An Instructional Design Study of an Advanced EFL Speaking Course
Author(s):
Gülçin Mutlu (presenting / submitting) Ali Yıldırım
Conference:
ECER 2017
Format:
Paper

Session Information

31 SES 07 B, Teaching/Development of Language Skills

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-23
17:15-18:45
Room:
W4.20
Chair:
Ana Sofia Pinho

Contribution

     Yalden (1987, p. 3) refers to course design as combining “what is already known about language teaching and learning” with the new ideas brought up by the students to the language classroom (their needs, wants and knowledge of the world). She further asserts that those designing second language courses are required to gain and understanding of certain theoretical issues, that is, what is available or relevant in the literature as regards language teaching and learning. Moving from Yalden’s (1987) suggestions on the theoretical issues to be considered by the curriculum designers, it is seen that there was a dominance of structure-based courses in the past because of the focus on structural linguistics (Dubin & Olshtain, 1986). However, over the years, socio-cultural views on the nature of language have started to gain importance. In other words, change in the world of linguistics was observed with the inclusion of the sociolinguistic component into the linguistic theory (Yalden, 1987). Though courses centering on structures (knowledge about the language) are still performed, other aspects of language like socio-linguistic knowledge are getting more popular in classroom practices. While the traditional approaches to language teaching defines language proficiency in terms of the degree of the mastery of the structures (phonological, grammatical or lexical structures), today the degree of ability to communicate is treated as an indicator of proficiency. In other words, languages are learnt for communication purposes, and this process encompasses more than the structural knowledge about the language. Moreover, Krashen’s (1981, 1982) hypotheses including acquisition-learning distinction, comprehensible input and affective filter, Chomsky’s (1965) performance-competence distinction and Hymes’s (1972) communicative competence briefly pointed out the need for a communicative curriculum that is based on three major sources, a view of language as viewed by the view of sociolinguistic, a language learning view that is cognitively-based and an educational approach that is humanistic (Dubin & Olshtain, 1986).

     Grounded in this communicative tendency above, this instructional design study was conducted in response to a desire to find more effective ways of teaching language for communication rather than for the mastery of language structures. Being also a case study, the study attempted to design an elective advanced speaking course to be taught to the freshman students who have completed one-year structure-based English preparatory instruction in a state university in Turkey. These students needed an elective English course to develop their speaking and communication skills further of which they had been deprived in the preparatory program. Thus, the purpose of this three part study was first, to identify critical and theoretical characteristics of an advanced communication and speaking course from extensive literature review on the subject; second, to operationalize these critical and theoretical characteristics by designing an English as a foreign language (EFL) language course involving the identified characteristics; and finally, to field test this devised instructional design in an undergraduate English course. 

Method

The course design model adapted the basic components of curriculum development from Graves' (2000) and Posner and Rudnisky's (1997) instructional design models, and hence it was built on four main questions of why (needs assessment), what (course content), how (instruction) and how much (evaluation) to develop the main components of a curriculum. The instructional model of this study is basically composed of processes and products. The processes include conceptualizing content, organizing content, instructional planning, formulating goals and intended learning outcomes (ILOs), developing materials, intitial thinking about the goals and ILOs and evaluation planning. The first five processes were taken from the course design model devised by Graves (2000), while the last two from Posner’s (1997). The relevant products are course grid (map), course syllabus, instructional plan and lastly evaluation plan. The first two products were taken from Graves (2000) framework and the last two from Posner and Rudnisky (1997). Defining context is a very important stage in the instructional model developed in that it encompasses “needs assessment” where the course designer makes further decisions in line with the interpretations she or he has generated based on the information gathered on the present situation (learners’ level of language, their interests and preferences etc.) and the future situation (learners’ expectations, language modalities they will use, types of communicative skills they will need etc.). Thus, in line with the instructional model developed, as the first phase of this instructional design study, a needs assessment study was conducted to gather information about the needs of our students. Data were collected through teacher interviews, student interviews and student questionnaires to learn about students’ needs and preferences as to topic selection, their perceived difficulty on the speaking skills and also the perceived importance of the speaking skills. The qualitative and quantitative findings were used in turn to guide the instructional design of the advanced speaking course. The final part of the study included the field testing of the devised instructional design. The researcher evaluated this field testing process through class observations, teacher interviews and student written feedback.

Expected Outcomes

The findings of the field testing provided preliminary evidence of the instructional design to facilitate communication and speaking skills as well as presentation skills. Even though there could have been more opportunities to field test this instructional design, the instructional design decisions based on Graves’ (2000) and Posner and Rudnisky's (1997) course design models appeared to work. Furthermore, the design and formative evaluation of the course for teaching speaking provides evidence for program modification in the English language instruction at the aforementioned university. The study also provided insights about instructional decisions to be taken and theoretical issues to be considered for future instructional design studies.

References

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. Dubin, F., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Course design: Developing programs and materials for language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics, 269-293. Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin Books. Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/Principles_and_Practice/index.html. Krashen (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Retrieved from http://www.sdkrashen.com/SL_Acquisition_and_Learning/index.html Posner, G. and Rudnisky, A. N. (1997). Course design: A guide to curriculum development for teachers. New York: Longman. Yalden, J. (1987). Principles of course design for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Author Information

Gülçin Mutlu (presenting / submitting)
Necmettin Erbakan University
School of Foreign Languages
Konya
Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.