Curriculum Development in Language Teaching - Report Example

Posts Forum Topics Name Course Tutor Date Posts Forum Topics Forum Topic 3.1: Evaluating Program The process of program and syllabus assessment is considered as important in the development of syllabus. Therefore schools and teachers are responsible for the results of each program that is designed for the purpose of language learning and teaching. Program evaluation has therefore surpassed the process of testing and making judgment in relation to the success of the entire program. Hence the process of evaluation is defined as a systematic gathering of important data for the sake of decision making process. Thus program evaluation is regarded as an important aspect in the decision facilitation approach and the assessment procedures in the process of learning (Richards, 2001). According to Brown (1995) the evaluation process of a program is not therefore considered as judgmental but important in the facilitation of decision making process. In addition, the process of assessment of a program is essential as it provides a chance for gauging the successes and failures of a particular program. Evaluation also provides an opportunity to assess what has been achieved by the program as both short term and long term goals of the learning and teaching process. I would like to point that the controversial issue in program evaluation involves the different definition of what program assessment entails. Hence the information collected can either be considered as qualitative or quantitative depending on the different dimensions of data collection process. Furthermore, the program assessment is engaged in the process of determination of the effectiveness of the program being used (Brown, 1995) References Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: a systematic approach to program development (pp. 217-246). Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle and Heinle. Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forum Topic 3.2: Evaluating materials In language teaching and learning it is important for the materials engaged in the process of teaching to be evaluated so as to attain the effectiveness of language learning and teaching process. Learning materials act as resources that are utilized in language learning process. The process of material assessment can be done prior to utilization which is considered as pre-use evaluation. It can also be done after the materials has been utilized which is regarded as post use evaluation. Material evaluation is conducted in the process of language learning in order to ascertain the suitability of the materials being used in the learning and teaching process. The evaluation process can be considered as either macro or micro. In terms of macro evaluation process the entire program is assessed while micro evaluation process focuses on a particular aspect or feature of the program in relation to its effectiveness. Hence it is important for these materials to be assessed so as to be able to analyze their strengths and weaknesses in terms of language learning (Richards, 2001). One of the most interesting aspects in material evaluation is the fact that it acknowledges that learners have a different life outside the classroom setting. Therefore the views of the learners in relation to materials that are used in the process of learning should be considered. Material evaluation can be done by teachers through the process of reviewing the effectiveness of the materials being used in the classroom context. In addition, the learners themselves can be incorporated in the material evaluation process through the use of questionnaires or survey approach (McGrath, 2002). References McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching (pp. 179-203). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forum Topic 3.3: Commonly Used terms in Language Testing and some limitations in Testing In the process of developing the use of language tests various terms such as measurement, test and evaluation are commonly used. It is more interesting to note the fact that the various terms are normally utilized synonymously in language teaching and learning. Test is considered as a measurement tool that is mainly designed to obtain a sample of an individual’s form of behavior. According to McGrath (2002) a test is therefore used for the purposes of quantification process. It is also important to note the fact that a test in language teaching and learning should be able to provide the best scores that will be regarded as consistent, significant and practical. In addition, there is a great association between measurement, tests and evaluation. However, despite the achievement made in language testing there are various limitations that testing encounter. This is attributed to the fact that the valuable of tests is founded in the capability of the test o elicit a precise form of behavior (Henning, 1987). Tests require an interpretation of the evidence that is used in the particular test. In addition, test may not be regarded as the best indicator of language use and performance among learners. I would like to point that despite the limitation of testing in language learning and teaching testing should not be regarded as less valuable as an aspect in learning. This is due to the fact that for efficiency and proficiency to be attained in language learning testing is crucial (McGrath, 2002). References McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching (pp. 179-203). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Henning, G. (1987). A guide to language testing. Cambridge, Mass: Newbury House. Forum Topic 3.4: Types of Tests There are varied types of tests that can be used in language learning and teaching process. The different types of tests are therefore dependent on the individual’s particular purpose. Within the context of the classroom in relation to classroom functions tests can be classified as placement, formative, summative or diagnostic assessments. Different tests are essential in the classroom as they provide the teacher with the necessary for the learning and teaching process. Different tests provide the teacher with varied forms of information or data. For instance a placement test within the context of the classroom can also act as a diagnostic test in the sense that it provides the teacher with information in regards to language skills in relation to the different levels of the students (McGrath, 2002). Bachman (1990) therefore argues that the different tests are important as they it provides information in relation to the student’s mastery of the various language skills that the instructions were designed for. The current trend involves the combination of various tests interpretation for the purpose of language mastery and effectiveness in the learning process. I would like to point out the fact that the different types of tests in language teaching and learning process is mainly utilized in terms of different goals and objectives of the learning process. It is further argued that the combination of different tests in important in order to come out with desired results in language acquisition (Bachman, 1990). References Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing (pp. 30-40). Oxford, Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press. McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching (pp. 179-203). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Forum Topic 3.5: Validity and Reliability Validity and reliability involves the ability of ensuring that the testing instruments were used for the intended purpose and the measurements were consistent and accurate. According to Gronlund and Linn (1990) the aspect of validity is important as it focuses on the measurement of what was intended to be measured. In relation to validity and reliability a test cannot be regarded as valid if it is not reliable. Weir (1990) argues that the concept of reliability involves a measure of accuracy, dependability and consistency of the various scores within a particular test. Within the context of learning there are various limitations to the reliability of a test. In addition there are different types of validities that are engaged in various measurements (Weir, 1990). These threats can be in form of fluctuations in the test taker that is attributed to such factors such as fatigue or sickness. I would like to point out that there are different types of validities such as content, face, criterion-related and construct. Content validity is mostly concerned with representation of what is being measured, face validity involves the motivation of the test takers and criterion related validity comprises of test scores in relation to an external criteria that is administered on performance. In addition, it is interesting to note that construct validity includes all other types of validities. This is mainly attributed to the fact that the measuring too involves information on construct validity (Gronlund & Linn 1990). References Gronlund, N. E., & Linn, R. L. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (6th ed., pp. 12- 16). New York, New York: Macmillan. Weir, C. J. (1990). Communicative language testing. New York: Prentice Hall. Forum Topic 4.1: The ALL guidelines The Australian Language Level denoted as ALL was developed as a project that was meant for the development of a national method to language teaching and learning in the context of Australia. The ALL guidelines are considered as a representation of reconciliation of different language curriculum for teaching ESL. Therefore the ALL guidelines involve flexibility that comprises the various features of particular learning situations. Hence it encompass the principles of teaching and learning and a set of objectives that is applicable to diverse language program and can be involved in the development of curriculum. In addition, the guidelines involve various important aspects that are essential in language learning and teaching process. The five important features include; the curriculum jigsaw, the activities foundation, the principles of language learning, the incorporation of goals and the table of language usage (Krahnke, 1987). I am also interested in the fact that ALL introduces the concept of stages in second language learning process. In addition, each stage applies the broad description of the learner characteristics that allows for development in language competency at each stage of the schooling process. Hence, the flexibility of the ALL guidelines allows for flexibility that encompasses the various features of the different learning settings. In my experience as a teacher the ALL guidelines is learner centered and provides learners with prospects to engage in communicative use of a specific language while understanding the role of language and culture in various contexts. Furthermore, the guidelines provides feedback in relation to the progress of language learning process (Vale et.al. 1991). References Vale, D., Scarino, A., & McKay, P. (1991). Pocket ALL: a user's guide to the teaching of language and ESL (pp. 33-36). Carlton, Vic.: Curriculum Corporation. Krahnke, K. (1987). Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Forum Topic 4.2: Common European Framework The Common European Framework also denoted as (CEF) is considered as being similar to ALL. This is mainly attributed to the fact that they were both established with the purpose of promoting a universal system to language curriculum development. Thus, CEF covers a wide range of language usage and language learning and teaching. It I important to note that CEF framework must comprise such features such as comprehension, transparency and coherency. The CEF approach therefore is considered as being action oriented as it views language users and learners as social agents within the context of the society. In this case communication and communicative requirements are a regarded as being of great importance as it is activated by various performance activities. I would like to point the fact that the development of CEF was an important development in the field of linguistics. The development of Common European Framework is important in language learning in order to promote and facilitate collaboration within educational framework in various countries. In addition, the framework was important in terms of mutual recognition in terms of language qualifications. Therefore CEF is considered as an important approach for language teaching, learning and assessment. CEF therefore focuses on the nature of language use and the implications for teaching and learning across various institutions. Hence the framework is useful in terms of language content in relation to tests, criteria for learning objective both oral and written and the level of language proficiency (CEF, 2001). References The common European framework in its political and educational context. In Common European framework of reference for languages: learning teaching assessment (pp. 1-20,24,48- 49,58,60). (2001). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Council of Europe. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More