�ݺ�ߣ

Syllabus Design:
Process/product syllabi, synthetic/analytic
syllabi, type A/type B syllabi
Professor: Dr. Bijani
Student: Mansooreh Alavi
alavi.m64@gmail.com
http://ztefl.mihanblog.com/

Introduction
• Difference between Syllabus and Curriculum
According to Longman Dictionary of Language
Teaching and Applied Linguistics, curriculum is an
overall plan for a course or program, as in the
freshman composition curriculum. A syllabus is
more specific and more concrete than a curriculum
and a curriculum may contain a number of syllabi;
For example, a curriculum may cover an entire
school year, while a language teaching syllabus may
make up only one part of the curriculum.

Definitions of Syllabus
Widdowson (1990, p. 127) interprets a syllabus as “the
specification of a teaching program or pedagogic
agenda which defines a particular subject for a
particular group of learners . . . a syllabus
specification, then, is concerned with both the
selection and the ordering of what is to be taught”.
Wilkins (1981) pointed out: "syllabuses are
specification of the content of language teaching
which have been submitted to some degree of
structuring or ordering with the aim of making
teaching and learning a more effective process".

Definitions of Syllabus
Nunan (1988) believes that curriculum is wider term
as compared with syllabus. Curriculum covers all
the activities and arrangements made by the
institution throughout the academic year to facilitate
the learners and the instructors whereas syllabus is
limited to particular subject of a particular class.
Yalden (1987, p. 87) also refers to syllabus as a
"summary of the content to which learners will be
exposed".

Syllabus types
Different approaches to syllabus design are
categorized into two main types:
● Product-oriented versus process-oriented syllabuses
● Analytic versus synthetic syllabuses
●Type A versus Type B syllabuses

Product-oriented versus process-oriented
syllabuses
Product-oriented syllabusi :
●emphasize the product of language learning
●different parts of language are taught separately
●acquisition is a process of gradual accumulation of
parts
●learner is being exposed to a deliberately limited
sample of language
(Wilkins, 1976).

syllabuses
According to Rabbini (2002), Product-oriented
syllabuses ), focus on what the learners will know as
a result at the end of instruction session.
Nunan (1988) explains that product-oriented
syllabuses are those in which the focus is on the
knowledge and skills which learners should gain as
a result of instruction (the product or the end).
The grammatical, lexical, situational and notional-functional
are the examples of product-oriented syllabus.

syllabuses
process-oriented syllabi operate in terms of the
purposes for which people are learning language and
the kinds of language performance that are
necessary to meet those purposes (Wilkins, 1976, p.
13).
These syllabuses, according to Rabbini (2002)
developed as a result of a sense of failure in product-oriented
courses to enhance communicative
language skills. It is a process rather than a product.

syllabuses
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. Procedural,
process and task syllabuses are examples of analytic,
process-oriented syllabuses.

Product-oriented Process-oriented
Structural/Formal Tasked-based
Situational Procedural
Lexical Negotiated
Notional-Functional Proportional
Content-based
Product/Process-oriented syllabi

Analytic versus synthetic syllabus
Wilkins (1976) separates language syllabi into
synthetic and analytical types of
syllabi. Synthetic syllabuses:
● segment the target language into discrete linguistic items
● Different parts of language are taught separately
● The learners’ job is to synthesize the language
● Structural, lexical, notional and functional, and most
situational and topical syllabuses are all synthetic (Long and
Crookes, 1992, 1993; Long and Robinson, 1998).

Synthetic syllabuses, also called "focus on forms" in
Long and Robinson (1998), however, have been
criticized for major problems, which include:
(a) Absence of needs analysis;
(b) Linguistic grading;
(c) Lack of support from language learning theory;
(d) Ignorance of learners' role in language development;
(e) Tendency to produce boring lessons, despite the best
efforts of highly skilled teachers and textbook writers; and
(f) Production of many more false beginners than finishers
(see Long and Robinson 1998 for more detail).

The second fundamental type of syllabus distinguished by
Wilkins is the analytic. The analytical syllabus is a
semantic, meaning-based syllabus, which aims at
developing the learners’ communicative competence.
In analytic syllabuses, the “Analytic approaches 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” (Wilkins, 1976:13).
Analytic syllabuses focus on the learner and his needs and on
the kinds of linguistic performance necessary to achieve
those goals (Wilkins, 1976:13-14).

Here a chunk of language is presented to the learner in
the context of a meaning oriented lesson. Analytic‟
refers not to what the syllabus designer does, but to
the operations required of the learner to recognize
and analyze the linguistic components of the
language chunks presented. Long and Crookes
(1993: 11) update
Wilkins definition, points out that “analytic syllabuses
are those that present the target language whole
chunks at a time, in molar rather than molecular
units, without linguistic interference or control.

Procedural, process, and task syllabuses are examples
of the analytic syllabus type.
Some types of analytic syllabuses, also called "focus
on meaning" in Long and Robinson (1998), have
been criticized for, for example,
Lack of needs analysis,
Lack of accuracy attained,
unlearn ability of some grammatical features from positive
evidence only,
And deprivation of the opportunity to speed up the rate of
learning.

Analytic syllabuses Synthetic syllabuses
Tasked-based Structural
Procedural Situational
Notional-functional
[According to Wilkins
(1976)]
Notional-functional
[(According to Long &
Crooks (1992))
Content-based
Negotiated
Analytic/Synthetic-oriented syllabi

Type A versus Type B syllabuses
A broader conceptualization of syllabus types can be
found in White (1988), who presents the differences
between syllabus types from the point of view of
course design, methodology, language learning, and
evaluation. According to White, Type A syllabi are
concerned with what should be learned. Without
considering who the learners may be or how
languages are acquired, they determine a series of
objectives and they ‘pre-package’ the language by
dividing it into small, discrete units.

They are externally imposed on the learner who has no
say in them; the authoritative role is given to the
teacher; they attach importance to the subject-matter
of instruction; and they are product-oriented, so they
evaluate the outcomes in terms of mastery of the
language. All synthetic syllabi, regardless of
whether they have grammar structures, notions and
functions, or lexical items as their units, are
considered Type A syllabi.

Type B syllabi, on the contrary, are concerned with
how the language is learned and how this language
is integrated with learners’ experiences. The
different elements of the syllabus emerge from a
process of negotiation between learners and
teachers; they are oriented toward the process; and
evaluation criteria are set by the learners themselves.
As we will see later, procedural, process, and task-based
syllabi are considered Type B syllabi despite
their differences.

Type A What is to be learnt? Type B How is it to be learnt?
Interventionist Non-interventionist
External to the learner Internal to the learner
Other directed Inner directed or self fulfilling
Determined by authority Negotiated between learners and teachers
Learner and teacher as joint decision
makers
Teacher as decision-maker
Content = what the subject is to the Content = what the subject is to the learner
expert
Content = a gift to the learner from the Content = what the learner brings and wants
teacher or knower
Objectives defined in advance Objectives described afterwards
Subject emphasis Process emphasis
Assessment by achievement or by
mastery
Doing things to the learner Doing things for or with the learner
Assessment in relationship to learners'
criteria of success

Conclusion
A good and valid syllabus covers more or less all
aspects of both these types, therefore, proper and
appropriate implementation of syllabus in language
teaching is expected.
Without proper implementation of syllabus, on the one
hand, desired objectives will be hard to obtain and
on the other hand students will suffer from a lack of
appropriate syllabus which could fulfill their
immediate pedagogical requirements.

�ݺ�ߣ

Me1

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Me1 (20)

Me1