Syllabus:

At its simplest level a syllabus can be described as a statement of

what is to be
learnt. It reflects language and linguistic performance.
summary of the content to which learners will be exposed"
(Yalden.1987).

Difference between Syllabus and Curriculum

Curriculum is wider term as compared with syllabus. Curriculum covers all
the
activities and arrangements made by the institution throughout the
academic year to
facilitate the learners and the instructors. Whereas Syllabus is limited to
particular subject of a particular class.

Bases for language syllabuses

content skill method

1. FORM 1. LEARNING
Structural focus Skill acquisition focus 1. PROCESS
Learning focus/ learning-led
2. LANGUAGE 2. PROCEDURL
Receptive/productive Cognitive focus (task based)
2. SITUATION
Contextual focus

3. TOPIC
Informational focus

4. FUNCTION
Notional/Functional
focus
TYPES OF SYLLABI

1:- Product-Oriented Syllabus

This kind of syllabuses emphasizes the product of language learning and is
prone to
approval from an authority. There are three types of syllabus described in
the following:
(i) The Structural or Grammatical Syllabus
Historically, the most prevalent of syllabus type is perhaps the structural or
grammatical syllabus in which the selection and grading of the content is
based on the
complexity and simplicity of grammatical items. The learner is expected to
master each
structural step and add it to her grammar collection. As such the focus is on
the outcomes or the product.
Since the 1920s, and the work of Harold Palmer and others in the Reform
Movement who emphasized the controlled presentation of grammatical
structures and oral practice following classroom presentation, grammatical
syllabi have featured prominently in programs for second and foreign
language learners. Intuitive criteria of relative usefulness, and simplicity
were used as a basis of selection and grading: “The grammatical material
must be graded. Certain moods and tenses are more useful than others; let
us therefore concentrate on the useful ones first . . . we will not learn off the
whole set of prepositions, their uses and requirements, but we will select
them in
accordance with their degree of importance”.
One problem facing the syllabus designer pursuing a grammatical order to
sequencing input is that the ties connecting the structural items may be
rather weak. A
more fundamental criticism is that the grammatical syllabus focuses on only
one aspect of language, namely grammar, whereas in truth there exist many
more aspects of language. Finally, recent research suggests there is a
disagreement between the grammar of the spoken and of the written
language; raising complications for the grading of content in grammar based
syllabuses.

(ii) The Situational Syllabus

The limitations found in structural approach led to an alternative approach

where situational needs are emphasized rather than grammatical units.
Here, the principal organizing characteristic is a list of situations which
reflects the way language is used in
everyday life i.e. outside the classroom. Thus, by linking structural theory to
situations the learner is able to grasp the meaning in relevant context.
Ellis’ argument rests on two distinctions: between explicit conscious
knowledge and implicit tacit knowledge, and between declarative knowledge
of facts and procedural knowledge of how to do things. He argues that
explicit, declarative knowledge of L2 grammar can influence the
development of implicit declarative knowledge, and through communicative
activity, implicit declarative knowledge can be proceduralized and used in
spontaneous skilled performance.
One advantage of the situational Syllabus is that motivation will be
heightened
since it is "learner- rather than subject-centered" (Wilkins.1976).
However, a
situational syllabus will be limited for students whose needs were not
encompassed by the situations in the syllabus.

(iii) The Notional/Functional Syllabus

In the 1970s, the Council of Europe initiated a project which aimed to specify
a common framework for teaching and assessing “communicative
competence” in foreign language
education. The aim was to specify syllabi in terms of three categories of
meaning
common across languages: semantic-grammatical meaning, or notions, such
“time” and “quantity”; modal meanings, such as degree of certainty and
scale of
commitment; and communicative functions, such as agreeing, requesting,
complimenting. These provided a way of going from specified types of
meaning, or
universal communicative and conceptual categories, to their realization in
specific
languages. This is an unordered inventory: what provides sequencing
constraints
on these notional categories, and their realizations in language, is the idea of
a
common core of notions/functions, useful for all communicative goals and
purposes,
which must be mastered before those particular to specific communicative
purposes.
Wilkins' criticism of structural and situational approaches lies in the fact that
they
answer only the 'how' or 'when' and 'where' of language use Instead, he
enquires "what it is they communicate through language" Thus, the starting
point for a syllabus is the communicative purpose and conceptual meaning
of language i.e. notions and functions, as opposed to only the grammatical
items and situational elements.
In order to establish objectives of such a syllabus, the needs of the learners
will
have to be analyzed on the base of communication need. Consequently,
needs analysis has an association with notional/functional syllabuses.
"language functions do not usually occur in isolation" and there are also
difficulties of selecting and grading function and form.
The above approaches belong to the product-oriented category of
syllabuses. An
alternative path to Syllabus Design would be to adopt process
oriented principles, which assume that language can be learnt
experientially as opposed to the step-by-step procedure of the
synthetic approach.

2:- Process-Oriented Syllabuses

Process-Oriented Syllabuses are developed as a result of a sense of failure in

product-oriented courses to enhance communicative language skills.
Syllabus is a
process rather than a product. That is, focus is not on what the student
will have
accomplished on completion of the program, but on the specification of
learning tasks and activities that s/he will undertake during the course.

(i)Procedural/Task-Based Syllabus

the question concerning 'what' becomes subordinate to the question

concerning 'how'.
The focus shifts from the linguistic element to the educational, with an
emphasis on
learning or learner. Within such a framework the selection, ordering and
grading of content is no longer wholly significant for the syllabus designer.
Arranging the Syllabus around tasks such as information- and
opinion-gap activities, it was hoped that the learner would perceive
the language subconsciously whilst consciously concentrating on
solving the meaning behind the tasks. There appears to be an indistinct
boundary between this approach and that of language teaching
methodology. A task-based syllabus assumes that speaking a language is a
skill best perfected through practice and interaction, and uses tasks and
activities to encourage learners to use the language communicatively in
order to achieve a purpose. Tasks must be relevant to the real world
language needs of the student. That is, the underlying learning theory of
task based and communicative language teaching seems to suggest that
activities in which language is employed to complete meaningful tasks,
enhances learning.

(ii)Learner-Led Syllabus

The notion of basing a syllabus on how learners learn language was

proposed by
Breen and Candlin (1984). Here the emphasis lies on the learner, who it is
hoped will be
involved in the implementation of the syllabus design. By being fully aware
of the course
they are studying, it is believed that their interest and motivation will
increase, coupled
with the positive effect of nurturing the skills required to learn. However, as
suggested earlier, a predetermined syllabus provides support and guidance
for the teacher and should not be so easily dismissed. Critics have suggested
that a learner-led syllabus seems radical and utopian in that it will be difficult
to follow as the direction of the syllabus will be largely the responsibility of
the learners.
This leads to the final syllabus design to be examined; the
proportional
syllabus as suggested by Yalden (1987).

(iii)The Proportional Syllabus

The proportional syllabus basically attempts to develop an "overall

competence”.
It consists of a number of elements within the main theme playing a linking
role through
the units. This theme is designated by the learners. It is expected initially
that form will be of central value, but later, the focus will turn towards
interactional components. The
syllabus is designed to be dynamic, not static, with sufficient opportunity for
feedback and flexibility. The shift from form to interaction can occur at any
time and is not limited to a particular stratum of learners. it is important for a
syllabus to indicate explicitly what will be taught, "not what will be learned".
This practical approach with its focus on flexibility and spiral method of
language sequencing leading to the recycling of language, seems relevant
for learners who lack exposure to the target language beyond the classroom.