Review of Curriculum Development ELT

Hyma Apparaju
Doctoral Student EFL

English and Foreign Language University, Hyderabad

Electronic copy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196
 Review of Curriculum Development ELT

Definition of Curriculum

The explanation that is given by Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 2005 for

the term curriculum is: ‘Curriculum refers to the subjects that are included in a

course of study or taught in a school, college, etc’. This is a brief, general definition

that is not aimed at any specialist branch of knowledge such as language learning or

teaching. It is a definition that makes sense to a lay person who would like to

understand the term from a broad point of view.

In the context of language education, however, the term needs careful and precise

description. According to Stern (1983), the term curriculum is used in two related

senses. The first refers to the substance of a programme of studies of an educational

institution or system. Thus, ‘school curriculum’ or ‘university curriculum’ refer to

this meaning. In the second sense, curriculum refers to the course of study or content

in a particular subject, such as the mathematics curriculum or science curriculum.

The term curriculum, in this sense, is used in the United States whereas in Britain the

word ‘syllabus’ is used to refer to the same.

Over the past few decades, a lot of research work done in the area of curriculum has

led to its recognition as a specialized area of educational studies. Consequently, the

term curriculum has acquired a broader and more comprehensive meaning, referring

not only to content but also to the entire instructional process including educational

goals, objectives, resources, teacher training and means of evaluation among other

things.

Electronic copy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196
Some definitions of curriculum given by experts in the field are:

“... curriculum is a very general concept which involves consideration of the whole
complex of philosophical, social and administrative factors which contribute to the
planning of an educational programme.” Allen (1984)

“Language curriculum is a function of the inter-relationships that hold between

subject- specific concerns and other broader factors embracing socio-political and
philosophical matters, educational value systems, theory and practice in curriculum
design, teacher experiential wisdom and learner motivation.” Clark, J.L. (1987)

“(Curriculum) includes not only what pupils learn, but how they learn it, and how
teachers help them learn, using what supporting materials, styles and methods of
assessment, and in what kind of facilities.” Rodgers (1989)

To sum up, the term curriculum, when used to refer only to the content of an

educational programme is quite inadequate. It refers to a whole range of processes

dealing with the planning and implementation of the educational goals and

objectives.

Having arrived at a comprehensive definition of the term curriculum, an attempt is

made in the following sections to understand the growth and emergence of the field

of curriculum theory in the Western context. In the subsequent sections, the main

approaches to curriculum development are discussed and a detailed study is made of

the product – process distinction in curriculum development.

Curriculum Theory

From about the middle of the twentieth century in the U.S. and U.K., systematic and

periodical inquiry into the effectiveness of existing curricula, especially at the school

level, has led to a curriculum reform movement, identifying the gaps in the existing

curricular frameworks. This in turn has led to innovative approaches in areas such as

teaching methods and development of teaching materials. Gradually, this systematic

approach has given way to the formulation of ‘curriculum theory’.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 According to Stern (1983), curriculum theory is identified with the following

concerns:

1. Curriculum philosophies

2. Essential components of curriculum which include purposes and content, instruction

and evaluation

3. Curriculum processes which are curriculum development, implementation and

management of curriculum change and curriculum evaluation

Curriculum Development

Curriculum development is thus an important field of study under curriculum theory.

This field of study draws inputs from numerous disciplines. According to Johnson

(1989), a number of specialists ranging from policy makers, needs analysts,

methodologists, materials writers and teacher trainers are involved in various phases

of curriculum development. The users of the curriculum products are, of course, the

teachers and the learners. The different phases of curriculum development are

curriculum planning, specification of ends and means, programme implementation

and classroom implementation.

Richards (2001) defines curriculum development as

“...the range of planning and implementation processes involved in developing or

renewing a curriculum. These processes focus on needs analysis, situation analysis,
planning learning outcomes, course organization, selecting and preparing teaching
materials, providing for effective teaching, and evaluation”

Many approaches to curriculum development have been advocated by various

experts in this field. These approaches are based on various underlying ideologies or

philosophies. Stern (1983) outlines five philosophical orientations as distinguished

by Eisner and Vallance (1974):

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

1. The school curriculum should develop cognitive processes and not merely transmit

predetermined content

2. Schooling should offer curriculum as a self-actualization experience, giving the child

meaningful experiences that are immediately relevant.

3. The social reconstruction/relevance orientation lays emphasis on the needs of the

society which are to be met by education and curriculum.

4. Academic rationalism views language instruction as a means of providing classical

scholarship and a common literacy.

5. Curriculum as technology orientation stresses the use of educational technology in

imparting education, through efficient identification of goals and means.

Ornstein and Hunkins (1988) use contrasting terms to view curriculum approaches,

namely, technical and non-technical approaches or scientific and non-scientific

approaches. According to them, technical-scientific approaches coincide with

traditional theories and models of education whereas non-technical and non-

scientific approaches are those that have emerged as alternatives to these traditional

approaches.

One other way of distinguishing approaches to curriculum development is via:

1. The product approach and

2. The process approach

Product Approach

The product approach to curriculum emphasizes the significance of the outcomes in

the learning process. The learning outcomes are identified in the form of behavioural

objectives that are clearly specified at the time of designing the curriculum.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 Behavioural objectives are those that are stated explicitly in terms of the change in

behaviour that is expected from the learners at the end of the learning programme.

These objectives are also referred to as performance or instructional objectives.

Based on these behavioural objectives, the learning content is then selected,

systematically organized, imparted through classroom instruction and the results are

evaluated. In this approach, coherence, rationality and logical and methodical

organization of content assumes great significance. It embodies what Parlett (1975)

refers to, in a related context, as the ‘tidy approach’. All outcomes or ‘ends’ are

planned and the ‘means’ to achieve those ends is reflected in the classroom practice.

The product approach has been advocated by Ralph W. Tyler (1949), whose seminal

work on curriculum theory and practice is based on four fundamental questions:

1. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?

2. What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these

purposes?

3. How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?

4. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?

Tyler (1949) also states categorically that

“All aspects of the educational program are really means to accomplish basic
educational purposes.”
He further states that

“Since the real purpose of education is not to have the instructor perform certain
activities but to bring about significant changes in the students’ pattern of behaviour,
it becomes important to recognize that any statements of objectives of the school
should be a statement of changes to take place in the students.”

This orderly way of setting up objectives and the identification of the means to

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

realize those objectives reflects one way of conceptualizing curriculum

development. This approach has been referred to as the traditional or the rational

approach. Despite many criticisms leveled against it, this approach is used in many

language curriculum development programmes. As a matter of fact many Indian

education boards follow these principles to design what is called the ‘State Board

Syllabus’ (as opposed to the CBSE or ICSE Boards).

Process Approach

The other approach that is sometimes viewed as a reaction against the product

approach is the process approach. This approach provides an alternate way of

looking at the curriculum theory and practice and that is as a process. Here, the

emphasis is not much on the creation of tangible documents to adhere to. Curriculum

is viewed in terms of interactions of teachers, students and knowledge. The entire

process of teaching and learning is of key significance rather than a predetermined

plan that is put into action in the classroom. In this process, therefore, the objectives

and content are not rigidly outlined. The emphasis is on holistic learning rather than

on breaking down of content into minute parts. The content and means are ideally

evolved through the interaction of teachers and learners. Thus the process of

learning, and not transmission of content, becomes the central concern for the

teacher.

Lawrence Stenhouse (1975) was the chief proponent of the process model of

curriculum development. His definition of curriculum is:

“A curriculum is an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of

an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable
of effective translation into practice.”

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

The use of the word ‘educational proposal’ as against an ‘educational plan’ reflects

the tentativeness evident in this approach when dealing with content specification.

Stenhouse (1975) acknowledges this in his statement:

“(Curriculum) is a way of translating any educational idea into a hypothesis testable

in practice. It invites critical testing rather than acceptance.”

This approach also accounts for heterogeneity in the learners’ capabilities and also in

the context of education. Each group of learners is unique and so is each learning

situation. Therefore, with the help of an educational proposal, the teachers and

learners find various means of its interpretation so as to provide significant learning

experiences for the learners. Learners are treated as subjects in this approach rather

than objects.

The learning objectives that one comes across in this approach could be termed, to

use Eisner’s (1975) words, ‘expressive objectives’. He uses this term as a contrast to

‘instructional objectives’, which embody the behaviourist approach. He defines

expressive objectives as describing an educational encounter. According to him, an

expressive objective:

“... identifies a situation in which children are to work ... but it does not specify what
from that encounter ... they are to learn. An expressive objective provides both the
teacher and the student with an invitation to explore, defer, or focus on issues that
are of peculiar interest or import to the enquirer.”
The process approach has stimulated innovative thinking and has resulted in

explorations in unique territories leading to, often, more coherent and useful

language programmes. The learners and the teachers have, in many ways, benefited

from these innovations. An example of this in India would be the renewal and

upgrading processes seen in the curricula of the CBSE scheme of education.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

Having discussed the distinction between the product and process approach to

curriculum, in the following sections an attempt is made to review three value

systems of education delineated by Skilbeck (1982a) and also to describe each value

system in terms of the product – process distinction made in the above sections.

The three value systems

Curriculum development is closely associated with another process which is

curriculum renewal. The two terms are sometimes used synonymously but Clark

(1987) points out a slight change in perspective. He says that the term ‘curriculum

development’ refers to an exercise that starts from the scratch and stops with the

production of some new curriculum package. He prefers to use the term ‘curriculum

renewal’ which implies change in the existing state of affairs and an on-going

process of refinement and recreation.

The three broad educational value systems outlined by Skilbeck (1982a) are

explored and critiqued by Clark (1987), who has made a study of the three value

systems of classical humanism, reconstructionism and progressivism, each of which

embodies ‘a particular constellation of socio-political and philosophical beliefs’,

with particular reference to foreign language curriculum renewal. He makes an effort

at the end to reconcile all the three educational systems in order to integrate the

significant features of each into a broader framework.

Classical Humanism: This value system, in essence, is elitist, top -down and

transmissive. This system is characterized by the ‘desire to promote broad

intellectual capacities, such as memorization and the ability to analyze, classify and

reconstruct elements of knowledge’. The context of British education system forms

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

the basis for this value system. Through the application of this system, two distinct

social classes are created: the elite which are taught the ‘high’ culture and abstract

intellectual thinking and the masses which are taught the more concrete and practical

aspects in accordance with their life style.

In curriculum design, classical humanism is content- driven. Content is analyzed,

sequenced into its constituent parts and each part is graded from simple to complex.

This structured content is expected to be followed by the teacher quite rigidly. The

teacher is hence considered as a possessor of knowledge and the job of the teacher is

to transmit this knowledge to the students. The task of the learners is conscious

learning of rules, their control and application to new contexts. The class is expected

to move homogenously through the learning units.

Assessment is norm referenced, aimed at creating a rank order of pupils, by

comparing their performances with each other. Achievement by the students in the

tests is seen as the measure of their abilities and intellectual capabilities. Curriculum

renewal is centralized, following a top-down approach and is effected from outside

the school. Change in curriculum is sought to be effected by changing the pattern of

examinations.

This value system, when considered through the product-process perspective, fits

better with the product approach. The emphasis of classical humanism is on the

content to be transmitted to the students, which is rigidly classified and sequenced.

The teachers transmit this preconceived knowledge in a structured manner and the

learners are expected to move through the learning units simultaneously.

However, the specification of behavioural objectives, which is the corner stone of

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

the product approach, is not stressed upon through classical humanism. Learning

objectives are expressed in terms of ‘conscious control of the various elements of

knowledge set out along the way.’ Nevertheless, the objectives are prespecified and

are expected to be achieved through the instructional process.

Reconstructionism: The ideology behind this value system is the view that education

is an important agent for bringing about social change. Change is sought to

counteract the discordant social system created by the application of classical

humanism values in education, leading to the binary division of the society.

Individual differences in learning abilities of learners are accounted for in

reconstructionism. Creation of equal opportunities for all is considered as one of the

important goals of education. Rational planning and setting up of goals is central to

curriculum design in reconstructionism, as is deliberate intervention in the education

system.

The curriculum is content oriented, objectives- driven and is founded on behavioural

outcomes. The ends-means approach to curriculum design and mastery learning

techniques are the important outcomes of this philosophy. Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy

of educational objectives outlining the behavioural outcomes of the learning process

is another significant achievement.

After identification of specific behavioural objectives, the content is selected and

graded from simple to complex. The content is broken down into specific part-skills

and the learners are set time frames within which to master these sub-skills. The

teacher’s role is seen as that of the manager of this classroom process. Effective

communicative ability is considered the ultimate goal of language education.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

Assessment is criterion- referenced. That is, the performance of the learners and

consequently their achievement is measured against a well-defined criterion within

the target domain of behaviour. Curriculum renewal is through the Research,

Development and Diffusion approach. Research into the efficacy of the existing

curricula is coupled with feedback from classroom teachers by a central curriculum

renewal committee. The decision making is centralized and innovation is diffused

from the centre to the periphery culminating in its adoption in the schools. It is a top-

down model of renewal, effected from outside the classroom.

This value system may be considered as being close to the rationale of the product

approach. The emphasis that is placed on the predetermination of behavioural

objectives renders this approach product- driven. The learning outcomes are

systematically organized and attempted to be achieved through various classroom

techniques. The roles of teachers and learners are also envisaged with slight

modifications. Learners are expected to be constantly aware of the levels of learning

and the outcomes they are supposed to achieve. Teachers are viewed as the

managers of the entire classroom process where each individual attempts to master

the prespecified levels. However, the social change perspective and redressing of

grievances through education is an area that is not emphasized in the product

approach.

Progressivism: This is a learner-centered approach where education is seen as a way

of providing meaningful learning experiences to the learners. Growth through

experience is a key concept in education. Emphasis is laid on creating the right

environment in the classroom where knowledge is treated as an intrinsic problem-

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

solving capacity to be developed and not as something external to be transmitted

through instruction.

Learners take on the role of active participants in the classroom processes and

teachers are seen as guides or facilitators of knowledge rather than instructors. The

entire process of learning is centered on meaningful activities where learners are

involved in active inquiry, dialogue, consideration, risk-taking and then in the

transfer of the knowledge thus acquired to new settings.

In this value system, the content is indicated but is not prespecified. Since the

emphasis is on classroom interaction, the content is specified to a minimal extent.

Appropriate learning activities are identified which lead to a meaningful interaction

between teachers and learners and among the learners themselves in the classroom.

Assessment is neither norm referenced nor criterion referenced. Here the

involvement of the learner is again seen through peer evaluation and self evaluation.

Assessment reports are given in the form of individual statements of student

achievements. Curriculum renewal is bottom up and school based. It is also

concerned with teacher development. Through the process of self-evaluation by the

teacher, specific learning problems are diagnosed and support is provided to the

teacher in arriving at solutions. Thus the teacher needs to take on the role of

reflective practitioner often participating in action research projects.

Progressivism is a process oriented approach to curriculum development. In this

value system, as in the approach, the process of teacher-learner interaction in the

classroom is given prominence in the curriculum. Prespecification of either content

or methods is generally minimal. The differences in the teaching learning context,

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

the individual variations in the abilities and attitudes of the learners and the

disparities in the learning outcomes are all sought to be accounted for through this

approach.

Learners and teachers are expected to realize their responsibilities and actively work

towards negotiation of content, learning activities and also assessment procedures.

The teacher, in particular, is required to step out of the conventional role of

transmitter of knowledge. What is expected of the teacher is an intuitive

understanding of the inherent variations in the context and in the learners

themselves. Accordingly, the teacher is expected to use suitable teaching strategies,

innovative activities and meaningful assessment methods

The process approach to curriculum thus marks a stage of experimentation,

innovation, evaluation and feedback of the evaluation results into the curriculum

process. Thus a dynamic and constructive cycle of curriculum development is sought

to be created. The process approach has given rise to various innovative approaches

to language curriculum development such as the procedural syllabus, the deep-end

approach and the immersion approach. More innovative methods and approaches are

being attempted in the current scenario of language education, spurred on by the

success of some of the experimental methods.

Having described in detail the product – process distinction in curriculum

development, I attempt to outline, in the following sections, my approach to

curriculum development based on the insights gained through the review of literature

in this area and also based on my own experiences as a teacher and learner.

An Approach to Curriculum Development

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 Any curriculum is intrinsically bound with the context for which it is created. The

curriculum cannot be perceived of as an isolated entity capable of functioning under

any circumstance. As the context changes, corresponding changes have to be made

in the requisite curriculum processes else it is in danger of becoming obsolete or

dysfunctional. In accordance with this view, I have made an attempt in the following

sections to present the context of the teaching-learning situation in which I have

taught and also that in which I propose to teach.

The context

I would differentiate the context into:

1. The social context

2. The educational context

The Social Context

Here, I propose to survey briefly the status of English language in our society and

what augurs for the future. English language in today’s Indian society is gradually

growing in significance and in use. Firstly, as a medium of instruction, its use is

exclusive in the tertiary level of education. Therefore, knowledge of the language

and its proficiency assumes a very significant role in the lives of students aiming for

higher education and a career. Secondly, as a result of urbanization, economic

liberalization and various other factors, use of English for social purposes has also

seen marked rise. As a result we see people, more importantly students, aiming for

communicative abilities and fluency in the language.

One important factor that needs to be considered here is that in the Indian society

there is a huge gap between the language abilities of the urban students, the

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

resources and opportunities available to them and the language abilities of the

students from rural areas and their access to resources. This rural-urban divide needs

to be accounted for in any language policy and suitable decisions need to be made to

try and bridge this gap.

The future of English language in our country can be assessed in very optimistic

terms. It is anyway a language of higher education and a window to the world; in

addition it is also increasingly becoming the language of social interaction between

different linguistic communities. This role is only going to broaden and English is

going to make more inroads into the Indian society.

The Educational Context

In this section I would like to look at the specific context that I have been and will be

associated with, in terms of the nature of college/institute, the learners, teachers and

the teaching learning situation. The context that I shall take up is the tertiary level of

education, specifically the language context in the graduate and post graduate

courses. These courses are run by either university affiliated colleges or private

autonomous institutes. The curriculum processes would be different in each case.

The College/Institute

The university affiliated courses offer both graduate and post graduate programmes

and would follow a centralized curriculum, a common syllabus plan and common

evaluation system for the students with respect to the language curriculum.

Curriculum development is usually entrusted to a board of studies which comes out

with syllabus specifications, in consultation with subject specialists. Sources for

published materials are then found out and are usually prescribed along with reading

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

lists and an indication of teaching methods to be used.

Evaluation is usually a centralized process with a systematized pattern. Assessment

is usually in the form of percentages or grades given out and ranks ordering of pupils

at the top. Curriculum renewal is a slow and gradual process, effected from outside

the colleges, sometimes in consultation with teacher groups and college

administrators.

On the other hand, private institutes that offer post graduate courses follow their own

approaches to language curriculum development and its implementation. In some

cases, a great deal of innovation is incorporated into all the processes, such as

teachers and other interest groups are involved in identifying the specific areas of

curriculum, teaching methods and materials are not rigidly prescribed, teachers are

given more autonomy to choose methods and materials, evaluation is both formative

and summative and feedback on the curriculum processes is analyzed and suitable

changes are fed into the process. However, innovations do not always take place in

all aspects of the curriculum and some of them are mere cosmetic changes.

The Learners

I would like to consider the following factors with respect to learners: their age,

entry level, learning abilities and motivation.

Firstly, considering the age, since the learners are above the senior secondary age,

they can be considered as being adult, responsible and mature.

Secondly, their entry levels are varied, owing to variations in both their abilities and

their learning backgrounds. The urban-rural divide that was mentioned in the earlier

section plays a major part in this variation.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

Thirdly, the learning abilities are naturally different, owing to different styles of

learning, levels of maturity, personality factors, their access to suitable resources and

various other factors.

Finally, their motivation levels differ, both in accordance with the factors mentioned

above and in the light of their future plans and ambitions.

This is a general picture of the learners entering this stage of study.

The Teachers

Here, the factors to be considered are education, experience, training and

adaptability.

Firstly, the level of teachers with respect to their education is disparate, as a result of

various factors chief of which is availability of suitable opportunities.

Secondly, with respect to experience, again wide disparities are found. Some

institutes take in fresher candidates whereas others would prefer more experienced

faculty. However, while conceding that experience adds richness to a teacher’s

qualities, it would not do to dismiss the abilities of novices.

Thirdly, some institutes offer extensive training programmes for their faculty while

some others totally ignore this aspect. So this factor again shows great

differentiation.

Finally, the adaptability of teachers to particular learning situations and to

innovation shows great divergence. Some teachers tend to resist change, some adapt

slowly and some others take to it immediately.

Thus, the teacher profile also presents quite a varied picture.

The Teaching Learning Situation

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 This is an important area for discussion as it is here that the actual implementation of

the curricular aims takes place. The changes or innovations in the curriculum are

either substantiated by the teaching and learning acts or they may be subverted and a

hidden curriculum followed with entirely different goals and objectives from the

specified ones. In the Indian context, lack of extensive and rapid innovation in

curriculum could be a fall out of various factors such as large classes, inadequate

number of teachers, lack of access to resources, unavailability of research results in

this field, apathy towards innovation or a general inclination to maintain status quo.

Accordingly, what actually happens in the classroom could be quite different from

what is expected of the teachers and learners.

To sum up, I would like to reiterate the point made initially that curriculum

development is a context-based programme and a good understanding of the ground

realities is absolutely essential to contemplate success in this endeavour.

Having explored a particular context of the teaching situation in India, I would now

like to set out my approach to curriculum development.

A Reconciliatory Approach

Clark (1987) has outlined the four stages of educational development as given by

Beeby (1973) as follows:

1. The Dame School stage where teachers are poorly educated and largely untrained.

Schools follow a narrow curriculum with much rote learning.

2. The stage of Formalism in which teachers are trained but still poorly educated.

Schools follow a rigidly prescribed syllabus.

3. The stage of Transition in which teachers are better educated and better trained.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 Experimentation is however, restricted by the examination system.

4. The stage of Meaning in which teachers are both well educated and well trained and

are encouraged to participate in the curriculum renewal process.

While not applying these stages literally to Indian society, I would still prefer to take

this division as a basis to scaffold my approach. In the above terms, Indian education

system, especially at the tertiary level, would be at an intermediary stage between

Formalism and Transition.

Since the present educational system needs to be supported and guided to reach the

stages of Formalism and Meaning, I would, given a choice, prefer a combination of

product and process approaches to curriculum development. This I would term

[again after Clark (1987)] as the Reconciliatory approach since some compromise

and understanding is required to bridge the gaps that are created by the system thus

far and to reach a level where such disparities are reduced and education becomes

more meaningful to all the participants.

The approach would try to combine the significant elements of all the three value

systems of Skilbeck (1982a).

1. The basic premise of the approach to curriculum development would be, given the

Indian context, to augment language knowledge and proficiency, to provide

opportunities for the learners to improve vocational skills, and to create a general

awareness towards learning and language learning.

2. The existing curriculum would be examined in the light of the present approach.

Areas of change would be identified and a needs analysis survey conducted among

all the participants of the curriculum, from the administrators to the learners, so as to

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 arrive at a broad framework of proposed changes.

3. A set of learning outcomes would be identified, based on the broad goals mentioned

above, the needs identified and also on the specific learning situation. These would

be specified in behavioural terms so as to make them clear to the various participants

of the development process. However, mere achievement of these outcomes would

not form the core of the curriculum.

4. Content specification would be done in some detail, again to provide support to the

teachers. But teachers would be given a choice to develop their own materials and

classroom activities, in conformity with the broad goals and learning outcomes.

5. Teaching methods would be indicated and an appropriate selection could to be made

by the individual teacher based on the learners and the learning context.

6. Teacher training would be emphasized and enough resources created for the process

where necessary.

7. Meaningful interaction in the classroom would be encouraged so as to provide the

learners with enough opportunities for growth through experience.

8. Assessment would be, where possible, individualistic. Where it is unmanageable, it

would be criterion referenced.

9. Feedback from all the participants of the curriculum regarding the efficacy of the

curriculum would be an important part of the process. The results would be analyzed

and suitable changes made and fed into the process so as to make it cyclic and

dynamic.

10. Teachers would be encouraged to be reflective practitioners and engage in

action research projects for the betterment of the teaching situation and also for their

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 own professional growth.

Conclusion

Based on the literature review and the context analysis made in the subsequent

sections, this approach is formulated. It is, in a sense, ideological but an attempt is

made to match the reality with the ideal so as not to compromise on either.

Bibliography

1. Allen, J.P.B. 1984. General- Purpose Language Teaching: Variable Focus Approach,

in C.J. Brumfit (ed.) General English Syllabus Design, ELT Documents, 118.

2. Beeby, C.E. 1973. The Quality of Education in Developing Countries. Cambridge,

Ma and Oxford: Harard University Press and Oxford University Press.

3. Bloom, B.S. (ed.) 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: the Classification of

Educational Goals Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. David McKay Co.

4. Clark, John L. 1987. Curriculum Renewal in School Foreign Language Learning.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

5. Eisner, E.W. 1975. "Instrutcional and Expressive Objectives". Golby, M. and

Greenwald, J. (eds.) Curriculum Design. London: Croom Helm and Open University

Press.

6. Johnson, R.K. 1989. “A Decision-making Framework for the Coherent Language

Curriculum” In R.K. Johnson (ed.) The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

7. Ornstein and Hunkins

8. Parlett, M. 1975. "Evaluating Innovations in Teaching". Golby, M. and Greenwald,

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196

 J. (eds.) Curriculum Design. London: Croom Helm and Open University Press.

9. Richards, J.C. 2001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

10. Skilbeck, M. 1982a. 'Three Educational Ideologies' in Horton, T. and Raggat, P.

(eds.) Challenge and Change in the Curriulum. Sevenoaks: Hodder and Stoughton.

11. Stenhouse, L. 1975. An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development.

London: Heineman

12. Stern, H.H. 1983. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

13. Tyler, R.W. 1949. Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago,

Illinois: University of Chicago Press

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2760196