How did we select grammatical items to focus on in our curriculum plan?

We assigned seven experienced teachers who had contracted teaching release time to complete this project.

They collected hundreds of past essay papers from previous final exams.

As noted earlier in this chapter, the final summative assessment is a task- based essay: Write a short expository essay using sources.

These papers had been graded using a rubric which described grammar as a critical aspect of task completion, but offered very little elaboration as to what levels of grammar complexity and accuracy would be demon- strated. However, there appeared to be distinct trends

Teachers collated and coded the grammatical items in the papers. They looked at papers scoring at every level of proficiency on the rubric. They identified what grammar items appeared to be present in papers considered successful. What items were most accurate? What items were deal- breakers? Were any items avoided which could have supported task completion? From this, they were able to create lists of grammar items and levels of accuracy required for successful completion of each level.

Once grammar items have been selected, there remains the dilemma of how to describe grammar items, in terms of what would be assessed for mastery and what new grammatical items should be introduced. Below is a description of one way this challenge could be overcome.

As you are reading the descriptions, ask yourself the following questions:

• Are these descriptors something your teachers could relate to?

• How many individual grammar items might fall in between the def- initions of grammar items presented here?

• How might teachers and students respond to the notion of using percentages for demonstrating grammatical accuracy?

• Are the titles for the type of grammar items adequate to describe their purpose in the curriculum plan?

Grammar assessment items:A set of expectations for grammatical accu- racy at each EAP level

These items are those which were identifiable as deal breakers in our research. Without consistently accurate production of these items, our experienced teachers could not award a passing grade.

Within these items, the most basic items are expected to be used at an accuracy level of 80%, with the more challenging items used at an accuracy level of 60%. These percentages were not intended to be the start of item analysis by teachers when marking final exams, rather to convey an overall impression of accuracy. The percentages could be substituted by more holistic style phrases: most of the time, some of the time, rarely, and so on.

The title given to these items conveys a lot about how the items are intended to intersect with a task-based teaching approach. The intent is not for explicit grammar instruction of these items. These items are items that will be assessed. Students are expected to have studied them in previous English language courses and developed a satisfactory degree of mastery. The role of the instructor is to monitor these items during task completion, in order to ensure that students are able to demonstrate the stated degrees of accuracy for each item by the end of the term. Instruc- tion is intended to be centred almost entirely on different types of cor- rective feedback and recycling of tasks.

Target teaching items:A set of expectations for grammar instruction at each EAP level

In addition to grammar assessment items, the grammar curriculum contains the grammatical items expected to require more explicit instruction, termed target teaching items. These items are not expected to be used by learners with high levels of accuracy in summative assessments, but could be attempted by learners rather than avoided. The intent of including these items is to describe potential items for explicit grammar instruction. This grammar instruction may be within the task-based cycle or as discrete instruction outside it.

An accuracy rate of as low as 40% is acceptable for students’ production of these items. This is meant to ensure that students are not ‘afraid’ to use these new items learned. Lowered required levels of accuracy mean that there is little possibility that making mistakes will lead to failing the final exam and coursework.

Table4.6AnexampleofthegrammarassessmentitemsinthecurriculumfromaB1−EAPcourse Subject-verbagreement(basic)Subjectisshortandsimple Noun(s)+verb e.g.,Theproblemis/Biggerproblemsare/CanadaandAmericaare ComplexsentenceOneindependentclauseandonesubordinateclause(adverbclause) Subordinatingconjunctionsused: although,(even)though,whereas,while,because,as,since,after,before,if,when,unless,until ModalverbstructureAnymodalverb+infinitive Focusisonthestructure(notnecessarilyonbestmodalverbchoice) TherestructureThere+is/are+nounphrase+infinitive e.g.,TherearemanygoodreasonstostudyinEAP NOTStudyinginEAPhasmanygoodreasons There+is/are+nounphrase+prepositionalphrase e.g.,TherearemanygoodreasonsforstudyinginEAP NOTStudyinginEAPhasmanygoodreasons InfinitivesObjectposition GerundsSubjectandobjectposition PresentcontinuousActionsinprogressatthepresenttime Intermediatedegreeofaccuracy:Thestudentshowsabilitywithlesscontrol(approximately 60%accuracy),canoccasionallyself-correct,andcanaccuratelycorrectwithfeedback RelativeclausesAdjectiveclauseswiththefollowingrelativepronouns: that,which,who,where ArticlesandnounsCountableanduncountablenounswith/withoutarticles e.g.,Ihavetowriteanessay e.g.,Ihavehomeworkeveryday Countableanduncountablenounswith/withoutpluralform e.g.,Farmersspraychemicalseveryyear e.g.,Farmersneedmorewater (continued)

Table4.6(continued) Subject-verbagreement(basic)Subjectisshortandsimple Noun(s)+verb e.g.,Theproblemis/Biggerproblemsare/CanadaandAmericaare Distinguishesbetweengeneralandspecificnouns e.g.,Studentsshouldstudyhard e.g.,ThestudentsinPaul’sclassdon’tstudy ConditionalsZeroconditional e.g.,Ifthereisadrought,plantsdie Firstconditional: e.g.,Ifyoustudyhard,youwillimprove Subject-verbagreement (complex)Morecomplexstructureinthesubject: Nounphraseassubject+verb e.g.,Highlevelsofairpollutioncauseproblems Linkingadverbials (basic)Commonlinkingadverbialsthatarelesslikelytocauseconfusioninmeaning e.g.,consequently,finally,furthermore,inaddition,however,moreover,similarly,then, therefore,thus,forexample,also PresentperfectCommonregular/irregularverbs Presentperfectcontinuousandpresentperfectpassivearenotthetarget,butcanbepresented andpracticedasanoption Wh-questions“Wh”-wordassubject e.g.,Whowantsthis? “Wh”-wordasobjectoradverb e.g.,Whatdoes“motorskill”mean?

Table4.7AnexampleofthetargetteachingitemsinthecurriculumfromaB1−EAPcourse TargetteachingitemsStudentsareabletousethefollowinggrammaritemswith40%accuracy GrammaritemLevelofcomplexity Linkingadverbials(complex)Commonlinkingadverbialsthatmaybemorelikelytocauseconfusioninmeaning e.g.,onthecontrary,ontheonehand/ontheotherhand,besides,inaword,nevertheless, thereby,incontrast,lastlyvsatlast SecondconditionalUseof“If…would” e.g.,IfIhadamilliondollars,Iwouldtraveltheworld TransitiveandintransitiveverbsTransitiveverbsneedtobefollowedbyanobject,andcantakeadirectobjectwhichdoes notrequireapreposition e.g.„Itaffectspeople NOTItaffects NOTItaffectsonpeople Intransitivesdonotrequireanobject,butwillneedaprepositioniffollowedbyanoun e.g.,Hearrived Hearrivedattheparty NOTHearrivedtheparty Nounclauses“That-clauses” e.g.,Thestudentsknowthatitisdifficult “What-clauses” e.g.,Iknowwhatyouwant 3-clausesentencesCompound-complexstructure e.g.,Eliteathletescanwin,buttheycanbeunhappybecausetheycannotdootheractivities Complex-compoundstructure e.g.,Youngathletescanwinbecausetheyspecializeinonesport,buttheymaysufferserious injuries ParallelstructureGerundsintheobjectposition e.g.,Thebestmethodsareexercisingeverydayandeatingnutritiousfoods Gerundsinthesubjectposition e.g.,Exercisingeverydayandeatingnutritiousfoodscanimprovepeople’shealth (continued)

Table4.7(continued) TargetteachingitemsStudentsareabletousethefollowinggrammaritemswith40%accuracy GrammaritemLevelofcomplexity PassivevoiceUsingsimplepresent,simplepast,andsimplefuturetenses Abletodistinguishproperusageofthepassiveandactivevoiceforms Pronoun–antecedentagreementParsingnounandpronounrelationshipwithinasimplesentenceandbetweensimple sentences e.g.,Studentsmustsubmittheirworkontime

Table4.6provides an example of the grammar assessment items in the curriculum from a B1−EAP course.

Table4.7provides an example of the target teaching items in the curriculum from a B1−EAP course.

As can be seen from the length and complexity of the items described above, the development of an outcomes-based curriculum for an EAP program is a multi-layered, complicated, and potentially confounding document. However, the detailed elaboration described above enables the curriculum plan to be understood at many levels, by many stakeholders, including students. Moreover, there is flexibility in the details which does not compromise the stated goal of building a shared understanding within the program of what the course means for students beyond just the program of study, but also in terms of what each student will be able to do by successful completion of each individual course.

The Critical Link Between Summative Assessments and Curriculum Revisions

EAP programs are often tasked with not only providing meaningful and impactful preparation to the language requirements of the academic milieu for undergraduate and graduate students, but also in many cases universities give them a role as gatekeepers charged with monitoring students who have not otherwise met the English language proficiency requirements for entry to mainstream study. This requirement adds fur- ther pressure to the function of summative assessments which are oper- ating in a high stakes environment to provide consequential measures of language proficiency.

Even when an EAP program has been able to deliver stable and reliable summative assessment results for this purpose, the introduction of a newly revised EAP curriculum can be disruptive. As teachers’ understanding of successful completion of a course may be forced to adapt and change, results of summative assessment may initially be strained in terms of consistency and reliability. Despite these challenges, this potential disruption may be viewed as an opportunity to improve the validity of summative assessments. Having an outcomes-based curriculum can result in increased capacity to describe the language proficiencies of successful students which in turn can streamline exam and rubric development processes.

Let’s go back and look at how different parts of the curriculum plan can facilitate the development and assessment of final exams.

Performance Conditions

As previously described, performance conditions detail how task completion can be delineated at different levels of EAP courses. They describe the expected level of task complexity in terms of topic familiarity and abstract/concrete nature, length of language produced, time limits on task completion, and degree to which external language supports can be utilized at a given level.

Here is a set of performance conditions for writing in a B1 level EAP course:

Performance Conditions:

• Topics are concrete, factual and academic, and may be unfamiliar.

• Language, style and register are formal and academic

• Essays require at least 4 paragraphs

• A maximum of two pieces of research are provided or assigned for essay writing. A maximum of two pieces of research are used in the essay

• If essays are completed under timed conditions, the time allowed is 50 minutes

• Short personal response texts are less structured but remain academic

• Tasks are completed independently without extensive guidance or external support (e.g., dictionaries, Internet).

Stating the expectations for the task complexity of essay writing at this level ensures that across a program, teachers understand and ‘agree’ what an essay consists of and what the final exam can be expected to contain.

Exam developers who are often teachers working on assessment projects as secondments from classroom teaching are clear when selecting exam topics, reading components, and exam timings. Moreover, when teachers are planning in-class practice sessions for the final exam or designing scaf- folding activities they can ensure that these are all effectively aligned to the final exam format and task complexity expectations.

Specific Learning Outcomes

Specific learning outcomes describe the goals for learners in a particular course, and as such can describe the general basis for task design. In the B1 course exemplified above, the specific learning outcomes for writing are as follows:

Specific Learning Outcomes—Learners will develop the ability to:

• Write structured research-based essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships

• Employ the writing process with some guidance

• Express opinions and respectful responses in short personal response texts with sufficient accuracy and fluency

• Apply proper APA paper formatting and APA citation and referenc- ing to basic types of sources

• Incorporate mainly quotations with occasional use of summaries and paraphrases.

In terms of final exam development, nothing should appear on the final exam which cannot be considered as part of these SLOs. This enhances the expectation that the final assessment will be linked entirely to the curriculum and students and teachers alike know what to expect in terms of tasks to be completed in the final exam. Maintaining a task-based focus on the final exam reinforces the importance of this methodology in the course and ensures that some of the most important principles of TBLT may be realized through positive washback from the final exam. In other words, the task-based focus of the summative assessment “influences language teachers and learners to do things they would not otherwise do that promote or inhibit language learning” (Messick, 1996, p. 241).

Using the SLOs to build the content of the final exam avoids a situation where TBLT is promoted as the preferred methodological approach of the course, but the final exam is in a more prescriptive format which for example emphasizes knowledge about language over procedural knowledge of how to use language to successfully complete a real world task. If final exams are task-based and well-aligned with the curriculum, teachers and students alike are more likely to recognize the importance of the tasks completed throughout the coursework.

Performance Indicators

A thorough description of the performance indicators expected to demonstrate proficiency of a particular SLO completed under stated performance conditions is critical to developing reliable and valid assessment procedures.

Let’s continue our look at the B1 writing curriculum we have been focusing on in this section above (see Table4.8).

Table 4.8 B1 writing curriculum

Writing

Specific learning outcome Performance indicators Write structured research-focused essays

to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships

*Refer to Assessment Items in the Grammar Section

Write introductory paragraphs with clear, straightforward thesis statements, hooks, and background information Write academic body paragraphs that include generally clear, straightforward topic sentences with a topic and controlling idea, and clear, straightforward and connected supporting ideas (e.g., 5-Ws, examples and facts)

Write concluding paragraphs with clear, straightforward concluding statements and summarized main ideas

Present relevant information with cohesive details in a clear, linear sequence. Some details may be underdeveloped, repetitive or not always logical

Connect ideas using transitions and relationships (e.g., cause/effect, compare/contrast, examples, sequences) to provide cohesion

Use phrases or vocabulary to indicate cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships

Table4.9Descriptionofgrammaritemsintheassessmentrubric GrammaritemLevelofcomplexity Advanceddegreeofaccuracy:Studentmakesoccasionalerrors(approximately80%)andcanself-correct Subject-verbagreement(basic)Noun(s)+verb e.g.,Theproblemis/Biggerproblemsare/CanadaandAmericaare ComplexsentenceOneindependentclauseandonesubordinateclause(adverbclause) Subordinatingconjunctionsused: although,(even)though,whereas,while,because,as,since,after,before,if,when,unless, until ModalverbstructureAnymodalverb+infinitive Focusisonthestructure(notnecessarilyonbestmodalverbchoice) TherestructureThere+is/are+nounphrase+infinitive e.g.,TherearemanygoodreasonstostudyinEAP.NOTStudyinginEAPhasmany goodreasons InfinitivesObjectposition GerundsSubjectandobjectposition PresentcontinuousActionsinprogressatthepresenttime Linkingadverbials(basic)Commonlinkingadverbialsthatarelesslikelytocauseconfusioninmeaning: e.g.,consequently,finally,furthermore,inaddition,however,moreover,similarly,then, therefore,thus,forexample,also PluralnounsDistinguishesbetweenpluralandsingularnouns e.g.,Studentsshouldstudyhard.NOTStudentshouldstudyhard Intermediatedegreeofaccuracy:Thestudentshowsabilitywithlesscontrol(approximately60%accuracy),canoccasionallyself- correct,andcanaccuratelycorrectwithfeedback RelativeclausesAdjectiveclauseswiththefollowingrelativepronouns: that,which,who,where ArticlesandnounsCountableanduncountablenounswith/withoutarticles e.g.,Ihavetowriteanessay.e.g.,Ihavehomeworkeveryday (continued)

Table4.9(continued) GrammaritemLevelofcomplexity Countableanduncountablenounswith/withoutpluralform e.g.,Farmersspraychemicalseveryyear.e.g.,Farmersneedmorewater ConditionalsZeroconditional:e.g.,Ifthereisadrought,plantsdie Subject-verbagreement(complex)Morecomplexstructureinthesubject: Nounphraseassubject+verb:e.g.,Highlevelsofairpollutioncauseproblems PresentperfectCommonregular/irregularverbs Presentperfectcontinuousandpresentperfectpassivearenotthetarget,butcanbe presentedandpracticedasanoption Wh-questions“Wh”-wordassubject:e.g.,Whowantsthis? “Wh”-wordasobjectoradverb:e.g.,Whatdoes“motorskill”mean?

In addition to these performance indicators which describe what aspects of an essay are expected to be included, there is a reference to the grammar curriculum. These assessment items are expected to be demon- strated at according levels of accuracy, see Table 4.9.

The detailed information represented in the performance indicators and grammar curriculum enables the program to develop a very clear understanding of what successful completion of the course through passing the final exam looks like. In this way, it is possible for a curriculum to develop an effective, task-based approach to EAP programming while building a shared understanding of what success in the course looks like and that the approach is rigorous enough to fulfil the imperative task of ensuring standards of language proficiency are met.

References

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks. (2012).Canadian language bench- marks framework.Ottawa, ON: Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

Chambers, W., Gnida, S., Messaros, C., Ilott, W., & Dawson, K. (2011).ATESL adult ESL curriculum framework.ATESL, Canada,Common European Frame- work of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Retrieved fromhttps://www.coe.int/en/web/language-policy/cefr.

Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstand- ings.International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19,3.

Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing.Language Testing, 13(3), 241–256.

Skehan, P. (2002). Task-based instruction. Language Teaching, 36(1), 1–14.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144480200188X.

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2012). Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task- based performance: A synthesis of the Ealing research. In A. Housen, F.

Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency:

Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (Vol. 32). Amsterdam, The Nether- lands: John Benjamins Publishing.

Implementation and Evaluation:

Bringing the Plan to Life

Abstract Guardado and Light elaborate a plan for program-wide curriculum implementation including tools, which can facilitate such a process with teachers, administrators, academic partners, and students. Fur- thermore, in line with the original model of curriculum development that illustrates monitoring of the curriculum as an ongoing process, this chapter outlines an approach for monitoring both the curriculum implementation launch, as well as the realization of the lived curriculum. The authors provide a considered discussion of several options for implementation (e.g., phased rollout, multiple levels at once), rollout timing, and the numerous potential implications of each of these options. Finally, sug- gestions for how to manage anxiety and other challenges around change, as well as potential ways of leveraging this energy to strengthen the process, are addressed.

Keywords Phased implementation·Monitoring change·Stakeholder communication strategy·Curriculum-as-lived

M. Guardado and J. Light,Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes,

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_5

Questions to ask yourself about your context

• What role do teachers and learners play in managing change within our program?

• How do we communicate directly and indirectly with our teaching team about change and their role in shaping the future of our program?

• Are we practiced at describing what we do and how we change and develop to improve the learners’ experience in our program?

• How often do we explain the changes we are making to the broader stakeholder community and how do we do these things?

• Do we have a formal, transparent, and safe process for teachers to give feedback and raise concerns?

Implementation and Evaluation

Once the format and content of the curriculum-as-planned have been completed, the crucial step of implementation can begin. Change can be challenging. Implementing the plan requires teachers to potentially undertake additional work, develop new classroom activities, and mod- ify their own understanding of their students’ learning. Resistance can be anticipated, but rather than merely attempting to mitigate all resistance in order to execute the plan, active engagement with teachers and their ensuing discomfort can offer an effective approach to the implementation of meaningful change (Fig.5.1).

The Notion of Curriculum as Planned and the Curriculum as Lived Throughout these descriptions, the philosophical considerations as elabo- rated by Canadian curriculum scholar Ted Aoki (1993), and in the work of Canadian language education scholar Virginia Sauvé are central. This work centres on the philosophical position that curriculum documents are merely the “plan” for the classroom and that what happens to those documents in the hands of teachers and learners is referred to as thecur- riculum as lived. “If the curriculum is to be successful, [the plan and the lived experience] need constantly to be interacting with and inform- ing each other. In other words, a good curriculum is alive and subject to change” (Sauvé,2009, p. 22).

Fig. 5.1 Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018])

The Plan

There is some debate in educational circles around the question of who should be responsible for writing a curriculum. Some argue that a curriculum document should be written by experts. In his article published by UNESCO, Stabback (2014) posits that “curriculum development is a specialist field within education, and curriculum development processes

should accordingly be led and managed by qualified and experienced pro- fessionals.” The notion of curriculum expert acknowledges the intricate nature of a second language curriculum document in attempting to meet teachers’, learners’, stakeholders’, and program needs; however, it appears to dismiss a key principle that a curriculum plan is just that, a plan. As we have argued throughout this book, curriculum comes alive in the classroom and those responsible for that wakening are the teachers who translate the document into a plan of action. Early leaders in the argu- ment that curriculum makers are both planners and teachers (Chambers, Gnida, Messaros, Ilott, & Dawson, 2011) were Clandinin and Connelly (1992) who suggested that creating a curriculum document in isolation from teachers who would then be tasked with its implementation was

“like putting the cart before the horse” (p. 365). We posit that a plan for enhancing the experience, readiness, and success of EAP students should include teachers at all of the stages of design, development, and implementation.

Curriculum planning in our context

I. Writing the document: Combining external expertise with invest-

Dalam dokumen Book Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes (Halaman 84-100)