SJIF Impact Factor (2023): 8.574| ISI I.F. Value: 1.241| Journal DOI: 10.

36713/epra2016 ISSN: 2455-7838(Online)

EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD)
Volume: 8 | Issue: 3 | March 2023 - Peer Reviewed Journal

COURSE SYLLABUS DESIGN: LANGUAGE TEACHING BASED

SYLLABI TYPES

Fayzullayeva Muhayyo Raxmatillayeva1, Mirzakulova Feruza Mukhitdin kizi2

1
The Teacher of the Department of Linguistics and English Literature,
Uzbekistan State World Language University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
2 nd
2 year Student of Master`S Degree, Uzbekistan State World Language University,
Tashkent, Uzbekistan

ABSTRACT
It is well known that in the tertiary educational setting, instructors and students have and use a separate set of resources and
documents. While instructors use registers, grading sheets, and reports to perform their professional duties, students use textbooks,
library borrowings, and software databases to build knowledge. The syllabus is the single official document that serves as a contract
between instructors and students. This article outlines course syllabus design and syllabi types that based on language teaching.
KEY WORDS: syllabus, “multi-strand”, product-oriented, process-oriented, analytic syllabus, synthetic syllabus.

I.INTRODUCTION
Some people may be unaware that syllabi serve a variety of important functions for various groups within an
institution, including communication, planning tools for instructors, course plans for students, a teaching tool or
resource, an artifact for teacher evaluation, and evidence for accreditation. Some people may be unaware that syllabi
serve a variety of important functions for various groups within an institution, including communication, planning tools
for instructors, course plans for students, a teaching tool or resource, an artifact for teacher evaluation, and evidence for
accreditation. A literature review revealed eight major themes for the purpose or use of syllabi in higher education: a
communication mechanism; an instructor's planning tool; a course plan for students; a teaching or pedagogical tool
(resource for student learning); an artifact for teacher evaluations/record keeping tool; a contract of policies and
procedures to be followed; a socialization process for students to the academic environment; and a scholarship
opportunity for instructors. The simple function of a syllabus as a communication device that lists the course objectives
and outcomes on the syllabus helps students understand what is expected, making it a teaching tool as well (Albers,
2003).
The purpose of a syllabus as a planning and development tool may initially benefit the instructor, but the students
may benefit from the instructor devoting extra time to course and syllabus planning. Furthermore, the more complete
and informative the syllabus is for the student, the more likely it will be beneficial for administrators and accreditation
organizations to review. For some instructors, designing or planning a course and writing the syllabus for the course can
be intertwined activities. Writing the syllabus can help with course design and development. "Construction represents a
critical moment in instructors' curriculum/course development thought process," according to the syllabus. As a planning
tool, the syllabus design process is logistical in nature, such as assigning periods or days to the content structure. The
instructor must plan for scheduling issues such as holidays or term breaks, as well as when to schedule assessment
exercises and allow adequate time to complete homework or assignments.
II. METHODS
Designing a syllabus entails deciding what is taught and in what order. In essence, each type of syllabus provides
different answers to the question: What does a learner of a new language need to know, and what should a learner be
able to do with this knowledge? Throughout the literature, scholars have distinguished six different types of syllabi.

2023 EPRA IJRD | Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2016 | https://eprajournals.com/ |248 |

 SJIF Impact Factor (2023): 8.574| ISI I.F. Value: 1.241| Journal DOI: 10.36713/epra2016 ISSN: 2455-7838(Online)
EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD)
Volume: 8 | Issue: 3 | March 2023 - Peer Reviewed Journal

Almost all language-teaching syllabi are a combination of two or more of the types defined below: grammar syllabus,
situational syllabus, notional syllabus, task-based syllabus, skill-based syllabus, and content-based syllabus.
Grammar or structural syllabus. For centuries, grammar syllabus has dominated language teaching, focusing on
grammar rules and structures. The language teaching content is a collection of the forms and structures of the language
being taught.
A theoretical or functional syllabus. Language teaching content is a collection of the functions or notions that are
performed when the language is used.
Situational or topical syllabus. The contents of this syllabus are organized according to the situations in which
students learn.
A skill-based syllabus. The focus of this syllabus is on the development of language skills (listening, reading,
writing, and speaking) in the target language. Reading for the main idea, writing good paragraphs, and listening for the
main idea are all examples of target language skills.
A task-based syllabus. Language teaching content includes a series of purposeful tasks that language learners
must complete; tasks are defined as activities required when using the target language.
A content-based syllabus. The primary goal of instruction is to teach some content or information using the
language that the students are also learning; in other words, the students use the foreign language to study other subjects
such as Science, Math, Biology, and so on, and in this way, they learn not only the subject but also improve their
language use. This principle is used in immersion education in countries such as Canada, where children of English-
speaking parents are sent to French language schools for primary education.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Syllabi can be synthetic or analytic, grammatical, lexical, grammatical-lexical, situational, topic-based, notional,
functional-notional, mixed or "multi-strand," procedural or process, based on goals and objectives, competencies,
standards, tasks, and take a comprehensive approach, among other things. According to Nunan (1988), product-oriented
syllabuses are those in which the emphasis is on the knowledge and skills that learners should gain as a result of
instruction (the product or the end), whereas process-oriented syllabuses are those in which the emphasis is on the
learning experiences themselves (the processes toward the end).
Product-oriented Process-oriented
Structural/Formal Task-based
Situational Procedural
Lexical Negotiated
Notional-Functional Proportional
Content-based
Table 1. product/process oriented syllabi
In connection with this, Wilkins (1976) distinguishes between synthetic and analytic syllabuses. A synthetic
language teaching strategy involves teaching the various parts of language separately and gradually. In this case,
acquisition is a process of accumulating parts until the entire structure of language is constructed. Analytic syllabuses,
on the other hand, are organized around the purposes for which people intend to learn the language and the types of
language performance required to achieve those goals.
Analytic syllabuses Synthetic syllabuses
Tasked-based Structural
Notional-Functional [According to Wilkins (1976)] Notional-Functional [According to Long &Crooks(1992)]
Content-based
Negotiated
Table 2. Analytic/Synthetic-oriented syllabi
2023 EPRA IJRD | Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2016 | https://eprajournals.com/ |249 |
 SJIF Impact Factor (2023): 8.574| ISI I.F. Value: 1.241| Journal DOI: 10.36713/epra2016 ISSN: 2455-7838(Online)
EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD)
Volume: 8 | Issue: 3 | March 2023 - Peer Reviewed Journal

Another scientist White (1988) distinguishes two types of syllabuses: Type A and Type B. Type A syllabi, he
claims, are concerned with what should be learned. They determine a series of objectives and 'pre-package' the language
by dividing it into small, discrete units without considering who the learners are or how languages are acquired. They
are product-oriented, so they evaluate the outcomes in terms of language mastery. Type A syllabi include all synthetic
syllabi. Type B syllabi, on the other hand, are concerned with how the language is learned and how it is integrated into
the experiences of the learners. Various elements of the syllabus emerge from a negotiation process between learners
and teachers; they are oriented toward the process; and the learners themselves set evaluation criteria. Despite their
differences, procedural, process, and task-based syllabi are all considered Type B syllabi.

IV. CONCLUSION
All of these syllabi go through the evolution of English language methodology, and their comprehension is very
useful when deciding what to do. The primary goal of teaching-learning from this perspective is learner empowerment
to obtain information, develop cognitive and strategic competencies, and form a critical attitude. A course syllabus
outlines the relationships between learning outcomes and content, as well as pedagogical practice to help students learn.
To accomplish this, the stages of the learning process using this approach are limited.

REFERENCES
1. Slattery, Jeanne M. and Janet F. Carlson. “Preparing an Effective Syllabus: Current Best Practices.” College Teaching
53 (2005): 159 - 164.
2. Doolittle, Peter E. and Robert A. Siudzinski. “Recommended Syllabus Components: What Do Higher Education Faculty
Include in Their Syllabi.” Journal on excellence in college teaching 21 (2010): 29-61.
3. Breen, M. P. “Contemporary Paradigms in Syllabus Design.” Language Teaching 20.3 (1987), p 85
4. Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus design. Oxford: Oxford University Press
5. Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press

2023 EPRA IJRD | Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2016 | https://eprajournals.com/ |250 |