The definition, types, design, and selection of English language curricula
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65405/b0vyvk30Keywords:
syllabi design, task-based syllabi, content, communicative, national, functional, situationalAbstract
The purpose of this article is to examine the many syllabuses that are used to instruct both native and non-native English speakers. In order to describe each form of syllabus according to its emergence in the epistemology of syllabus design and pedagogical trends in teaching English worldwide, the researcher employed a chronological approach. The paper emphasized theories of language and learning, features of each syllabus, and advantages and disadvantages of the syllabi under discussion. Additionally, emphasis was placed on illuminating the connections between instructional methods and techniques and syllabus types. Examples of syllabi design was also discussed. The researcher made an effort to include writings from academics and authors who supported each course. This article's material was presented using a list of key titles and explanations of the curriculum. For additional inspiration, primary and secondary sources were consulted.
Downloads
References
Allwright, R.L. (1997). Seminar notes from “Contributions to Language Learning I”, M.A. E.L.T. Unit, Department of Applied Linguistics, and Lancaster University. October December 1997.
Abobaker, K. M., & Adlali, R. M. (2026). Teacher Talk and Learner Response: A Discourse Study of Oral Feedback in Speaking Classes in Libya. Al-Farooq Journal of Sciences, 2(3), 1190-1203.
Baleghizadeh, S. (2012). Grammatical syllabus and EFL textbooks: the need for consciousness raisingactivities. Per-Linguam28(1):111-116 http://dx.doi.org/10.5785/28-1-123.
Barnett, J. (1980). “Notional/Functional Approaches.” In Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. Ed. Robert Kaplan, Randall L. Jones, and G. Richard Tucker. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 43–57.
Bourke, J. (2006). Designing a topic-based syllabus for young learners. ELT Journal 60 (3) July 2006 doi:10.1093/elt/ccl008. Available at https://www.scribd.com/document/189983618/topic-based-syllabus.
Breen, M. (1984) “Process Syllabuses for the Language Classroom.” in Brumfit, C.J. (ed) General English Syllabus Design, ELT Documents 118. London, Pergamon Press/British Council. 47-60.
Brown, D. (1995). Teaching by Principles-An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall.
Brown, D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Prentice Hall. Brumfit, C. (1981). The Notional Syllabus Revisited. Applied Linguistics, 2 (1). pp. 83-89.
Candlin, C. (1984): “Syllabus Design as a Critical Process.” in Brumfit, C. J. (Ed): General English Syllabus Design, ELT Documents 118. London, Pergamon Press/British Council. 29 -46.
Cullen, R. (2008). Teaching grammar as a liberating force. ELT Journal. 62:221-230. Ellis, R. (1993). The Structural Syllabus and Second Language Acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (1). pp. 91-113. doi: 10.2307/3586953.
Ellis, R. (2003) Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Jalilzadeh, K. & Tahmasebi, A. (2014). Content-based syllabus. European Scientific Journal, 1: ISSN: pp.1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 743.
Johnson, R. (1989). “A Decision-Making Framework for the Coherent Language Curriculum.” in Johnson, R.K. (Ed): The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. pp. 1- 23.
Johnson, R. (1989). The second Language Curriculum. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Larsen, D. (1974). “A Re-Evaluation of Grammatical Structure Sequencing” in Crymes and Norris (Eds): On TESOL. Washington D.C., TESOL. pp. 151-161.
Long, M. (1985a). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.). Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. 77-99.
Long, M., & Robinson, P., (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1998). 26
Latif, M. B., & Saeid, S. A. M. (2026). The Impact of Teaching English Literature as an Elective Course to Fourth-Year ESL Students in a University Context. Al-Farooq Journal of Sciences, 2(3), 1166-1179.
Long, M. & Crookes, G. (1992). Three Approaches to Task-Based Syllabus Design. TESOL Quarterly, (1), spring 1992, Pages 27–56. Available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2307/3587368/abstract.
Lunenburg, M. and Lunenburg, F. (2014). Applying Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom: A Fresh Look at Teaching Writing. International Journal of scholarly academic Intellectual Diversity, 16(1), 2014. Available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1140/675d1f017400842ca72bf25ccf287b9fea0d.pdf
Shneb, H. M. (2026). Writing Assessment in Undergraduate EFL Courses: A Document Analysis of Examination Papers at Elmergib University, Libya. Al-Farooq Journal of Sciences, 155-176.
Soliman, L. (2026). Evaluating and analyzing the use of sentiment analysis techniques in developing reading comprehension skills among English language learners. Al-Farooq Journal of Sciences, 2(3), 686-706.
Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pages 34-38 | Published online: 23 Aug 2006.
Nunan, D. (2001). Teaching grammar in context. In Candlin, C & N Mercer (Eds.). English language teaching in its social context. London, UK: Routledge. 191-199.
Nunan, D. (1988). The Learner-Centered Curriculum. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Nunan,D. (1993) Task-Based syllabus design: selecting, grading and sequencing tasks. In G.Crookers and S. Gass (Eds.).
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 279-295.
Nunan, David. (2005) Important Tasks of English Education: Asia-wide and Beyond. The Asian EFL Journal, 7(3) http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/September_05_dn.php
Pienemann, M. (1985). “Learnability and Syllabus Construction.” in Hyltenstamand Pienemann (eds): Modelling and Assessing Second Language Aquisition. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters. pp. 23-75.
Prabhu, N. (1992). “The Dynamics of the Language Learning Lesson.” TESOL Quarterly, 26(2).
Richards, J., Platt, J. & Weber, H. (1992). Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. London: Longman.
Richards, J. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (1998) State of the art: SLA theory and second language syllabus design. The Language Teacher, 22: 7-14. Rodgers, T. (2001). Language Teaching Methodology. Center for Applied Linguistics Digest. Available at http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/rodgers.html.
Rogers, J. (1982). The World for Sick Proper. ELT Journal, 36 (3). 144 151.
Schulz, R. A. 2005. Language acquisition and syllabus design: the need for a broad perspective [On-line].Available at http://www.adfl.org/adfl/bulletin/v15n3/153001.htm
Skehan, P. (1996a). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17.
Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials Development in Language Teaching. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, UK.
Ur, P. (2000). A course in language teaching: practice and theory. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Willis, D. (1990). The Lexical Syllabus. Collins Cobuild. Wilkins, D. A. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wijaya, H. (2013). Using multiple intelligences-based techniques to improve the writing of Gardezi students at SMPN 2 Bantul in the academic year 2012/2013. Undergraduate thesis yogyyakara: English Education Faculty Program. Available at https://www.academia.edu/10119610/USING_MULTIPLE_INTELLIGENCE BASED_TECHNIQUES_TO_IMPROVE_WRITING_SKILLS.
