Innovations in the english program for non major sophomores at binh duong university an assessment

BINH DUONG PROVINCIAL PEOPLE‟S COMMITTEE
THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY

LE THI NGOC DIEM

INNOVATIONS IN THE ENGLISH PROGRAM FOR
NON-MAJOR SOPHOMORES AT BINH DUONG
UNIVERSITY: AN ASSESSMENT

MAJOR: ENGLISH LANGUAGE
MAJOR CODE: 8220201

MASTER THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

BINH DUONG PROVINCE - 2020


BINH DUONG PROVINCIAL PEOPLE‟S COMMITTEE
THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY

LE THI NGOC DIEM

INNOVATIONS IN THE ENGLISH PROGRAM FOR
NON-MAJOR SOPHOMORES AT BINH DUONG
UNIVERSITY: AN ASSESSMENT

MAJOR: ENGLISH LANGUAGE
MAJOR CODE: 8220201

MASTER THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE
SUPERVISED BY NGUYEN THI THANH TAM Ph.D

BINH DUONG PROVINCE - 2020


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study would not have been completed without the help of important
people.
First of all, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my study
supervisor, Dr. Nguyen Thi Thanh Tam, for her guidance, encouragement, and
patience in reading and editing my study. She always made me feel relaxed and
comfortable whenever I felt confused and worried in conducting this study. She
built up a good English model for me not only with her deep knowledge but also
her personalities.
I gratefully acknowledge Thu Dau Mot University in general,
Postgraduate Department and Foreign Languages Department at Thu Dau Mot
University in particular for allowing me to pursue this study. I also thank to Dr.
Tran Thanh Du and other teachers and professors for their encouragement and
lectures while I was taking the Master of Arts course at Thu Dau Mot University.
I also thank to my classmates in the Master of Arts course in the academic years
2017-2019 for their friendship and support throughout the years.
I highly show my gratitude to the Principal of Binh Duong University for
letting me conduct this study freely on the university campus. I also would like to
express my appreciation to my co-teachers and my beloved non-English-major
students who were participants in this study.
Finally, I would like to express my greatest love to my beloved family,
especially my husband and my children for their motivation and understanding
throughout the years. I thought that I could not finish this study without their
encouragement and love.
To all these significant people, I hope that the achievement of this study
would make them feel pleased and satisfied enough.

i


DECLARATION BY RESEARCHER
I declare that this study titled “Innovations in the English Program for
Non-major Sophomores at Binh Duong University: An Assessment” was
created by my own findings. With the best of my knowledge and understanding
including the help of reference materials, this study was conducted by using
author‟s work and it was submitted after a carefully checking progress of
supervisor in order to fulfill the partial requirements of the Master‟s Degree.

Researcher’s Signature

Lê Thị Ngọc Điểm

ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT . .................................................................................. i
DECLARATION BY RESEARCHER . ............................................................ ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................... vii
LIST OF TABLES. ........................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... ix
LIST OF APPENDICES ..................................................................................... x
ABSTRACT . ....................................................................................................... xi

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 1

1.1. The Research Background ....................................................................... 1
1.1.1. An Introduction of Binh Duong University (BDU) ...................... 2
1.1.2. An Introduction of BDU‟s English Program for Non-EnglishMajor Students .............................................................................. 2
1.2. The Aims of the Study ............................................................................. 3
1.3. Research Questions .................................................................................. 3
1.4. Scope of the Study ................................................................................... 4
1.5. Significance of the Study ......................................................................... 5
1.6. Definitions of Terms ................................................................................. 6
1.7. Structure of the Study ............................................................................... 6

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................. 8

2.1. Innovation ............................................................................................... 8
2.1.1. The Nature of Innovation .............................................................. 8
2.1.2. Curriculum Innovations ................................................................ 9
2.1.3. Reasons for Innovation ................................................................ 10
2.1.4. Models of Curriculum Innovations ............................................. 10
2.2. Curriculum ............................................................................................. 11
2.2.1. Definition of Curriculum ............................................................ 11
2.2.2. Curriculum Assessment .............................................................. 13

iii


2.2.2.1. Definition of Curriculum Assessment ................................ 13

2.2.2.2. Approaches for Curriculum Assessment ............................ 14
2.2.3. Curriculum Implementation ........................................................ 16
2.2.4. The Importance of Curriculum Assessment ............................... 17
2.2.5. Effective Curriculum Design ...................................................... 17
2.3. Analysis of Needs .................................................................................. 18
2.3.1. The Overview of Analysis of Needs ........................................... 18
2.3.2. The Importance of Analysis of Needs ......................................... 19
2.3.3. Types of Analysis of Needs ........................................................ 20
2.3.4. Steps of Analysis of Needs ......................................................... 21
2.4. Conceptual Framework .......................................................................... 22
2.5. Previous Studies ..................................................................................... 23

Chapter 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................ 27

3.1. The Overall Design of the Study ........................................................... 27
3.2. Research Design ..................................................................................... 27
3.3. Research Questions ................................................................................ 28
3.4. Setting and Participants .......................................................................... 28
3.4.1. Setting in this Study .................................................................... 28
3.4.2. Participants in this Study ............................................................. 29
3.5. Research Method .................................................................................... 30
3.6. Data Collection Instrument .................................................................... 30
3.6.1. English

Teachers‟

and

the

English

Program

Director‟s

Questionnaire .............................................................................. 31
3.6.2. Non-English-Major Sophomores‟ Questionnaire ....................... 31
3.7. Data Analysis ......................................................................................... 32
3.8. Ethical Consideration ............................................................................. 32

Chapter 4

DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................ 34

4.1. Data Analysis Procedure ........................................................................ 34
4.2. Findings from the Current English Curriculum (see in Appendix C) .... 34
4.3. Findings from Research Questions in the Study ..................................... 37
iv


4.3.1. Results from Research Question 1 ................................................ 37
4.3.1.1. Demographic Information of English Teachers (questions 16 in English Teachers‟ and The English Program Director‟s
Questionnaire) .................................................................... 37
4.3.1.2. The Innovations in the English Program at BDU .............. 39
4.3.2. Results from Research Question 2 ................................................ 41
4.3.2.1. Demographic

Information

of

Non-English-Major

Sophomores (questions 1-4 in the Non-English-Major
Sophomores‟ Questionnaire) .............................................. 41
4.3.2.2. Students‟ Needs in the English Program at BDU (question 5
in the Non-English-Major Sophomores‟ Questionnaire) ... 43
4.3.3. Results from Research Question 3 ................................................ 44
4.3.3.1. The Degree of Satisfaction on the English Program for NonEnglish-Major Sophomores at BDU ................................... 44
4.3.3.2. Students‟ Assessment on the Factors of Innovations in the
English Program at BDU .................................................... 46
 Assessment on Course Content (statements 1-5) ................. 47
 Assessment on Independent Learning (statements 6-8) ....... 48
 Assessment on Materials and Textbooks (statements 9-11) 49
 Assessment on Testing and Assignment (statements 12-15) 50
 Assessment on Academic Instructors (statements 16-20) .... 52
4.4. Findings from The Final Examination Results of Non-English-Major
Sophomores at BDU ............................................................................. 53

Chapter 5

CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, AND SUGGESTIONS 55

5.1.

Summary and Discussion of the Study ................................................ 55

5.2.

Implications of the Study ..................................................................... 58

5.3.

Limitations of the Study ...................................................................... 58

5.4.

Suggestions from the Findings ............................................................ 59
5.4.1. For Non-English-Major Students .............................................. 59
5.4.2. For English Teachers and Administrators ................................. 60
v


5.4.3. For Further Studies ................................................................... 60

REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 62
APPENDICES ................................................................................................... 1
Appendix A Non-English-Major Sophomores‟ Questionnaire ........................... 1
Appendix B English Teachers‟ and The English Program Director‟s
Questionnaire ........................................................................................................ 7
Appendix C Detailed Outlines for Non-Major Basic English 1,2,3,4,5 .................
Appendix D Final Examination Results ................................................................

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BDU

Binh Duong University

EAP

English for Academic Purposes

EFL

English as a Foreign Language

ELT

English Language Teaching

GCE

General Certificate of Education

GEP

General English Program

HaUI

Hanoi University of Industry

HE

High Education

HUWR

Hanoi University of Water Resources

MA

Master of Arts

MoET

Ministry of Education and Training

MSLU

Minsk State Language University

NCE

National Center of Excellence Program

NEC

Certificate in English Language (New England College)

PNU

Pusan National University

ROI

Return-On-Investment

SSCE

The Senior Secondary School Certificate

TDMU

Thu Dau Mot University

YTU

Yildiz Teknik University

Q

Question

S

Statement

vii


LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1. Information about the English Curriculum for Non-English-Major
Sophomores at BDU ........................................................................ 34

Table 4.2. Demographic Information of English Teachers ................................ 37
Table 4.3. Demographic Information of Non-English-Major Sophomores ........ 41
Table 4.4. Other Purposes to Join in the English Program at BDU .................... 44
Table 4.5. Assessment on Course Content in the Curriculum ............................ 47
Table 4.6. Assessment on Independent Learning in the Curriculum. ................. 48
Table 4.7. Assessment on Materials and Textbooks in the Curriculum . ............ 49
Table 4.8. Assessment on Testing and Assignment in the Curriculum .............. 50
Table 4.9. Assessment on Academic Instructors in the Curriculum. ................. 52

viii


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1. Innovations in the English Program at BDU ................................... 39
Figure 4.2. Students‟ Needs in the English Program at BDU ............................. 43
Figure 4.3. Students‟ Satisfaction on the English Program at BDU (question 6 in
Students‟ Questionnaire) ..................................................................................... 45
Figure 4.4. English Teachers‟ Satisfaction on the English Program at BDU
(question 8 in English Teachers‟ Questionnaire) ................................................. 46
Figure 4.5. Final Examination Results of Non-English-Major Sophomores ..... 54

ix


LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Non-English-Major Sophomores‟ Questionnaire . ........................... 1
Appendix B English Teachers‟ and The English Program Director‟s
Questionnaire . .................................................................................... 7
Appendix C Detailed Outlines for Non-Major Basic English 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 . ...........
Appendix D Final Examination Results . ................................................................

x


ABSTRACT
Hoang (2008a) stated that non-English-major students in educational
universities in Vietnam considered learning English process as a pressure.
Consequently, Gadner (1985) showed that “identifying these students‟ demands
in learning English plays an important role in designing an English curriculum in
an educational university since it is the foundation for the English teachers and
students in order to investigate the flexible techniques in teaching and learning
English as a foreign language with the highest achievement”. With these
remarkable issues, it is obvious that innovations in English curriculum are widely
required in order to fulfill the students‟ various needs.
The aims of this study were (1) to find out the innovations in the English
program/curriculum for non-English-major sophomores at BDU according to the
perspectives of English teachers and the English program director; (2) to identify
the needs of non-English-major sophomores in the English program/curriculum
at BDU according to the perceptions of students; (3) to determine the degree that
the innovations in the English program/curriculum at BDU meet the different
expectations of non-English-major sophomores.
In order to obtain these purposes, quantitative method was employed.
Questionnaires with 300 non-English-major sophomores in the academic years
2018-2019 in different departments at BDU, 10 English teachers (including 5
full-time English teachers and 5 part-time English teachers who have got at least
one year experience in teaching the English program at BDU), and one English
program director were the main instrument to collect data. Throughout the
research method, this study provided significant implementations and useful data
for curriculum developers, English teachers and administrators not only at Binh
Duong University context but also in Binh Duong province context in the career

of developing teaching and learing English language.
Keywords: Innovations, the English program, non-English-major sophomores,
curriculum assessment, analysis of needs.

xi


Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Research Background
The process of learning and mastering a foreign language is one of
important requirements for the young generation in the 21st century and the
process of designing a curriculum that meets the learners‟ different needs and the
course‟s objectives is to keep a highly significant part for curriculum
designers/planners.

Cochran-Smith

(2003,

pp.5-28)

informed

that

“the

development of a curriculum for teachers and policies that might support the
improvement of what teachers need to know and do in order to meet the various

demands of students now gains little attention on”. Moreover, there was a
broadly belief that these policies did not succeed in educational universities,
especially in public universities (Nunan, 2003).
In recent centuries, many countries added curriculum innovations into
educational systems with the hope of improving the position of English language
teaching and learning in these countries. These innovations, on the contrary, did
not often gain the intentions of people who designed and planned these
curriculum innovations during the implementation process.
In the scope of learning and teaching English language in educational
universities in Vietnam, especially at Binh Duong Universty (BDU) context,
although the English program/curriculum for non-English-major students was
designed by this university, it was based on the foundation of the requirement of
MoET for non-English-major students under the Plan 808/KH-BGDĐT 2012
implementing the 2020 Foreign Language Project in higher education institutes
for the period of 2012-2020 issued by the Ministry of Education and Training
about the English output standard. Moreover, the English program/curriculum
was also designed based on the various demands of non-English-major students
in developing their English language skills.

1


1.1.1. An Introduction of Binh Duong University (BDU)
Binh Duong University (BDU) is located at the address of No. 504 Binh
Duong Avenue, Hiep Thanh Ward, Thu Dau Mot City, Binh Duong Province,
Vietnam. It is one of the private schools in the center of Binh Duong province in
Vietnam, which is one of the fastest developing business and industrial provinces
in the country. Binh Duong province is just around 25 km away from Ho Chi
Minh City (Sai Gon) to the southeast. Since Binh Duong University (BDU) was
established in 1997, it has trained various levels throughout the years. During the

period of time, BDU has confirmed its brand and its career in fulfilling the
learners‟ educational expectations as well as the needs for economic growth in
the province. In the year 2019, there were over 22.000 students from all villages
around Vietnam enrolling in the university at different education levels including
Intermediate vocational education level, higher education, Undergraduates,
Postgraduates and Distance education. As an education network, BDU has been
making considerable contributions to the socio-economic development of the
southern region, as well as the scientific and technological development of the
country.
1.1.2. An Introduction of BDU’s English Program for Non-EnglishMajor Students
According to Hoang (2008a), there were 94% of Vietnamese students who
learnt English in non-English-major programs in educational universities at the
time of his study. According to National Assemply of Vietnam (2012),
educational universities were allowed to design on how much time was spent on
teaching English and what degree it would be taught in a non-English-major
program/curriculum. In the context of teaching and learning English at BDU, the
current English program/curriculum for non-English-major students was
designed based on the MoET‟s requirement and the students‟ needs. It has been
implemented widely at BDU for all non-English-major classes for several years
with the desire of meeting the MoET‟s requirement about the English outcome
standard for non-English-major students at universities and focusing on
2


developing two English listening and speaking skills for students. Though, there
have not been any studies conducted on the university campus to access the
quality of the English curriculum and examine whether the curriculum has been
working effectively as its intentions or not. During its implementation, it seemed
that most of students and English teachers were satisfied with the English
program/curriculum. The English curriculum comprises five courses under the

names of Non-English-Basic English 1, Non-English-Basic English 2, NonEnglish-Basic English 3, Non-English-Basic English 4, and Non-English-Basic
English 5 (see in Appendix C), which must be taken by non-English-major
students during 4 years at the university. A new series of textbooks “Life” of
Helen Stephenson, Paul Dummet, John Hughes (2018) by National Geographic
Learning, Cengage Learning Vietnam Edition was used with the hope of
fulfilling students‟ English listening and speaking skills.
1.2. The Aims of the Study
The study aims:
1. to find out the innovations in the English program for non-Englishmajor students at BDU according to the perspectives of English
teachers and the English program director.
2. to identify the non-English-major sophomores‟ needs in the English
program at BDU according to the perceptions of students.
3. to determine the degree that the innovations in the English program
at BDU meet the students‟ needs.
1.3. Research Questions
For this study, the three research questions have been employed to collect
data to help identify areas for improvement in the English program at BDU.
1. What are the innovations in the English program for non-Englishmajor sophomores at BDU according to the perspectives of English
teachers and the English program director?
2. What are the needs of non-English-major sophomores in the English
program at BDU according to the perceptions of students?
3


3. To what degree do the innovations in the English program at BDU
meet the needs of non-English-major sophomores?
1.4. Scope of the Study
Hutchinson (1993) showed that there were a number of factors that should
be

evaluated

in

curriculum

assessment

including

audience,

contents,

methodology, materials, textbooks, and so forth. Though, in the study, due to the
limitation of time and the extent of a Master Thesis, the scope of the study were
(1) to find out the innovations in the English program/curriculum for nonEnglish-major sophomores at BDU according to the perspectives of English
teachers and the English program director; (2) to identify the needs of nonEnglish-major sophomores in the English program/curriculum at BDU according
to the perceptions of students; (3) to determine the degree that the innovations in
the English program/curriculum at BDU meet the different expectations of nonEnglish-major sophomores.
The participants in this study were 300 non-English-major sophomores
who were from different departments at BDU in the academic years 2018-2019,
10 English teachers (including 5 full-time English teachers and 5 part-time
English teachers who have got at least one year experience in teaching the
English curriculum at BDU), and one English program director. Second year
students were selected in this study for (1) they were familiar with the previous
English courses and they were still taking similar English courses at BDU for the
following academic semesters; (2) they stabilized not only in their English
learning at the beginning of the New School Year but also in their understanding
and recognition on how important English is in their future career. The study was

conducted at BDU context for they accepted magnificent number of students and
hence they kept important role in the society in future. With the reasons stated
above, this study hoped that the data collected were validity in the source of
participants and they were useful data for English teachers and English program
developers/planners. The study was also conducted on Binh Duong University
campus because the researcher could get the data easily as an English teacher at
4


this university and the researcher would like to make a contribution in the
English language teaching and learning process at this university where the
researcher has been working as an English teacher.
1.5. Significance of the Study
This study was conducted with a number of its contributions as follows:
(1) There have not been any studies with the same topic conducted on the
BDU campus before (according to the records of BDU‟s library
information source checked on 30 August, 2019 by the researcher) to
assess the quality of the English program and check whether the
English program have been working effectively as its intentions or not
since the English program was implemented at BDU officially.
(2) The findings in this study could make a contribution in developing the
English language teaching and learning process not only at Binh
Duong University (BDU) but also in Binh Duong province because
based on the data from this study, English teachers

and

program/curriculum designers will find out the suitable strategies to
develop English language skills for students.
(3) This study came out from the intention of the Principal of Binh Duong

University (BDU) with the desire of assessing the innovations in the
English program for non-English-major students in adapting students‟
various needs in studying English at BDU.
(4) Most of the previous studies on curriculum assessment in Vietnam
have been conducted with assessing materials or textbooks, or
assessing curriculum based on students‟ needs, howevere, and this
study was conducted with the combination between two purposes of
assessing the innovations in the English program and examining the
students‟ needs by using the quantitative method.
It is hoped that the findings of this study must be able to provide valuable
information to decision makers to assist them in making innovations and

5


improvements in order to design a more innovative curriculum that fits with the
English needs of different departments in educational universities.
1.6. Definitions of Terms
(Extracted from Oxford Advanced Dictionary and Meriam-Webster
Dictionary)
 Innovation: “Innovation is a new thing or a change made a current
product, idea, or field”.
 Curriculum

Innovation:

“Curriculum

innovation

is

stated

as

considerable actions in order to improve a learning language environment
throughout adapting a new method of using materials to students”.
 Curriculum: “Curriculum is the number of activities, which aims to
strengthen educational programs so that students will have been improved
their opportunities of language learning”.
 Curriculum Assessment: “Curriculum assessment is an ongoing process
of collecting, analyzing, synthesizing, and interpreting information to
further understand what students know and what they can do”.
 Curriculum Development: “Curriculum development is a process of
planning, identifying needs, and selecting of content, materials, and
methods and assessing the curriculum”.
 Analysis of Needs: “Analysis of needs is the number of the processes in
collecting information about the learners‟ current and future language
needs in order to develop a curriculum which will meet the needs of
students”.
1.7. Structure of the Study
This study was organized in five chapters as follows:
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter introduced the research background, the aims of the
study, research questions, scope of the study, research method, definitions
of terms, and structure of the study.
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
6

This chapter presented a theoretical framework of innovations,
curriculum innovations, curriculum, curriculum assessment, curriculum
development, analysis of needs and based on these theories in order to
assess the effectiveness of English program for non-English-major
students at BDU.
Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter outlined the methodology of this study. It started with
the overall design of this study, and then it mentioned on the research
design, data collection instruments, and setting and participants. This
chapter also described data collection and analysis procedure and the
techniques which were applied to make sure the quality of data. Finally,
the ethical consideration of this study was presented as well.
Chapter 4: DATA ANALYSIS
This chapter presented an analysis of quantitative data in details
throughout the questionnaires to non-English-major sophomores, English
teachers, and the English program director. This chapter included
statistical data analysis.
Chapter 5: CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, AND SUGGESTIONS
This chapter concluded the findings from this study in chapter 4 of
the English program for non-English-major students at BDU. This chapter
also presented the implications arising from this study and its
contributions. Finally, this chapter ended with possible suggestions for
non-English-major students, for English teachers and administrators, and
for further studies.

7


Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Innovation
2.1.1. The Nature of Innovation
Fullan (2007) mentioned that “reform or innovation refers to change.
Changes in education depend on specific context and they can be initiated either
internally or externally”. He also defined innovation as “the content of a given
new program” (Fullan, 2007, p.11). Furthermore, Fullan (2001) and Rudduck
(1986) stated that “the nature of innovation itself can have a crucial acceptability
and implementation process”. The nature of the innovation included new
practices which differ from the existing practice. There, however, have been
problems arised in curriculum as follows.
Inconsistency in a curriculum innovation may include the unsuitability
between the curriculum materials and the examination system, or the mismatch
between the curriculum designers‟ intentions and the teachers‟ beliefs/practices.
Complexity related to the difficulties and changes which were required for
the implementers of the innovation. Brindley and Hood (1990) argued that “the
more complex an innovation is, the less likely it is to be adopted”. They also
proposed that “when complex changes are required in teacher behavior, it is more
difficult to bring about the successful adaption of an innovation in teaching
methods”. This viewpoint did not get the agreement from Fullan (2001) who
suggested that “while complexity creates problems for implementation, it may
result in greater change because more is being attempted”. In order to support the
above viewpoint, Chan (2002) conducted a study based on teachers‟ responses to
the introduction of task based learning process in Hong Kong. In his study, Chan
(2002) reported that teachers could not make the innovations come true by
themselves because of its complex structure and its multiple theories. He also
claimed that when teachers felt the innovations inconsistent with the real context,
they intended to switch back to their traditional approaches of teaching.

8

Clarity of the innovation also had an important influence on the
implementation process. Teachers were often forced to apply a curriculum
innovation in their teaching process without a clear explanation on how to apply
the innovation in practice. Fullan (2001) warned that “lack of clarity, lengthy
goals, and unspecified means of implementation represent a major problem at the
implementation process, teachers find that change is not very clear as to what it
means in practice”. Fullan (2001) also made further suggestion that “unclear and
unspecified changes can cause great anxiety and failure to those who were truly
trying to implement them”.
In any circumstances, an innovation should be required and applied not
only on a small scale but also on a large scale with the improvement. On the
contrary, conducting the innovations on a small scale should be priority to reduce
a lot of potential risks. This experiment would provide all stakeholders who get
involved in the curriculum innovations some ideas about any obstacles that might
affect on the implementation process.
2.1.2. Curriculum Innovations
Curriculum innovation is one of the complicated approaches in
educational change because there are various factors related to the teaching
process. An important factor that created the success of curriculum innovation is
teachers who applied new approaches/methods in practice. Fullan and
Stiegelbauer (1997) stated, “Educational curriculum innovation is the staring
point of a long process towards educational change”.
One of essential strategies to bring the improvement of teachers and
students is curriculum innovations. According to Fullan (2000), “Innovation is
not always synonymous with change and reform because it refers to specific
curriculum change”. He also defined that “curriculum change as any replacement
in the factors of a curriculum such as philosophy, values, objectives,
organizational structures, teaching strategies, student experiences, assessment

and learning outcomes” (Fullan, 2000). Curriculum innovations should be based

9


on two major principles such as the students‟ needs and the success of methods,
procedures and techniques of teaching.
2.1.3. Reasons for Innovation
According to literature, there were different reasons that created
innovations in educational universities/systems (Nation & Macalister, 2010).
These reasons of innovations may be included in social contexts or from outside
influences (Datnow & Stringfield, 2000; Morris & Adamson, 2010). Generally,
Stoller (2009) stated that “the environment also creates circumstances for
innovations and three important reasons for innovations are dissatisfaction with
the status quo, stated or implicit desire for more professionalism, and top-down
directives from higher administration or government legistration”. Sabatier
(1986) showed, “these reasons are embedded in the debate about bottom-up and
top-down approaches for introducing changes”.
Furthermore, Morris and Adamson (2010) revealed that “there were
various factors creating innovation including education access and the changes in
structure, organization, system and pedagogics”. According to Brentley (2010),
“change due to purposes of access refers to expanding evaluation opportunities in
countries”.
2.1.4. Models of Curriculum Innovations
The process of identifying some suitable models of languages teaching has
had three important obstacles including (1) the lack of some models based
mainly on curriculum innovations; (2) the lack of some models which are
adapted suitably with the specificity of majors; (3) the lack of the programs of
initial training for teachers. Therefore, there were seven significant educational
models based on the implementation of some innovative programs as follows:

The first model, Johnson (1989) suggested that “the implementation of
some educational syllabi based on innovation as a process that requires a careful
study of forming educational policies, of planning and developing a valid
program, of training teachers and assessing the whole process”;

10


The second model, Markee (1997) stated that “the relationship between
curriculum development and professional development in a process of diffusion
of innovation the communicational method”;
The third model, Lamie (2004) focused strictly on “developing
capabicities in using languages by creating a realistic context for learning”;
The fourth model, Laurenz (et al, 2005) stated that “the basic curriculum
and educational practices focus on the consideration changes that are connected
to the educational context”;
The fifth model, Waters and Vilches (2005) insisted that “teaching
languages should start from contents of grammar and the entire educational
process is developed in a context of the collaboration between schools and
students”;
The last model, Ogilvie (2010) suggested that “the consideration both
philosophical aspects and methodological ones also play an important role in the
stage of teachers‟ initial training”.
2.2. Curricuculum
2.2.1. Definition of Curriculum
In term of curriculum, there were different concepts of curriculum. In
some studies, researchers considered the concept of curriculum as subject
matters, on the other hand, others described curriculum as experiences that a
student acquired during the period at a college or a university. Five different
definitions were provided by Ornstern and Hunkins (2004) for the concept of

curriculum and they were listed as follows:
(1) “Curriculum is a desire of action or printed materials that involves
approaches for accomplishing anticipated aims”.
(2) “A curriculum can be said in general terms to involve the proficiencies of
the learners”.
(3) “It can be also seen as a structure for guiding people so as to measure the
expected goal of a system”.
(4) “A curriculum can also be regarded as a framework for study”.
11


(5) “A curriculum can be seen as subject matter or content”.
Venville et al, (2012) argued with Scott (2008) who defined curriculum
through what it should be contained. Venville (et al., 2012) stated that “These are
aims, objectives, content or subject matter, methods or procedures, and
assessment or evaluation”. Bloch (2013) also viewed curriculum as “both a
process and a product”.
According to Pratt (1980), “A curriculum is a process of activities which
aims to strengthen educational programs so that students might have improved in
learning opportunities”. A curriculum helps students, parents, teachers, and
administrators of a language program to develop learning and teaching activities.
The language program will be better unless the curriculum is more responsive to
the various needs of students.
Researchers‟ opinions of curriculum are similar. The main features of a
curriculum include the purposes, implementation, process to promote learning
and assessment in a language program. Nunan (1988) stated that “curriculum is
as a product to be taught, a process for driving materials, a methodology, and a
plan of a program”. Moreover, according to Hutchinson and Waters (1987, p.
65), “curriculum is as integrating series of teaching and learning experiences
whose ultimate aim is to lead the students to a particular state of knowledge”.

Meanwhile, Pratt (1980) considered that “curriculum is as an organized set of
formal, educational, and training rules in the program”. In the similar view,
Dubin and Olshtain (1986) described curriculum “as a program in operation”.
Tyler (as cited in Nunan, 1988) also showed more details about curriculum when
he said that “curriculum consists of a content, methodology, and assessment of a
teaching program”.
A curriculum should link to the students‟ needs, the goals of the teaching
program, the contents of the program, and the implementation of the teaching
activities, methodology, and the textbooks. Students keep an important part in
language teaching programs. They are expected to take an active part in learning
process. They should acknowledge their responsibilities, make their own
12