elementary English majored students at a University in Cau Giay
district Hanoi” is a presentation of my original research work for the Degree of
Master of Arts at the University, and that this thesis has not been published or
submitted for any degree at any other universities or tertiary institutions. Wherever
contributions of others are involved, every effort is made to indicate this clearly,

with due reference to the literature, and acknowledgement of collaborative research
and discussions.

Approved by Supervisor Hanoi, 2018 Signature
(Signature and full name) M.A Student,

Vu Thanh Loan
Date: …………………………………….

iii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am greatly indebted to Dr. Hoang Ngoc Tue, my supervisor, to whom I
wish to extend my sincere gratitude for his guidance, constructive criticisms,
valuable suggestions and encouragement, without which the thesis might not have
been completed.
I would also like to express my gratitude to all my lecturers at the Faculty of
Post Graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies – VNU
for their useful lectures, comments, and suggestions.
Special thanks are due to all the English staff and the first year English
majors of Y. University for their contribution to the data collection and their
constructive suggestions for this research.
Finally, I owe the completion of this study to my beloved family for their
endless support, patience and understanding.

iv

ABSTRACT
This thesis was conducted in an attempt to investigate the gaps between the
current speaking 1 syllabus and the first year elementary English students‟ demand
at Y.U, in the hope of designing a more appropriate syllabus to teach speaking skill
to suit students‟ level. To achieve this aim, the study first (1) looked at the current
speaking skill 1 course for first year students majoring in English at Y.U to see if it
met the students‟ needs. (2) Then it identified the target needs and learning needs
perceived by teachers and Elementary English majors at Y.U. (3) The final stages
was devoted to proposing a speaking skill 1 syllabus based on need analysis the
study has been conducted in the form of survey research, with the informants of the
study being teachers of English and students of two classes, English Department,
Y.U. The results obtained showed that there is a considerable gap between the target
needs of the current speaking 1 syllabus and the students ‟learning needs. Based on
the findings, the students and teachers prefer to have a new speaking syllabus which
provides them with specified objectives and activities to support in speaking class.
Moreover, the Task-based syllabus was opted for because it is believed to provide
the elementary English students with a number of tasks that illustrate different
situations needed by these learners and help them promote both accuracy and
fluency.
Key words: syllabus design, Task-based approach, speaking skills, target
needs, learning needs

v


LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Product-based vs. Process-based syllabus (adapted from White
(1988: 44)) ........................................................................................ 9
Figure 1.2: Types of Language Syllabus ............................................................. 9

Figure 1.3: Framework for task based syllabus design (Long, 1985) .................. 13
Figure 1.4: Framework for task based syllabus design (Ellis, 2003: 66) ............. 14
Figure 1.5: The Framework of Task-Based Instruction ....................................... 18
Figure 2.1: Table of the National High School Graduation examination‟s
English scores ................................................................................... 30
Figure 2.2: Students' years of learning English ................................................... 35
Figure 3.1: Teachers‟ attitude towards the current textbook ............................... 41
Figure 3.2: Teachers‟ and Students‟ attitudes towards the need of designing a
new Speaking skill 1 Syllabus .......................................................... 42
Figure 3.3: Teachers‟ evaluation towards Students‟ competence at Speaking 1
skill Exams ....................................................................................... 43
Figure 3.4: Teachers‟ opinion about the appropriate number of topics for the
syllabus ............................................................................................. 46
Table 4.1: Task sequencing .................................................................................. 56
List of Tables
Table 3.1: Students‟ attitude towards the current speaking 1 skills course ......... XXXI
Table 3.2: Teachers‟ attitude towards the current textbook ................................. XXXII
Table 3.3: Teachers‟ and Students‟ opinion about the objectives of the
Speaking skill 1 course ....................................................................... XXXIII
Table 3.4: Teachers‟ and students‟ opinions about interesting topics for a
new speaking skill 1 syllabus ............................................................. XXXIV
Table 3.5: Choice of tasks according to Students and Teachers‟
expectation .......................................................................................... XXXV
Table 3.6: ............................................................................................................ XXXVI
Table 3.7: Grammar Structure in the Syllabus ..................................................... XXXVII

vi


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ................................................................................................. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. iv
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES .................................................................... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... vii
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................. 5
1.1. Previous Studies .......................................................................................... 5
1.2. An Overview of Syllabus Design ................................................................ 6
1.2.1. Definition of syllabus ................................................................................ 6
1.2.2. Approaches to Language Syllabus Design (LSD).................................... 7
1.2.3. Types of Syllabus ....................................................................................... 9
1.2.3.1. Structural syllabus .................................................................................. 10
1.2.3.2. Situational syllabus ................................................................................. 10
1.2.3.3. Notional/Functional syllabus .................................................................. 11
1.2.3.4. Skill-based syllabus ................................................................................. 11
1.2.3.5. Content-based syllabus ........................................................................... 11
1.2.3.6. Learner-Centered Syllabus ..................................................................... 12
1.2.3.7. Task-Based syllabus (TBS)...................................................................... 12
1.2.4. Steps in Task –Based Syllabus Design ...................... 13
1.2.4.1. Needs Analysis (NA) ................................................................................ 14
1.2.4.2. Aims and objectives setting ..................................................................... 16
1.2.4.3. Task Selecting and Sequencing ............................................................... 17
1.2.4.4. The framework of TBLT applied in teaching speaking ........................... 18
1.3. An overview of speaking ............................................................................. 19
1.3.1. Definition of speaking ............................................................................... 19
1.3.2. Nature of Speaking.................................................................................... 20
1.3.3. Principles for Teaching Speaking Skills .................................................. 21

vii

1.3.4. Tasks to be employed in speaking syllabus .............................................. 23
1.3.5. Classroom Effective Speaking Activities .................................................. 25
1.3.6. Rationale of choosing Task-Based Speaking Syllabus ........... 27
1.4. Summary ...................................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ....................................................................... 29
2.1. Setting of the Study ..................................................................................... 29
2.1.1. Research context ....................................................................................... 29
2.1.2. The teachers............................................................................................... 29
2.1.3. The learners ............................................................................................... 29
2.1.4. The Syllabus for Speaking skill 1 ............................................................. 31
2.2. Research Methodology................................................................................ 34
2.2.1. The Research Questions............................................................................ 34
2.2.2. The Participants ........................................................................................ 35
2.2.3 The Questionnaire and Procedure ............................................................ 36
2.2.3.1. The Questionnaire ................................................................................... 36
2.2.3.2. Data collection procedures ..................................................................... 38
2.3. Summary ...................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .................................... 40
3.1. Teacher’s and Students’ satisfaction degree towards current
Speaking Syllabus .................................................................................... 40
3.1.1. Students’ attitude towards the current speaking 1 skills course ............. 40
3.1.2. Teachers’ attitude towards the current Speaking 1 textbook .................. 41
3.1.3. Teachers’ evaluation towards Students’ Speaking competence at
Speaking 1 skill class ................................................................................ 43
3.2. Teachers’ and Students’ expectation for a Speaking 1 skill Syllabus .... 44
3.2.1. Objectives of the Speaking skill 1 syllabus ............................................... 44
3.2.1.1. Learning needs ........................................................................................ 44
3.2.1.2. Target needs ............................................................................................ 44

3.2.1.3. Wants .......................................... 45

viii


3.3. Summary ...................................................................................................... 49
CHAPTER 4: THE PROPOSED SPEAKING SKILL 1 SYLLABUS ............... 51
4.1. Setting a type for Speaking skill 1 Syllabus .............................................. 51
4.2. Aims and Objective of the Syllabus ........................................................... 51
4.3. Detailed Syllabus ......................................................................................... 52
4.3.1. Content Selection ................................... 53
4.3.2. Materials .................................................................................................... 56
4.3.3. The organization of the syllabus ............................................................... 56
4.3.4. Time allocation and evaluation ................................................................ 57
4.4. Summary ...................................................................................................... 57
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 58
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... I
APPENDICES...................................................................................................... V
Appendix 1: THE PROPOSED SPEAKING SKILL 1 SYLLABUS
SPEAKING 1- SCHEDULE (Calendar, Course Contents and Task
Specifications) ........................................................................................... V
Appendix 2: NEEDS ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK (Hutchinson and Waters,
1987) .......................................................................................................... XI
Appendix 3: THE CURRENT SPEAKING SKILL 1 SYLLABUS ................... XIII
Appendis 4: THE STUDENTS‟ QUESTIONNAIRES ....................................... XVIII
Appendix 5: THE TEACHERS‟ QUESTIONNAIRES....................................... XXII
Appendix 7: CEFR SCALE FOR SPEAKING LEVEL A2 ................................ XXVIII
Appendix 8: STUDENTS‟ ATITUDES TOWARDS THE CURRENT ............. XXXI
SPEAKING SKILL 1 COURSE .......................................................................... XXXI
Appendix 9: TEACHERS‟ ATITUDES TOWARDS THE CURRENT

SPEAKING SKILL 1 COURSE ............................................................... XXXII
Appendix 10: TEACHERS‟ AND STUDENTS OPINIONS ABOUT
OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................... XXXIII

ix


Appendix

11:

TEACHERS‟

AND

STUDENTS‟OPINION

ABOUT

INTERESTING TOPICS FOR A NEW SPEAKING SKILL 1
SYLLABUS .............................................................................................. XXXIV
Appendix 12: CHOICE OF TASKS ACCORDING TO STUDENTS AND
TEACHERS‟EXPECTATION ................................................................. XXXV
Appendix 13: TEACHERS‟CHOICE OF GRAMMAR-STRUCTURES
NEEDED TO BE USED IN THE SYLLABUS ....................................... XXXVI
Appendix 14: GRAMMAR-STRUCTURES USED IN THE SYLLABUS........ XXXVII
Appendix 15: THE SAMPLE OF LESSON PLAN............................................. XXXVIII

x

INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Speaking is one of the four major language skills that foreign language
students have to master. It is a common knowledge that speaking is very important
in language learning as, according to Richards (2008:19), of four major language
skills: listening, speaking, reading, writing, the mastery of speaking skill in English
is a priority for many second-language or foreign language learners. Consequently,
the success of learners in language learning is often evaluated on the improvement
in their spoken language proficiency.
As speaking is of such a great importance for language learners, teaching
how to speak well is the inevitable aim of almost all language courses. In Vietnam,
although most of schools have conducted English teaching trial programs from
Grade three, the amount of students in Vietnam who can use English as a
communicative tool in real life is not much. The fact is that almost students may
master language knowledge such as grammar structures and vocabulary, yet they
cannot use English to communicate fluently and effectively.
Being a teacher who has taught English for more than seven years, I realize
that my students, especially the first-year English-majors at Y.U. who as part of
their studies have to make oral productions, also share the same problems. Many
students seem to lack the skills and confidence to make effective presentations in
their final oral examination, resulting in a majority of them do not meet the target
needs of the course. Following the textbook-based syllabus, in the teaching process,
many teachers at Y.U. find difficult to motivate students to speak in the target
language comfortably and naturally in speaking lessons. Some of them complain
about spending much time compiling and adapting materials in order to meet their
students‟ needs and make the speaking lessons more interesting and motivating.
Whether the journey speaking teachers and learners have to go on under their
speaking course is smooth and whether the learners can reach the destination of the
journey depend on a wide variety of factors such as the course syllabus, the teaching

1


methodology, the available resources and the motivation of the students. Among all
these influential factors, the course syllabus is extremely important because if
appropriately designed with careful need analysis, the syllabus can act as the guidance
for both teachers and learners in terms of aims, the objectives, teaching methodology,
material suggestions, time allocation, assessments, and almost all the matters of
learning and teaching. In fact, a course syllabus can be compared with a helpful travel
guidebook or a compass for teachers and learners in their journey to knowledge.
Among several versions of the Communicative Approach, the author sees that
Task-based language teaching (TBLT) is popular and relevant to our educational
purposes. TBLT refers to an approach based on the use of tasks as the core unit of
planning and instruction in language teaching, (Willis, 25:36). And it provides a
structure framework for both instruction and assessment. Students are more likely to
develop intrinsic motivation in a task-based approach and it enables teachers to see if
students are developing the ability to communicate in language learning.
Despite its importance, the syllabus in teaching speaking -one of the most
difficult language skills is not always given adequate attention, especially at Y.
University where the current used syllabus is available but not referring to the
situation analysis and learner needs analysis. Consequently, when the syllabus was
implemented, it showed a lot of pitfalls, the greatest of which being the students‟
disinterest in learning speaking, the irrelevance of the speaking tasks and the
teaching methodology. This fact heightens the need to design a new speaking
syllabus for a particular group of students, i.e., beginner students, low-intermediate,
intermediate, etc. That syllabus should be based on careful analyses of contextual
factors and learner needs as well as educational target needs, i.e., the objectives of
the foreign language program.
The ideas above motivate me to design a new speaking skills syllabus for the

elementary students at Y.U. The choice of “Designing A Task-based speaking
syllabus for the elementary English majored students at a University in Cau Giay,
Hanoi” as the topic of this thesis, therefore, is not accidental.

2


2. Aims and Objectives of the study
As mentioned above, the study aims at designing a new appropriate speaking
skills syllabus for the elementary students majoring in English at Y. University.
To achieve this aim, the study first attempt to look at the current Speaking skill
1 course for first year students majoring in English at Y.U to see if it meets the
students‟ needs. Then it will carry out a research to identify the target needs and
learning needs perceived by teachers and Elementary English majors at Y.U. The
final stage is devoted to proposing a speaking skill 1 syllabus based on the need
analysis results.
3. Research Questions
To make the tasks manageable, the following questions are raised for
exploration:
1. What are the attitudes of students and teachers on the current Speaking 1
syllabus in Y.U?
2. What are the needs and learning wants of the elementary English majors in
Y.U that need to be taken into account in designing the speaking skills syllabus?
3. How should the Speaking skill 1 syllabus be designed to cover the types of
needs identified?
4. Scope of the study
The syllabus limits itself to the design of new Speaking skill 1 syllabus for
the Elementary English students in Y.U. It involves the participation of 62 first year
English majors who are in their first semester at Y.U. Thus, it is not intended for
other groups of the students at the University or students from other universities.

However, once the syllabus has been implemented, and evaluated by the university
teachers who implement the syllabus, it can serve as a reference for those who are
interested in designing a similar syllabus for similar groups of students.
5. Methods of the study
In this study both quantitative and qualitative methods are employed. The
quantitative is used to collect the data by delivered questionnaires and the

3


qualitative is applied when discussing the data. Class observation and interview also
serve as supporting instruments to enhance the validity and reliability of the
data.The methodology of the study is described as follows:
- To gain theoretical background for the study, a careful examination of
related literature has been carried out. What has been perceived from this
examination will be the foundation for the study.
- The study is carried out with 62 students and 15 teachers at Y.U., which will be
presented in great details in Chapter 2. Data about the participants is collected by the
form of questionnaires. The questionnaires are designed to investigate information about
students‟ needs, wants, and learning – style preference…
- The author also observe the two speaking 1 class in ten weeks to find out how
the students engaged with the tasks, what topics that they are interested in or what kind of
activities can motivate them… The interviews with five English teachers help the
researcher to seek the appropriate tasks, topics and material for designing a new speaking
syllabus.
6. Structure of the Thesis
The thesis will be comprised of three parts:
Part 1 is the introduction, which presents the rationales, the aims, the
objectives, the scope, the methods and the design of the study.
Part 2 is the development which consists of four chapters:

Chapter 1 reviews the literature related to the syllabus design and the
theoretical issues on the definition and features of task based language teaching in
relation to the teaching of speaking skills in EFL context. It focuses on the course
design starting with the identification of needs, syllabus design, and materials
production then moves to the explanation of the speaking teaching/learning process.
Chapter 2 reports the research methodology including the methods of
situational analysis and need analysis and the data collection procedure.
Chapter 3 presents and discuss the findings from situational analysis and
need analysis in light of teaching problems with the current syllabus, the insiders‟
attitudes towards speaking skills and the current syllabus as well as their
expectations of the changes in teaching and learning speaking skills.

4


Chapter 4 is the main part of the study. Based on the situational analysis and
need analysis, a suitable syllabus framework will be developed. Decisions regarding
the objectives, the content and the structure of the course are justified.
Part 3 is the conclusion that provides summary, states the limitations of the
study and gives some suggestions for further research on the topic.
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This Chapter is concerned with some theoretical background of the study.
First, it gives a detailed presentation of previous and current studies on the topic
under investigation. Second, it also synopses the definitions and types of syllabus
design. Moreover, an overview of speaking and principles for teaching this
language skill is clearly described and finally it shows information about the types
of syllabus which will be adopted in the current paper.
1.1. Previous Studies
In language teaching, a great importance has been attached to strategies of
designing a speaking syllabus which are based on learners‟ needs and ways to

develop students' oral communication skills. That is why a growing number of
linguists and institutions like the University of Canberra, Ball State University are
working on this field and they have, in fact, made a substantial contribution to the
development of language learners‟ speaking skills. Such titles as “A task-based
speaking course for ninth grade students of the institutions educative inobasol de
sole dad” by Erasmine (2017), “Affective Factors in Oral English Teaching and
Learning” by Wang, etc. have so far caught a great attention from a significant
number of readers. Undeniably, it is clear that these scholars and institutions in their
research, present guidelines to promote learners‟ speaking skills in both in theory
and in practice but those experts just mainly focus on their teaching contexts and
problems in their teaching speaking classroom. Also, they do not touch upon the
problems that elementary English learners have when speaking in the classroom
setting and the reasons why they experience such problems. In addition, the

5


solutions/suggestions given from those studies are not drawn from their own
research or in other words, they were not research-based. They are somehow based
on the writers‟ own observations and perceptions, so the solutions tend to be
applicable for some subjects.
In Vietnam, there have been a lot of studies on syllabus design and many of
them are presented in M.A thesis. Works by Nguyen Kieu Oanh (2005) and Nguyen
Thanh Giang (2007) are some typical examples. Nguyen Thanh Giang (2007) has
conducted the study on the application of the learner-centered approach to designing
a speaking syllabus for the third year students in teacher-training section. Based on
the situational analysis and experience from current syllabus, a suitable syllabus
framework was developed, he justified his decisions regarding the content of the
course, how it is structured, the learning and teaching activities, how the students
are selected, assessed and possible feedback for the improvements the syllabus.

Nguyen Kieu Oanh (2005) was also interested in designing an ESP speaking
syllabus and she also proposed a suggested syllabus by needs analysis through
survey questionnaires and semi-structured interview questions. The data
instruments have supported her with much useful information as the basic for
designing the ESP speaking syllabus. As far as I concern, there has been so far no
study on the task-based speaking syllabus that focused on English elementary
students. For that reason, I decided to carry out this study investigating the first-year
English major students‟ learning needs when learning speaking and propose a
speaking skill syllabus that is more relevant to the students‟ needs, and more
appropriate to the teaching context at the University.
1.2. An Overview of Syllabus Design
Designing a syllabus that meets the needs of specific learners is the first step
that the speaking course designer is going to handle. Thus, an understanding of the
word “syllabus” and the different syllabi is necessary.
1.2.1. Definition of syllabus

6


Syllabus is a popular notion in teaching language; it plays an important role
in the success of the teaching and learning. There are several ways of defining the
syllabus on the views of different writers: the narrow and the broad approach to
syllabus design.(Yalden,1984: 14), a broad view scholar, defined that “ The
syllabus replaces the concept of „method‟, and the syllabus is now seen as an
instrument by which the teacher, with the help of the syllabus designer, can achieve
a degree of „fit‟ between the needs and the aims of the learners(as social being and
as individual), and the activities which will take place in the classroom”. He
considers the teacher as an assistant of the syllabus designer; teacher can adjust the
syllabus and the learners‟ needs and aims in the classroom.
On the other hand, with a clear distinction between the syllabus design and

methodology are drawn, Nunan (1988:5) pointed out that “Syllabus design is seem
as being concerned with the selection and grading of the content, why methodology
is concerned with the selection of learning tasks and activities”. He also affirmed:
“Syllabus is a statement of content which is used as the basis for planning courses
of various kinds, and that the task of the syllabus designer is to select and grade this
content”.
In short, there are many different views in syllabus design. Each one has its
own strong and weak points. So syllabi designers have to take account the
objectives and the learners‟ needs to design an appropriate syllabus that meets the
demand.
What should be noted is that designing a speaking syllabus is far from being
an easy task because of its complex and important role in meeting the students‟
needs; this is why speaking syllabus designers need to be aware in the choice of the
adequate type of syllabus so that it can be used most appropriately.
1.2.2. Approaches to Language Syllabus Design (LSD)
Syllabus proposal of kind or another kind might be analyzed in many
different ways. Although there are a variety of attempts to classify approaches to
LSD, the division into the two main strands: Synthetic and Analytic suggested in

7


Wilkins (1976); White (1988); Long and Crookes (1992, 1993) seems to be the
most commonly accepted.
Wilkins (1976:02) describes the synthetic approach as: “A synthetic
language teaching strategy is the one in which the different parts of language are
taught separately and step by step so that the acquisition is a process of gradual
accumulation of parts until the whole structure of language has been built up.”
This means that within the synthetic approach language forms are tackled
separately and progressively, the synthetic approach relies on learners‟ capacities to

learn a language in different parts separately from one another.
In effect, the term synthetic is a generic term used to cover a variety of
syllabi such as: Structural, Functional Notional, Skill-Based and Situational
syllabuses.
Analytic syllabi are described however, by Wilkins (1975:13) as those
syllabi which are organized in terms of the purposes for which people are learning
language and the kinds of language performance that are necessary to meet those
purposes.
This means that, the analytic syllabi rely on learners‟ capacities in
synthesizing language rules based on their capacities and aptitudes to produce the
different grammatical structures and forms.
The analytic approach in its turn comprises a number of syllabi for instance:
Task -Based, Content-Based, Learner- centered syllabi.
As there are two main approaches to LSD, there are two main types of
syllabus: the analytic syllabus and the synthetic syllabus, In fact, this classification
is just theoretical because in the real teaching practice, there are no solely analytic
or solely synthetic. The types of syllabus should be determined according to the
prominence given to the forms or form. Therefore, to be more exact and easier to
follow, this paper hereafter employs the two terms the product based syllabus and
the process based syllabus.

8


The comparison of the two types and their sub-types are presented in the two
figures below:
Product based syllabus:

Process based syllabus

What is to be learnt

How is to be learnt

Determined by authority

Negotiated between learners and teachers

Teacher as decision-maker

Learner and teacher as joint decision
Makers

Content = what the subject is to the Content = what the subject is to the learner
expert
Content = a gift to the learner from Content = what the learner brings and
the teacher or knower

wants

Objectives defined in advance

Objectives described afterwards

Subject emphasis

Process emphasis

Assessment by achievement or by Assessment in relationship to learners‟
mastery

criteria of success

Doing things to the learner

Doing things for or with the learner

Figure 1.1: Product-based vs. Process-based syllabus (adapted from White (1988: 44))

1.2.3. Types of Syllabus
LANGUAGE
SYLLABUS
SYNTHETIC

ANALYTIC

PRODUCT-BASED

PROCESS-BASED

STRUCTURAL

NOTIONAL/
FUNCTIONAL

TASK-BASED

SITUATIONAL

SKILL-BASED

LEARNERCENTERED

Figure 1.2: Types of Language Syllabus

9

CONTENT-BASED


The above figure shows the existence of sub-types of synthetic and analytic
syllabi.
A. Product Based Syllabus
1.2.3.1. 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 (Nunan, 1988). 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 disagreement between the grammar of the spoken
and of the written language; raising complications for the grading of content in
grammar based syllabuses.
1.2.3.2. Situational syllabus
The limitations found in grammatical 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.

10


1.2.3.3. 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.
1.2.3.4. Skill-based syllabus
Combines linguistic competences such as: pronunciation, vocabulary,
grammar, and generalized types of behavior such as: socializing, presentations. The
objective of this syllabus is to learn about a given specific language skill/skills and
develop it/them.

B. Process Based Syllabus
1.2.3.5. Content-based syllabus
According to Nunan (1988), the primary purpose of instruction in a content
based syllabus is to teach some content or information using the language that the
students are also learning. The students are simultaneously language students and
students of whatever content is being taught. The subject matter is primary, and
language learning occurs incidentally to the content learning. The content teaching
is not organized around the language teaching, but vice-versa. Content-based
language teaching is concerned with information, while task-based language
teaching is concerned with communicative and cognitive processes. An example of
content-based language teaching is a science class taught in the language the

11


students need or want to learn, possibly with linguistic adjustment to make the
science more comprehensible.
1.2.3.6. Learner-Centered Syllabus
According to Nunan (1991) learner-centered syllabus seeks to provide
learners with efficient learning strategies that will allow them to negotiate on the
syllabus, to encourage learners to set their own aims, to choose corresponding
learning strategies to fulfill their aims, and finally to develop self-evaluation skills.
1.2.3.7. Task-Based syllabus (TBS)
One particular type of process syllabus is a Task-Based syllabus, where the
emphasis is as much on what learners do in order to learn as the eventual objectives.
In TBS, tasks are treated as „unit of teaching on their own right and serve as the
basis for designing the complete courses‟ and „tasks are the actual means for
constructing the syllabus‟ (Ellis, 2003:65)
TBS is built with two types of tasks: target tasks learning tasks. Target tasks
prioritize the purposeful use of the target language in the real sharing of meaning.

Learning tasks aim to explore the workings of knowledge systems themselves
especially how these may be worked and learned (Breen, 1987). That is, a learning
task serves to facilitate a learner‟s participation in target tasks while a target task
„facilitates the learning of something new‟ and solves a problem. A learning task
aiming to prepare for a target task or solve an earlier problem can generate real
communication among participants.
They both require participants to engage the underlying competence in
undertaking interpretation, expression, and negotiation in actual communicative
events. Breen (1987:162) indicates that „learners can cope with the unpredictable,
be creative and adaptable, and often transfer knowledge and capability across tasks.‟
In a Task-based syllabus, communicative abilities and learning capability are
achieved simultaneously through the new language.

12


1.2.4. Steps in Task –Based Syllabus Design
Syllabus design refers to the planning and structuring of a course to achieve
the needed goals. It is the outcome of a number of elements: the result of the needs
analysis, the course designer‟s approach to syllabus and methodology, and existing
materials Robinson (1991). Munby (1978:2) continues saying that English Speaking
skill courses are: “Those where the syllabus and the materials are determined by the
prior analysis of the communication needs of the learner.” This means that the
identification of learners‟ needs is the first step upon which the English Speaking
skill course is going to be designed.
In the same vain, Nunan (1988: 60) points out that the initial step in the
process of designing a syllabus is to carry out a needs analysis to assess the needs of
the learners. Basing on the result of this analysis, the aims and the objectives of the
syllabus will be set up and the content of the syllabus will be selected and graded.
Thus, the course takes into consideration not only the subject area of the

learners, but also the topics, vocabulary and structural aspect of the language
characteristics of that specialized area.
In case of TBS design, Long (1985) offers the following steps for developing
a task-based syllabus:

1. Conduct a needs
analysis to obtain
an inventory of
target tasks

2. Classify the target
tasks into task types

3. From the task
types, derive
pedagogical
tasks

4. Select and sequence
the pedagogical tasks
to form a task based
syllabus.

Figure 1.3: Framework for task based syllabus design (Long, 1985)
Ellis (2003), however, suggests a rather different framework for designing
TBS. This process includes the specification of tasks involving task selection and
sequencing and the specification of language to be incorporated into tasks.

13

Figure 1.4: Framework for task based syllabus design (Ellis, 2003: 66)
From the above definitions, one may say that the aim of the English speaking
skill courses are to prepare the learners in accordance with specific skills and
vocabulary needed in order to be able to communicate effectively in the target
situation. To achieve these aims, based on the common features of the ideas above,
another framework for the TBS designing is suggested with the following steps:
 Needs Analysis (NA).
 Aim and Objective Setting
 Task selecting and sequencing (selecting topics, task types, etc.)
 Materials Production.
 Evaluation and Assessment.
1.2.4.1. Needs Analysis (NA)
Needs Analysis (NA) is a primordial step in any courses operation. It is the
basis upon which the course is going to be designed as explained by Senhadj
((1993) cited in Hemche (2007:15)) who notes “…if you define the need, you
define the content of the course.” In the same line of thought, Johns (1991:67)
writes: “The rationale for needs analysis is that by identifying elements of students'
target English situations and using them as the basis of EAP/ ESP instruction,
teachers will be able to provide students with the specific language they need to
succeed in their courses and future careers.” This means that, needs analysis is
central to speaking courses because students are not targeting all the sides of the
language, for this reason speaking course designers have to equip them with the

14


knowledge of English they need to fulfill either academic or professional purposes.
Thus, the duty of the course designers is to identify learners‟ needs and design a
course around them.

A syllabus compilation is necessarily preceded by a needs analysis, as it
„provides a basis for setting goals and objectives‟ (Nunan and Lamb 1996: 27). In
case of TBS it also provides a basis for task selection.
(a) Definitions of Needs
Before tackling the types of needs, it is necessary to understand what is
meant by the term “needs”. Needs are defined as being the requirements that the
students have in order to be able to communicate effectively in the target situation.
They are also defined as what the students need to learn to acquire the language.
(b)Types of Needs
The above definitions imply the existence of two main types of needs that the
ESP course designer has to take into consideration while establishing his/her
syllabus: Target needs and Learning needs. In the same vein Sunshade ((1993) qtd
in Hemche (2007:20)) puts it “We analyze the learners‟ needs by distinguishing
target needs and learning needs.”
Target needs refer to what the learners need to do in order to be able to
communicate effectively in the target situation. Viewing the definition as such the
meaning is likely to be closest to the term Objectives; this is why further divisions
were made to differentiate between Necessities, lacks and wants.
Necessities represent the final objectives. They refer to the academic or
occupational requirements of the target situation; they show what the learners are
able to do at the end of the English course. That is, what the learner has to know in
order to function effectively in the target situation. In this sense needs are described
as objectives. Robinson (1991:07)
Lacks refer to the proficiency level and background of the learners; they also
refer to what learners lack in order to reach the required level of proficiency. Lacks
are then, what learners do not know or cannot do in English.

15