Luận văn an evaluation of the writing curriculum for first year and second year students of english at hanoi university of language and international studies vietnam national university hulis vnu

All of these can cause a lot of difficulties and problems lo teaching and learning process especially the waste of time and energy, Furthermore, there are increasing complaints from both

LE DIEM PHUC

AN EVALUATION OF THE WRITING CURRICULUM FOR FIRST YEAR AND SECOND YEAR STUDENTS OF ENGLISH AT HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES

AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, VIETNAM

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY (HULIS-VNU)

(Đánh giá chương trình môn Viết của năm thứ nhất và năm

thứ hai cho sinh vién Tieng Anh tai Dai học Ngoại ngữ - Đại

học Quốc gia Hà Nội)

M.A Combined Programme Thesis

Major: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60 14 10

Hanoi, 2010

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

LE DIEM PHUC

AN EVALUATION OF THE WRITING CURRICULUM FOR FIRST YEAR AND SECOND YEAR STUDENTS OF ENGLISH AT HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES

AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY (HULIS-VNU)

(Đánh giá chương trình môn Viết của năm thứ nhất và năm thứ hai cho sinh viên Tiếng Anh tại Đại học Ngoại ngữ - Đại

học Quốc gia Hà Nội)

M.A Combined Programme Thesis

Major: English Teaching Methodology

Code: 60 14 10

Supervisor: Dr TO THI THU HUONG

Hanoi, 2010

1, Statement of the problem and the rationalss for the study

2 Aims and objectives

3 Significance of the study

4, Scope of the study

5 Methodology

6 Organization

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CTIAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Definition of ewriculum, syllabus, course books

iv

1.2.5 Standards-based curriculum

1.2.6 Criticism of different curriculum development methods

1.2.6.1, Limitations ofa top down model

1.2.62, Bottom-up’school-based curriculum development

1.3 Curriculum development

1.3.1 Preparation for curriculum development

1.3.1.1 Establishing tho curriculum devclopment task 1.3.1.2 Clarification of the task

1.3.1.3 Support structures for the project 1.3.2 Cuniculutn evaluation

1.3.2.1 Wiy to evaluats

1.3.2.2 When to evaluate 1.3.2.3 Howto evaluate

1.4, Continuity and coherence through various stages in curriculum development

2.3 Procedures of data collection

2.4, Procedures of data analysis

CTLAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION:

CHAPTER 4: SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

LIST OF TABLES, CHARTS, AND ABBREVIATIONS

Reasons for evaluation Dilferences across EST/ ALL stages — report writing

Students’ evaluation of the difficulty of Summary and

Reflection Causes of students’ mistakes

Reasons for students’ paragraph writing structure

mistake Evaluation of curriculum development process

‘The checklist for Continuity and coherence throughout stages in curricutm development

‘The differentiations between stages in learning and leaching process

Survey and Interview participant description:

Students’ result in reflection and summary exercises Hanot University of Languages and International Studies — Vietnam National University

Page

24 33

To remove the watermark, you need to purchase the software from

hitp:/Avww.anypdttools.com/buy/buy-pdf-splitter htm!

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1, Statement of the problem and the rationale for the study

Curriculum development has always been intensely attended by educators and teachers because a good euriculurn ean guaranta css ofa couse Curtienhim reforms have

carried ont very offen in education in gencral and English Language leaching in

the first year are required to master compticaled types of writing like summary and reflection while they are supposed to reach level 2 of ALTE Besides, their writings are in the format of an essays with standard structure of introduction, development and conclusion paragraph whilst second yoar students start with camming about writing paragraphs, This breaks the contimity throughout slages of the wholz English fanguage skill program In addition, the first year and second year writing programs share a number

of common leaming contents but each item is developed and taught to students differently with no cxplicit reason All of these can cause a lot of difficulties and problems lo teaching and learning process especially the waste of time and energy, Furthermore, there are increasing complaints from both teachers and students that the language program at English Teacher Education Department — HULIS — VNU last too long (thice fowth of the university study duration) while its graduates’ English competence is sometimes much lower than that of students who undertake short English courses at English centers for

IELTS or TORFT, preparation

Willva view Io finding ont firstly the problems and then the ways to inerease the qualily of the English writing program for first year and second year students at HULIS-VNU in particular and the whole Linglish language program in general, | have decided to do a research on the topic “An evaluation of the writing curricuban for first year and second

year students of English at Hanoi University of Languages and International studies,

Vietnam National University (HULIS-VNU)

Jearning in the classtoom, Learning resources, An assessment scheme, and Evaluation strategies, the paper aims at making a thorough investigation into the English writing curriculum of the first and sooond years mainly through analyzing their caursc books and

syllabuses to figure out their strengths and weaknesses In particular, the researcher is going to answer the four following questions:

1 How do the first and second year writing syllabus components and course book contents

match course objectives?

2 How do the syllabus components and course boaks guarantee the continuity and

coherence through stages in curriculum development?

23 How do the svilabus components and course books guarantee the internal consistency of

the curricubon?

4, If there are some mismatches, what problems occur as @ consequence?

Aftcr coming up with the answers to the above questions, the rescarcher would like to give some suggestions to enhance the English writing curriculum of the frst and second year and even for the language skÍlf trairing program of Tinglish Teacher Rducation Deparbnent HULIS - VNU More importantly, with the findings of the research, I hope to shorten the language skill program to save time, money and energy for students, teachers and the institutions as the planning manifested through the curriculum can reduce, before a class

cven meels, about hal'the work for teaching a course (Vogler, 1997)

3 Significance of the study

The study results would be very helpful to various groups including students al English Teacher Education Department HULIS VNU, course curriculum developers, English

‘Teacher Education Department — LiULIS - VNU and researchers in both theoretical and

practical aspects

First and foremost, the innovations thai are triggered by the findings of this research will ensue students achieving the highest English competence within the shortest period off

time Regarding English Teacher Education Department — HULIS — VNU, this is the opportunily for ther lo reform their training programs for higher qualily Moreover, they can save a lot of money, time and energy thanks to a more condensed and effective curriculum Concerning course curriculum developers and course book designer they can recognize the poinls in need of improvement in their products and Jeam valuable lessons for futue work from the suggestions made by the participants and the researchers Last but not least, researchers can benefit a lot from the rich and thorough literature review for the issues rolalcd especially the criteria Lo evaluate a English Language Teaching program and

a comprehensive cwriculum construction process,

4, Scope of the study

Within the scope of this study, ] am going to evaluate the implemented (UNESCO-IBE, 2007) writing curriculum for the first year and second year students in 2009-2010 acadomie year The focus is (he math between the course objectives with lcarning content and activities, the continuity and cohzrenee through various stages and the consistency in the English writing program revealed in the syllabus and the course books,

5, Methods of the study

To find out the answers to the four above research questions, the researcher has adopted both quantitative and qualitative research methods ‘I'hs research tools would include:

Document analysis: Curriculum, Course guide and course book analysis: | made an exlaustive study about the course guide with explicil explanation of course objectives, skills, structure, assignments, assessment and grading, and list of reference materials as well as the writing course hooks of both English language Divisionl and 2 to disclose any teaching ilem thal, non-malch (he course objectives as well as that breaks the continmity and consistency of the whole program

Students’ paper analysis, Student Questionnaire and teacher Interview: The analysis

of 100 students’ papers, questionnaires for 100 sophomores and interviews for 5 teachers who have taught both of the targat writing programs were condneted to help the researcher gather practical cvidence for the conclusions from course guide and course book analysis Moreover, these data were used to elicit the respondent’s ideas for the final research question about the consequences of the existing problems in the target writing programs

as framework, Outcomes-based currieudiim, and Standards-based currievdun To help readers to have a more insightful look into cach type of curriculum, the study also provides

a list of advantages and disadvantages of bottom-up and top-down ewriculum Thirdly, the researcher is going to discuss the curriculum development process with two important slages of preparation and evaluation, In the end, 1 am presenting the role amd the way lo maintain the continuity and coherence throughout stages in curriculum development,

The third chapter is going to present the methodology of the research with detailed information about the participants, the research tools, the procedure of data collection, and the procedure of data analysis

Tn the fourth chapter, | would like to present the resulis of data analysis and how they answer four research questions

In the fifth chapter, after describing the target course with the specific information about who and how the currieulum have been built up and adjusted, I am going to make some suggestions to improve the curriculum dasign of the target English tanguage program

Inthe final chapter, the researcher aims at providing the readers a thorough overview of the

roscarch with a summary of the mos! important resulls and suggestions

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I

LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Definition of curriculum, syllabus, course books

A sange of terminology may be used in the specification of curriculum development task with curriculum and syllabus being the most popular and important

1.L1 Curriculum

In view of the literature, a umber of definitions of curriculum have been proposed in both narrow and broad approach For supporters of the narrow view, curricwdum is the totality of learning cxpeticness provided to students so that they can attain general skills and knowledge at a variety of leaming sites (Marsh & Willis, 2003), ‘The broad view define curriculum as an educational program, which slates:

1) “The educational purpose of the pragram (the ends)

2) The content teaching pracedures and learning experience which will be necessary io achieve this purpose (the means)

3) Means for assessing whether or not te educational ends have been achieved.”

(Richards & Platt, 1993, p.94)

MeKay and Searino (1991, p.23) claim thal a eurricedum inchudes:

1) Agflabus, ie a plan of action outlining goals, objectives and learning content 2) Strategies for teaching and learning in the classroom

3) Learning resources

4) Anassessment scheme

5) Evaluation strategies

Holding the strong belief that @ curricudim: should involve the consideration of “the whole

complex of philosophical, social, and administrative factors thal contribute to the planning

school or followed by teachers and school administrators for the students” (UNESCO-IBE, 2007) lo refer fo the writing curriculum under investigation in this thesis

1.1.2 Syllabus

Regarding the definition of syilabus, many people try to conceptualize sylfabus by making

a clear distinction between syllabus and methodology They believe that methodology is concemed with the selection and grading of tasks and activities while ay/labus relates to the selection and grading of content, Whereas, others qnesliou [his strict separation so They seek to define syllabus in a different way, Widdowson (1984) states that a swabus is a framework within which activities can be carried out or in other words a teaching device to facititatc caning Another romosentalive of this upproach is Broon (1984) whe claims that any syllabus will show indircetly cerlain assumption about Tanguage, about the psychological process of learning and about the pedagogic and social processes within classroom ‘This paper adopts the expanded definition of syllabus as a statement of content,

In fact, do these two terms have the same or different reference? Nunan (1998) confirmed

there are s

sral conflicting views on jusl wha distinguishes syllabus design and curriculum development, However, up to now, scholars seem to have come to an agreement about the scope of those two concepts A swlabus is more specific and more

conerals than a œœøviodliem “a curicuhum is a very gencral conwopt” while

concems with a specification of what units will be taught” (Allen, 1984, p.61) Krabnke, K (1987) shared this view by saying that syifabus is a statement of the plan for any part of a

syllabus

curriculum excluding the element of curricudunr evaluation itself and the syllabus should

be viewed in the context of an ongoing cuarieulum developmen process

To sum up, curticulura and syllabus carmol be interchanged; a curricuhum is broader Gran a syllabus in scope, Syllabus is more localized and is based on accounts and records of what actually happens at the classroom level

it is obvious that textbooks represent ihe “visible heart of any ELIT program" (Sheldon,

has been done to ELT cwriculum However, scholars have managed to list educational

curriculum throughout the history as follows:

1.2.1 Curriculum as content

This is a classical way of understanding curriculum In this model, cmriculum means a detailed description of contents of teaching (syllabuses or syllabi) that teachers should deliver to their pupils through teaching This model derives from the classical ‘T'ylerian education rationale that visws teaching and Isarming process as a linear causal relationship (Tyler, 1949) According to this curriculum logic, carefully pre-determined cducationat objectives lead to appropriate selection of content that will be taught and to choice of relevant teaching methods that fit with the qualities of students and teachsrs vahration of Jearning outcomes will then be used to regulate the new “input” or planning of teaching This curricukum model has been typical in many countries It is a common solution in less developed education systems especially when there is a shortage of adequately trained schoolteachers The reasons for the prevalence of this approach are that it is systematic, follows the ideas of industrial management, and has therefore considerable organizing

This curriculum model is based on an assumption that the process through which the goals

of schooling are achieved is more important than the content, thal is used as an object of study Probably the best-known advocate of this cwriculum modal was American

educationalist John Dewey in early 20" century Later on, curricukun as experience

bocame allomulive to classical contont-based curricuhum However, curriculum model that emphasizes experiences rather than transfer of information is more vulnerable to external critics (especially from traditional academic spheres) and also more difficult to use as a basis for educational evaluation and assossment for student loarning

1.2.3 Curriculum us framework

Another altemative to often relatively fixed content-based curriculum has been so called framework curriculum that only sets an objective and provides broad guidelines for actual curriculum planning Framework curriculum is nonmally a comprehensive document that describes the overall aim of schooling, more specific goals of education, and objectives of leaching subjects or infegraled subject groups The purpose of snch a framework curriculum is to leave decision-making and curticuhum planning authority to teachers themselves

Framework curriculum model also requires (hal the eduvalion system has highly qualified and committed personnel in place

1.2.4, Outcomes-based curriculum

In 1980s mostly in North America, the focus of curriculum planning started to shift from

tcaching, ic subjects, content, methods, and other arrangements, to whal students shonld actually learn as a result of school education An idea of outcome-based curriculum expanded widely and was also adopted as a leaming principle of many large-scale curriculum reforms The key idea of outcomes-bascd curriculum is that it guides the planning of teaching by more precise description of intended leaning outcomes In other

words, this curriculums taodet consis

s of descriptive allainment (argets for leaning in various subjects For œsmmple, íL may provide tachers with very dotailed lists of knowledge and skills that students should achieve in any given level of their schooling

‘This onteomes-based curriculum became very popular model in many education reforms in

and students more sy

1.25 Standards-based curriculum

‘The next generation of outcomes-based curriculum was standards-based curriculum model thal gocs oven further iv sctting the eriteria whut sludlenls shoukl know and be able to do in different subjects and at different phrases of schooling The basic logic of standards-based curriculum model is that the State sets the standards for learning and learning that are the

chors, and schools, Th

sarme for all students, Le: landdards aro normully subject-specific, detailed descriptions of expected learning, outcomes per giade or phase of schooling A particular strength of standards-based curriculum is their provision of measurable criteria for evaluating the quality of the course

However, the wzent trond is the combination and integration of morc than one cuuriculuin types Curriculum is an ongoing process, not a product that never ceases once a curriculum framework and a package of prescribed teaching/learning materials are produced and introduced in an educational system It is no doubt that cuziculmm t is the heat of

educational improvement (Pinar et al, 1995)

1.2.6 Criticism of different curriculum development methods

1.2.6.1 Limttations ofa top down model

A top-down model of eurriculum development may be conceptualized in terms of a set of hicrarchically ordered praccsses [hot srơ conlrally initiated and controlled and thal are usually performed by selected expert committees, A decision is made by the supreme

authority in the educational system to start the whole process A steering committee will be

culrasted with the production of the cdualional philosophy A mmiber of working committees will be setected for producing the curriculum guides’ frameworks for different stages and school subjects or subject areas A co-coordinating committee will be entrusted

with [he co-ordination of work done in different commilices al different levels The dutics

of the working committess might include the production of a retrospective scopc-and-

sequence through the analysis of existing curriculum documents and then producing the

prospective scope-and-sequence based on the goals and broad guidelines specified in the

educational philosophy/strategy Malcrials will then be produced or selecicd Matcrials production takes many forms and involves various processes depending upon several factors In most cases, however, this will be the work of committees including textbook writers and editors Tn the different variants of the top-down model, allermpis will be made

to make those materials teacher-proof through the production of teacher manuals that accompany diffzrent textbooks for different stages and grades This process might also inchids lots of brainsionning, fet finding, pooling of ideas, proof roading, rovisiys and publicizing conférences in which the views of all stakeholders are sought

Proponents of this model or its variants nonmally consider such activities major efforts to get all parties concemed, including teachers, involved, Teachers’ involvement here might

be viewed as attempts to familiarize them with what is going on and, probably, ensure that the products arc suitable for or feasible in the Joval market, Only during the implementation stage are teachers actually involved, ‘I'he implementation committees will arrange [or textbook training, and in some cases trialing language leaching malerials on a sinall scale betore they are finally introduced nation-wide, Presumably, this model has its own ways of market evaluation However, the teachers* role will be confined to implementation of the new product in exactly the same way in which expert designers

inlendsd it to be fmplemented All measures are taken to suppressiefrournvent any criticism; and any difficulties encountered by implementers will normally be interpreted as indicators of their ignorance of, or at least lack of familiarity with, the new product But the most importanl advantage of this model is thal tremendous nation wide changes thea are centrally controlled can be cozrcively introduced in a relatively short time

Depending entirely on this model may have both short-term and long-term disadvantages, First, curricultan development in this model looks like an educational raid that ends with roplacing the curenlfy used texthooks by a new

ule a

series that tay, oF may nol, constil

great improvement on the old ones depending on a host of other factors such as the excessive caution of the change agents to be system-sensitive (Markee, 1997) ‘This is specially clear when the change agenl is an cxpalrialc as is the casc im forcign language teaching, More often than not I am being reminded by teachers of very interesting features

of the old materials that they miss in new ones, Moreover, no change agent will ever dare

11

to introduce too many theoretically motivated innovative features given the filtering role

ollen played by system constraints, Therefore, the newly intraduced textbooks may, im very few years, require a new educational raid in which they meet the same fate of their predecessors This is specially disturbing because most educational systems cannot afiord such costs of frequent lextbook replacement Second, and perhaps more disturbing, is thai

it can result in teacher resistance to and/or misinterpretation of innovative features This

argument is supported by the often dwelt upon phenomenon of the gap between theory and

practice To this issue we return later in the so ction about toacher professional growdlh With all attempts made to produce teacher-proof materials through the production of highly prescriptive teacher manuals, teachers may reinterpret any task or language learning

sxperiemes Third, detailed guidance given to Ioachars about how to implement matoriats designed by experts can lead to guidance jams and feelings of insecurity, anxiety and a relatively low level of self-efficacy It might be argued that such phenomena are expected only in the initial stages of implementation [lowever, this prescriptive approach can develop what might be callcd pedagogical dogiatism Fourth, as Markec (1997, p 64)

of ownership detrimentally affect teachers’ commilment to the succoss of the newly

introduced imovative features

1.2.6.2 Bottom_up/schaolhased curriculum development

In many parts of the world sul as USA, Brilain, Austrulia and some other European and South-Asian countries, many attempts have been made to develop curricula using bottom-

up models (Bolstad, 2004) In almost all these attempts, teachers in a particular school or Togiơn of country will be entasted with developing their school curricula collaboralively Several detinitions of school based curriculum development (SBCD) are available in the literature Skilbeck (1984, cited in Bolstad, 2004, p.14) defines it as

«the planning, design, implementation and evaluation of a program of students’ learning

by the educational institution of which those students are members.”

Bezzina (1991, p 40) defines SBCD as

.a process in which some or ail of the members of a school community plan, implement, and/ or evaluate an aspect or aspects of the curriculum offering of the school This may involve adapting an existing ewriculum, adopting it unchanged, or creating a new curriculum, SBCD is a collaborative effort which should not be confused with the individual efforts of teachers or administrators operating outside the boundaries of a collaboratively accepted framework.”

In her literature review on SBCD, Bolstad (2004) sems up its main charactensstics:

Teachers are responsible not only for the implementation of ewrieula, but also for ils

development

Y SBCD is a collaborative process

Vv Itis an on-gomy process

Vv Ithas to be centrally supported and facilitated

+⁄_ Itmay be adaptive rather than wholly creative

Several argumints arc frequently made to justify SBCD One major argument is that it helps avoid the problems involved in top-down models, Another argument is that it makes curricula meet the needs of learners and local commumities Tt is also argued thal, SRCD ensures teacher autonomy, a goal thal

SRCD can be very slow and piecenteal Besides, a lack of central govermmos and monitoring can have serious detrimental effects on the quality of the teaching learning processes Furthermore, many teachers may simply be unwilling to participate in such attempts thinking thal currieuhun devclopmicn! is beyond their role commitments This is

1.3.1 Preparation for curriculum tleveloiiment

To prepare for the cuzriculum development, McKay and Scarino (1991) emphasized three points including the establishing the curriculum development task, clarification of the task

and suppor! structure for the project

1.3.1.1 Establishing the curriculum development task 'There are a number of options to choose curriculum developers as follows:

¥ School-based: Practicing teachers are given regular release time from teaching to develop uiterials

¥ Clusters of schools, districis, or regions: One project officer coordinates the curicutum development work of teachers in schools

¥ System wide: A ecniral tam forms a core working party, consulting regularly with teachers, The team carries out the writing, and teachers respond to the drafts and participate in trialing,

¥ A combination of school-based and regional or system wide structures is used

(McKay & Searino, 1991, p.11)

‘The processes of curriculum development followed can also vary:

Y ‘The project team writes an initial draft with limited consuitation, ‘I'he team then consults teachers and others to gather responses and rewrite according to

TCäCUOIä

Y The project team coordinates the input of the teachers to the writing task and ñnahzes the material for publication

1.3.1.2 Clarification of the task

‘To guarantee the quality of the curriculum, McKay and Scarino (1991) state that all those involved and influenced by the planned curriculumn development need to establish a clear, shared understanding of the task betore proceeding, Clear statements of goals, objectives, and outcomes need to be determined, and the roles and responsibilities of participating members noed to be nogatiated Some sigrificanl questions conecrrs

¥ The nature of the leamer group: the age, number, their language experience and competence

¥ The nature of the program: type of target program

¥ The nalure of the target audience: the suitabilily of the curriculum lo the largel

teachers and students

¥ The natwe of cwriculum development task the understanding of the terminology used

Y Management processes within the writing group and consultative processes beyond the writing gronp: who will be affected by the task? Wha will be asked for consultancy? Who will give the final decision?, <tc

¥ The time flame; What are the time lines for the project?

Answers to all the above questions will influence the time and enzrgy spent on different

aspects of curriculum development process

Curriculum developers should be flexible and modify the plan as required, modification should be expected after consultancy

1.3.1.3 Support structures tor the project

- Management: A management group may assist the financial and administrative aspects of

the projects; particularly, if more than one system or agency is involved in the task The management group may be organized by and comprise personel ftom the administrative structures supporting the project It is likely to include personnel representing the project, the system and finding agency It is useful to establish clear roles and responsibilities

regarding management process.

15

- Profassional consultancy: A reference group may provide invaluable support A reference group may consist of

¥ personel from management group

¥ colleagues with expertise in the arca,

gg other curriculum writers on the same and in other languages

3 well as in other arcas of the curriculum, teachers:

¥ representatives from a range of interested areas, e.g early childhood education

¥ tertiary represcniatives

¥ the project writers

Mesting of the groups ean bo held:

¥ ona reguilar basis during the life of the project

¥ ona short-term basis Lo deal with particular document or issue

once only, to deal with a particular document or issue

¥ once only, with further guidance or feedback provided by correspondence

Reference group can provide:

¥ — guidance on directions to take

Y assistance in the development of materials, e.g feedback on drafts

Y perspective ftom the range of related interest groups

- Information dissemination: this must be done to collect feedback for the curriculum

1.3.2 Curriculum evaluation

Both teachers and Icarncrs necd to cvaluate the Icarning activity, the syllabus and other aspect of the learning and teaching activity Narrowly, it is for students to judge, to make comments on the tsaching and learning activity (which is important for the teachers lo look

at for making changes’ innovations) and adjust their own learning, More broadly, teachers

needs evaluation “because it can provide a wealth of information to use for the fixture

direction of classroom practice, for the planning of the courses, and for the management of

Icarning tasks and sludents” (Germaine ct al., 1992, p.3)

As summarized by Dickins and Germaine (1992, p 10), there are two Teasons why

evaluation is called for

effectiveness

¥ With a planned evaluation process of evaluation through trial of the curiculum materials

Y ‘Through consultations, questionnaires, interviews with teacher and other users

aboul the curricakum

Statement pf essential learning

v Ilasa statement of Essential learning been included?

v’ How was it arrived at?

¥ Isit sufficiently comprehensive for the syllabus?

¥ How does it compare with the Statements of Essential learning in other States’?

Y Isa clear statement of development through states evident in the statement of

Essential learning?

Goals and general objectives

Y’ Llave general objectives been stated?

Y’ Ilave they been stated in holistic terms?

Y’ Isthere an adequate range’?

v Check initially through dimensions and communication goals (activity types)

Then check through the four macro-skills

¥ Arc they sufficiontly goucralizable? Sometimes is il possibls to combing some of the objectives?

¥ Are they assessable?

¥ Do the genaral objectives relate to the goals and activities?

Suggested activities

¥ Isthere an adequate number and range of activities?

Check range through activity-type and macro-skills Are they expressed sufficiently clearly and consistently?

¥ Have they been categorized accurately according to according to the activity-type framework? Are they activities and not exercises? Apply the context, audience, purpose framework (or allermatively use the field, tenor, mode Giamework) to

claborals the activilics

¥ Are Ihe aclivitics appropriats to the slage? Is stimulus language or a specific

resource indicated to help clarify the level? Are sufficient examples provided?

¥ Do the activities match the goats and/ or objectives?

¥ Are there any other activi

the organizational focus?

which could he added to bring in another aspect of

Are the activities ordered and/ or sequentced in any way’? Lf'so, is it coherent? Are

the criteria for sequencing evident?

If more than one activity-type is indicated for an activity, is it necessary? Can the activily be casily divided into work or three aclivities, or is the focus of the

activity clearly in one particular activity-type?

¥ Do the activities relate to the organizational focus of the module?

¥ Is arange of resources implied?

Y Do some of the activities lend themselves to assessment? Have these been

indicated?

Modules

¥ On what basis have the organizational focus been chosen? Is it explicit’ Is the

basis justifiable and appropriate?

¥ On what basis have the organizational focus been chosen? Is it explicit? Is the

19

basis justifiable and appropriate?

¥ Is anoverview of the module (in terms of the range of dimensions, modes and

activity- types) provided?

Y Lave some suggested units been provided in each module? Is there a sufficient

range and scope for a unit? Does the module allow for several units?

Kxercises

Are they in fact exercises?

Isa range of leckmiques evident in the exercise?

Isa sufficient range of procedures included?

Ate criteria for judging performance and awarding grades included?

Ate exemplars included? Are they appropriate?

General questions

Y Are the writers clear about the expected outcomes of the project, ie the

curriculum package: syllabus, resources package and Leachers? manual? Tow is work in each of the originality?

¥ What does the curriculum look like as a whole? Is it filly developed? Ts it

internally consistent? How is the issue of sequencing deal with? Is there an

element of originality?

Y Isthe difference between Stages sufficiently clear in terms of level?

Y Isthere development through Stages in terms of organizational focuses?

¥ What consultative strut3ures have been established for the project?

Has a time-hne been established?

(McKay & Scarino, 1991, p.76-77) Table 1 Evaluation of curriculum development process

1.4 Continuity and coherence through various stages in curriculum development

The issue of maintaining conlinuily and coherence across phases of schooling is an important one (Me Kay, P, & Scarino, A 1998, p, 24)

When developing curriculum matzrials for learners, curriculum designers nood lo:

¥ attend the detail, range and cohersrce within materials designed for each Slage (micro-approach)

¥ maintain an overview of the Stages in order to check for progression, continuity and coherence (macro-approach)

‘To facilitate the above requirements, Mc Kay and Scarino make some suggestions In

particular, curriculin developers should approach the task from both these angles from the earliest stages of the project, It is useful, for example, to outline the broad development across Stages before working in depth on any one Stage or to work in broad brush-stroke across a number of Stages while completing one Stage in detail with #equent reference to the outtine

Activities can be graded and sequenced according to the:

¥ activily itself: number of participants, level of cognitive demand, ete

¥ text used: grammatical complexity, whether it is concepmally easy or difficult to understand, cte

¥ conditions under which the activity is undertaken access to a dictionary, degree of teacher support, degree of redrafting allowed, degree of redeemability, ete

~ expectation: degree of grammatical accuracy, level of appropriateness, breadth, and depth of vocabulary

Syllabus designers can use the following checklist for their work reference

¥ specific objectives, e.g elements of language, skills, strategies

(Adapted from Mc Kay, P, & Scarino, A 1998, p 24)

¥ —— Context embedded ¥ — Context-reduced

¥ Lille assumed knowledge |v Mors asautnof

prior to activity

w Experientially known knowledge pnor to activity

w Experientially new

Y _ Notsocioculturally speciie

processing (e.g information is presentsd in a clear, logieal manner, short manageable chunks

Socio-culturally specific

¥ — Inorease cognitive processing

¥ — Inoreased mumber of

participants

¥ — Tnereased number of steps required in the activity

ý Imeeascd linguiste processing,

¥ — Subject matter of the text

is nor necessarily familiar to

the learner

¥ More complex structure

Y Information may be less

clearly

¥ Layout less significant in assisting comprehension of meaning

¥ Lessnon-lingistie clues

* Print or recording may be

23

recording and no redundancies

¥ — Reduced speed and! or number of speakers

of low quality and contain a

⁄⁄ The degree of accuracy and

fluency required is reduced

“The degree of sovio-cultural

knowledge required is reduced

¥ — Lxtensive reliance on use of

bommmumication stralagics

Differentiation | “ Fxtensive suppor v Redaced support

by conditions | y — Fytensive time available for |¥ Reduced time available

“Extensive preliminary work |“ Redneedredeamability

to introduce the activity

“Opportunity available to redeem an initial effort

Differentiation |“ ‘The response may be short| “ — The response is longer

(McKay, & Scarino, 1991, p 28)

Table 3 The differentiations between stages im learning and teaching process

To illustrate the differentiation framework, McKay and Scarino (1991) provided an

example © acros

81⁄ ALI slages — report wriling

Stage 1: Leamers write a short reporl, with teacher guidance: models and

1 | hoadings qsiven, vocabatary supptiod, and teacher support right thrangh,

1 | including individual support, e.g conferencing and redeemability

Stage 2: Loamers write a longer report, still with strong teacher support: the L

ị teacher describes the process step-by-step, goes through the suggested content | ¡

for report, and supplies a model, heading and skeleton outline, learners copy

from the model into books, changing key words or sections as needed i

Stage 3: Leamers write a report appropriate to the requirements of the subject

area, some discussion before writing, teacher reminds learners of structural

requirements, etc and vocabulary, short discussion on content, support from

| teacher during writing process

Stage 4: Leamers write a long, more detaled report by themselves, structures

and content of report is expected to be appropriate to the requirements of the

1 subject area, minimal support before or after writing process, #edback im terms of'a mark, and comments

lo design and build up a curriculum from preparation to evaluation, The

why, when and how a curriculum should be evaluated were also staled clearly herein Finally, to provide readers with firm background knowledge of the focused aspect of the curriculum in this research, | mentioned the necessity and ways to create the consistency and conlinuity throughout syllabus dosign slag:

The next chapler prasenis the methodology used in this research,

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

2.0 Research questions

1 How do the first and second year writing syllabus components and course hook contents

match course objectives?

2 How do the syllabus components and course books guarantee ie continuity and

coherence through stages in curricula development?

3 How do the syllabus components and course books guarantee the isternal consistency of

the curriculum?

4 if there are same mismatches, what problems occur as a consequence?

2.1 Participants

‘To collect data for this research, the researcher approached two writing syllabus designers

of the first and second year program, 100 second year students at English Teacher Edueation Department HULIS VNU who belong to 4 groups of E8, E10, E11, E14 and

5 teachers from English ‘Teacher Education Department _HULIS _ VNU who have been involved in Leaching the writing program of both the English language Division! and 2

‘Tabke 4 Survey and Interview participant description

‘The students were randomly chosen to make the research objective and representative

while the 5 teach:

involved in delivering the first yoar and sccond year writing program were selected based on their consent, The first year students were not ineluded because they are not compstent (both linguistically and psychologically due fo the transitional natures of their firsl ycar experience in higher cducation) cnough to provide valid and reliable infoxmation

2.2 Duala collection instrument

To find out the answers to four rescarch questions, the rescarcher has exploited 4 rescarch tools Firstly, along with the knowledge acquired ftom the literature review and ALTE framework, I investigated and analyzed the BA TEFI curriculum, the conse guide with claims about course objectives, matcrials, structure, assessment and grading, assignments; and the course books his enabled the researcher to have firstly the overview of the whole writing programs and then a closer lock into specific items to find oul any conflicts

bolwsen the ecurss objectives and syllabus componenis Tike activitios or assignments

designed to achieve those objectives, the teaching and learning activities and course materials that fail to guarantee the continuity and consistency throughout stages of the whole English language program

The second tool ulitized by the researcher is the analysis of the papers and writing porltolio that 100 sophomores produced in their first and second year to find out the consequences

of designing the above assignments and activities Also, the findings of the students’

rosulis and mistakes help me eanGirm the suitability of the assignment (o students? I

and reveal the consequences of the discontinuity and inconsistency in cuticulum development stages

Besides, | conducted a survey among 100 second year students and interviewed 5 teachers

lo answer the questions of whether sludents and teachers face any probleres and what problems they face due to the discontinuity and inconsistency in the syllabus or the mismatch between the course objectives and other curriculum components These students

who have undertaken the first and second year Unglish writing program can have an appropriate and cxhaustive cvaluslion of the targel syllabus while 5 teacher interviewees

who have taught first year and second year writing program can also give professional

reflections of the issue based on their real experiences

Interviews were also conducted with the two syllabus designers to clarify the factors influencing their syllabus design, thoir evaluation of the suitability of corlain typos of assignments to students’ level and suggestions to guarantee the continuity of the six - semester Lnglish language program

2.3 Procedure of data collection

The data collection procedure comprised 4 main stages:

Stage 1

In the first stage, the researcher had to read and study the BA TEFL curriculum, course guide with specifics of course objeclives, materials, structure, assessinent, grading, and assignments and then the couse books for the first year and second year English writing, program, ‘hen, based on the literature review especially, the framework of ALTE, which

Stage 3:

Afier completing the second step, the researcher analyzed the students’ papers and portfolio for English Writing to got the basis for designing the student questionnaires The

29

list of questions for the strvey was pondered for one week ‘The questions aimed at clarifying students? evalualion of some cerlain types of writing thal rnismmaich the course objectives, the mistakes they often make in these types of writing, and the reasons for their making those mistakes and their suggestions for bettering the writing syllabus and course books To cary oul the survey, the leacher wranged a meeting wilh Ihe monitor of 4 aroups of E8, E10, E11, E14 - K4, explaining the purpose of the survey, requesting their

consent to participate and asking them to pass the questionnaires on to their classmates

Three days afler the meoting, the monitors relumed the completed questionnaires ta the researcher To avoid the situation in which the monitor cannot detiver the questionnaire to the classmates and answered all of them by himself’ herself, the researcher contacted a

At the agreed time, the researcher had face-to-face conversations with those teachers one

by one The required procedure of an interview was strictly followed and for the preciscness and convenionce for decper analysis, all the interviews were recorded with their consent

When it comes to the latter subjects, I had to conduct email interviews because both of the syllabus designers were away from Hanoi on business, ! send email to the participants and received their answer jus! two days Tater As the lisl of questions was very clear so the interviews could be done in such a way

2.4 Procedure of data analysis

Stage 1:

In the first stage, I had to study the course guide and course books very carefully to figure out: 1) the conilict between any component of the syllabus and course books with course objectives, 2) any syllabus component, and course book conlent thal breaks the continuity

and consistency requirement of curriculum development in order to come up with an accurate list, Fad to refer lo ALTE framework during the analys

pro

mrolilly and regularly To increase the accuracy of the analysis, I turned to a colleague in the same division for help with another list Then, we compare the lists together, finding out and discussing the differences to come to the agreed final list

Tha nufshelt, the rescarch involved two writing syllabus designers of the first and sceond

‘year program, 100 second year students at English Teacher Education Department

HULIS _ VNU who belong to 4 groups of F8, B10, ELL, and BIA and $ teachers fiom

English Teacher Education Department _ HULIS _ VNU who have cxpericnecd the writing program of both the English language Division! and 2, The researcher exploited four research tools including the analysis of the course guide with claims about course objectives, materials, structure, assessment and grading, assignments, and th: coursc books based on ALTE fiamework, The second tool is the investigation into the papers and writing portfolio that 100 sophomores produced in their first and second year to End out

of designing the above assignments and activities Two other fools are

survey for 100 sophomores and interviews for 5 teachers and two syllabus designers

Results of the data analysis arc presented in the next chapter.

in accordance with the course guide for the first year Janguage program, students have to

“master” summary and reflection writing at the very beginning of the first semester (Course guide for English language skills _ Scmester I, p.3) and learn about argumentative writing in the second semester, Whereas, the second-year students are supposed to

“familiarize” with these types of writing only (Duong ‘Thu Mai et al, 2004)

As such, the fact that the first year writing program requires students to master summary and reflection writing is quite unreasonable This was also mirrored by the poor results of

the reflection and summary assignments the participants did in their first year

Table 5 Students’ results in reflection and summary exercises

‘As can be seen fiom the table, the average grade students get for both summary and reflection exarcises were not high at all with the former being better However, the dataset

in both cases were rather homogenous with standard derivation being approximately s=t With this result, we can conclude that students did not master these types of assignments in their first year

This paints the same pictures with the result of the student survey and teacher interviews,

In particular, 100% of the teachers interviewed and 50% of the syllabus designers questioned said that students’ performance in summary and reflection cxcreises are bad,

Whereas, 90% and 5% of the student respondents judged Siwumary and Reflection Difficult

and Too Difficult for the first year respectively and only 5% believe that they are suitable

lo frestunen When it comes io tha socond year, 95% of thata think that these types of assignments are quite to their Jevel

Figure 3 Students’ evaluation of the difficulty of Summary and Reflection

Besides, analyzing their papers and their answers in the survey, the researcher managed to

come up with a list of difficulties, which are realized by the mistakes they often made as

follows,

Summary assignment

Including specific details

One of the mistakes students make the most often is to include trivial details in their

summary, to take the following assignment as an example:

Sophie Milman is a glamorous jazz singer of Canada In the second emigrating to Canda,

she was offered of the recording contract after just three or four professional singing

engagement, that touched off a series of events Her self-titled debut was released in 2004

After two and a half year of touring the world had deepened and strengthened

collaboration between Milman and her band, she achieved resounding success worldwide,

specially in Canada and the United States Meanwhile, she has maintained a rigorous

touring schedule and continued to balance her burgeoning music career with the

commerce studies at the University of Toronto Only in her mid-20s, she has already seen

and done more than many people twice her age.