Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes: A Guide to Practice [1st ed.] 9783030474676, 9783030474683

Citation preview

Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes A Guide to Practice Justine Light

Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes

Martin Guardado · Justine Light

Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes A Guide to Practice

Martin Guardado University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada

Justine Light NorQuest College Edmonton, AB, Canada

ISBN 978-3-030-47467-6 ISBN 978-3-030-47468-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © Melisa Hasan This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

To the memory of my grandmother, who wrote to me every single week while I was away at university, and in that way led me to believe that writing was fun and a normal part of everyday life…ha! Justine Light To my mother who planted the seed of education and to my sister Ana Maria who nurtured it. Martin Guardado

Foreword

Sitting down to write the foreword to this book, I tallied up the years I’ve been involved with teaching English as an additional language at the post-secondary level. As I thought about the highlights of my career over the years, the conditions that fostered those highlights came to mind. It seemed that teachers, staff, and students all did better when there was a shared vision and purpose to what we were doing. What’s more, it was a shared vision and purpose that informed a living curriculum that provided guidance while allowing for creativity and opportunities to craft meaningful learning experiences. I also thought about the people I’ve met over the years, and the authors of this book immediately came to mind. Through their writing, presentations, and service to the field, they are leaders in the teaching and learning of English for academic purposes, and this book articulates their expert vision for designing and implementing an English for academic purposes curriculum with the potential to ignite teaching and learning and enable excellence in the field. The six chapters of this book come together to create a useful roadmap for the planning and implementation of an English for academic purposes curriculum. Readers get a good sense of the nature of the field as well as the challenges curriculum designers face organizing teaching and learning for students heading toward full-time studies in higher education. As a starting point to overcoming these challenges, backward design is presented as a framework for the task at hand. The importance of a carefully articulated philosophical approach, including strategic plans, visions, and

vii

viii

FOREWORD

mission statements, is also covered as a way of informing pedagogical priorities and bringing together shared understanding among everyone involved in the process. Once the philosophical approach is set, goals and outcomes are next taken into consideration along with concrete ways to carry out an environmental scan and clear examples of what outcomes might arise from a program’s broad goals. The implementation of those goals and outcomes is covered, with tools for implementation and tips for managing change. Finally, the book points to the cyclical nature of curriculum evaluation and illustrates the process with examples from the authors’ context. Curriculum renewal is a daunting but exciting process that can invigorate English for academic purposes teaching and learning and foster students’ success as they make their way through their post-secondary studies. This book helps by making the process less daunting and supporting meaningful renewal that contributes to strengthening English as an additional language teaching and learning in higher education. Scott Roy Douglas, Ph.D. Okanagan School of Education The University of British Columbia Kelowna, Canada

Preface

While working in key leadership roles in our University EAP program, our process for reviewing and renewing our EAP curriculum was largely unsupported by the lack of recent practical curriculum design guides available. Through our own applied research, lived experiences with managing change, and years of trial and error, we developed a bank of practical knowledge that could be used to help other practitioners facing similar needs and challenges. Thus, we decided to write this book to help other EAP professionals engage in the process of renewing curriculum in their own contexts using the steps we developed, informed by theory, research, and lessons learned in practice. This book is the result of our collective experiences in language learning and teaching accumulated over more than 20 years. Even though both of us have been practitioners, researchers, and administrators of language programs, our experiences can be more accurately described as complementary. Justine Light identifies primarily as a curriculum expert, with a notable track record developing language programs and curricular frameworks in many relevant contexts. Martin Guardado is a professor and administrator with many years of experience teaching English. Over the last five years, we have worked together on curriculum development and language program management in EAP, and this book is the result of what we have learned and created together during these years.

ix

x

PREFACE

With the above credentials, it became quite natural for us to want to produce an accessible guide that makes a solid bridge from theory to practice. Our approach is straightforward: we are firmly grounded in theory, particularly the learning paradigm, curriculum design of EAP, and TBLT, and translate these elements directly into a step-by-step process of renewing or creating a new curriculum. The design process we present in the book is illustrated with multiple examples from an actual EAP curriculum. We also made the decision to include reflections on how we implemented these steps in our own context. The result, we hope, is an easy-to-follow guide that we wished existed when we undertook a major EAP curriculum renewal process several years ago. We wrote this book for EAP practitioners, curriculum developers, and administrators; however, in the process of writing, we realized that the content as well as the approach we took would also be of interest to student teachers, graduate students, and researchers. Finally, we would like to thank the students, teachers, and other colleagues who helped develop some of the insights that are contained in the book, as well as those who supported different aspects of preparing the manuscript. Edmonton, Canada

Martin Guardado Justine Light

Contents

1

2

Introduction and Overview of Book Purpose of Book What Is EAP: The Nature and Purpose of English for Academic Purposes The Challenges of EAP Curriculum Design Models Backward Design and TBLT EAP Curriculum Design Model and Principles Guiding Principles for EAP Curriculum Design Outline of Book References Philosophy and Learning Principles The Importance of an Educational Philosophy The Learning Paradigm A Process for Re-framing and Developing a Program Philosophy Moving from Teaching to Learning Shifting from a Focus on the Quality of Entering Students to Those Exiting Examining Learning Structures Revising Learning Principles References

1 2 3 4 6 8 10 11 13 15 17 18 18 21 24 24 24 25 26 xi

xii

3

4

5

CONTENTS

Getting to Grips with the Environment: Program Goals Defined Understanding the Environment External Stakeholders Internal Stakeholders Understanding Learner Needs Infusing Principles and Pedagogical Priorities Current Teaching Environment Understanding the Underlying Principles Which Make up a Teaching Philosophy Pedagogical Priorities for a Contemporary EAP Classroom References Formatting Curriculum Content: Program Learning Goals Realized Understanding Outcomes in EAP Curriculum General Learning Outcomes Performance Conditions Specific Learning Outcomes Performance Indicators Sample Tasks Addressing the Language Focus in EAP Curriculum Building an Explicit Grammar Curriculum The Critical Link Between Summative Assessments and Curriculum Revisions Performance Conditions Specific Learning Outcomes Performance Indicators References Implementation and Evaluation: Bringing the Plan to Life Implementation and Evaluation The Notion of Curriculum as Planned and the Curriculum as Lived The Implementation Steps Towards a Successful Curriculum Launch Monitoring the Ongoing Curriculum as Lived References

27 29 30 35 38 42 42 44 46 47

49 51 51 54 57 59 68 69 70 77 78 79 80 83 85 86 86 92 95 100 101

CONTENTS

6

Evaluating the Plan and Lived Experience of the Curriculum: Completing the Circle Why Evaluate? Evaluating the Plan in Light of the Lived Experience When to Evaluate? How Frequently Should an EAP Curriculum Be Evaluated? How to Evaluate? Direct and Indirect Measures of the Curriculum Impact Who to Consult During the Evaluation? The Most Important Stakeholders: Students Internal Stakeholders: Teachers External Stakeholders: Beyond the Organization Conclusion References

Index

xiii

103 104 104 106 106 107 107 109 110 112 115 119 119 121

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1

Fig. 2.1 Fig. 3.1

Fig. 4.1

Fig. 5.1

Fig. 5.2 Fig. 6.1

Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018]) The relationship between the learning paradigm, backward design, and TBLT Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018]) The hierarchy of general learning outcomes, performance conditions, specific learning outcomes, performance indicators, and sample tasks Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018]) A staged curriculum implementation to ensure seamless learning experience for students Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018])

11 20

29

51

87 93

105

xv

List of Tables

Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table Table Table Table

4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Table 4.7 Table 4.8 Table 4.9 Table 5.1 Table 6.1

Elaborating SLOs through performance Indicators (B1− Writing) Elaborating SLOs through performance indicators (C1 writing) Rating scale for writing (B1−) Rubric for writing (B1−) Connecting SLOs to Sample tasks An example of the grammar assessment items in the curriculum from a B1− EAP course An example of the target teaching items in the curriculum from a B1− EAP course B1 writing curriculum Description of grammar items in the assessment rubric Activities which can be undertaken to ensure a smooth curriculum launch Checklist for grammar portion of summative assessment B1

60 60 62 64 69 73 75 80 81 96 112

xvii

CHAPTER 1

Introduction and Overview of Book

Abstract This introductory chapter describes the central purpose of the book, and outlines its structure. The first goal includes a brief overview of the nature of English for academic purposes, drawing attention to some of the particular challenges of organizing the teaching and learning environment in an EAP setting. Then, the authors provide a brief background of their own experiences renewing EAP curricula, introduce the curricular model that informs the book, backward design, and present the curriculum design and evaluation model which has been developed in their context. Finally, the chapter outlines the structure of the book. Keywords Curriculum design models · Backward design · English for academic purposes · Principles of curriculum design

Questions to ask yourself about your context • Do we understand why we are doing things the way we are? • Do we have a philosophy of teaching and learning? • Do we have a plan to implement this philosophical approach?

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_1

1

2

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Do we support our teachers and learners in achieving the program’s goals through our curricular documents (including assessments)?

Purpose of Book The purpose of this book is to provide a step-by-step guide that can help practitioners effectively review and manage their English for academic purposes (EAP) learning environments. Because the content is based on current theory and research, and also grounded in and realized through relevant experiences of the authors, it offers a systematic yet flexible and context driven approach for others to share. We are very aware that there have been several editions of curriculum development texts, some of which have been written with language learning contexts in mind. However, it is clear that many of these lack an EAP focus, or are becoming a little out of date and thus pre-date important developments in communicative language teaching (CLT), such as taskbased language teaching (TBLT), which we address later in the book. Throughout the book, we provide explicit guidance and practical tools that practitioners can use to examine their own contexts purposefully, prompting them to engage in critical reflection and helping them to better understand their learning settings, and the historical and contextual factors driving them to do the things the way they do. A central part of this process involves taking an institutionally inward look to figure out whether their own EAP program possesses a philosophy of teaching and learning, either explicitly stated or implicitly held. Whether it is tacit or expressed, we provide suggestions that are grounded in our own experience for implementing such a philosophy, and offer an example from our own practice of a paradigm that we believe is strong and current, and show how it can be implemented. This theoretical approach also suggests ways in which such thinking can be conveyed to teachers and learners, and how it can support them in achieving the program’s goals. In essence, the result of how we have organized the content of the book provides a method which is grounded in a robust, research-informed and philosophically-driven foundation, with a deeply practical and easily recognizable classroom approach. The purpose of the book is to support

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

3

practitioners in all facets of curricular work in EAP contexts and we are confident that they will find it a very accessible and practical guide.

What Is EAP: The Nature and Purpose of English for Academic Purposes EAP refers to teaching English in order to prepare learners to function in academic settings, usually as they study or engage in research (Flowerdew & Peacock, 2001). Driven by an increase in international students and new immigrants, the number of people seeking to study EAP in Canada (Douglas & Kim, 2014) and elsewhere (Charles, 2013) has risen steadily over the past few decades. EAP emerged as a minor branch of English for specific purposes (ESP) in the 1980s (Hyland, 2006) as the English language became a more dominant global language. Presently, English is a major international lingua franca for business and it is the lingua franca for academics, playing a gatekeeping role in academic publishing and other opportunities for knowledge dissemination and career advancement (Charles & Pecorari, 2016). Due in part to the pervasiveness of beliefs linking immersive language learning contexts to language mastery, well-resourced students from non-English-speaking backgrounds commonly seek out educational experiences in English-medium of instruction (EMI) environments in inner-circle (Kachru, 1992) countries (e.g., the UK, Australia, Canada) and increasingly, in expanding circle countries (e.g., Switzerland) (see Snow, 2016, for a thorough discussion of EMI and academic language development). Unlike other areas of ESP, such as English for nursing, EAP classes are often characterized by disciplinary diversity. An EAP class at the undergraduate or graduate level might consist of business, computing science, and agriculture students (among others), each field with its own lexis and communicative norms. While there are academic activities that are common to all disciplines, such as attending lectures and writing academic texts (Charles & Pecorari, 2016), the multiple layers of diversity in EAP learning contexts also present unique challenges to learners and educators. In the following section, we outline some of the challenges of organizing teaching and learning in an EAP setting. These challenges can be addressed thanks to the development of EAP in recent years, which has benefited from various theoretical and empirical advances. No longer a fringe movement, EAP has now taken a leading role in the innovation of

4

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

teaching English as a second and foreign language, particularly in relation to theory building, research development, and practice (Hyland, 2006).

The Challenges of EAP There are particular challenges of organizing the teaching and learning environment in an EAP setting, several of which are outlined in Charles and Pecorari’s (2016) book, Introducing English for Academic Purposes. Some of the challenges relate to the policies pertaining to EAP and its status within the institution, while others relate to the students, the instructors, and of course, the teaching of language and content itself. Charles and Pecorari remark that EAP tends to be regarded as ancillary to the core work of universities, which in turn, can have an effect on resource allocation and other forms of support. Additionally, smaller institutions may not have large cohorts of students with similar levels of language proficiency and/or disciplinary aspirations, which can pose challenges for instruction and planning. Students represent varying abilities and backgrounds (linguistic, cultural, subject-specific), which are as much strengths as they can be challenges. As Basturkmen (2010) observes of ESP learners more generally: In some cases learners are already working or studying, or have already worked or studied in their target workplaces or disciplines, and thus have knowledge of their specific ways of working. In other cases, learners may not have entered their targeted communities and have little understanding of what work or study in these communities involves. (p. 12)

Relatedly, fostering students’ social acculturation—in addition to their academic socialization—has been found to be a relatively overlooked area in EAP, but an important one that can lead to greater experiences of success beyond the EAP program and into the degree programs and professional lives of EAP students (e.g., Cheng & Fox, 2008; Fox, Cheng, Berman, Song, & Myles, 2006; Tweedie & Kim, 2015). Diversity in terms of educational, linguistic, and cultural background can also be found among an EAP teaching team. To narrow in on educational background, whether EAP instructors started their careers as subject specialists and became EAP instructors, or whether they have always been English as an additional language (EAL) or EAP instructors (Charles & Pecorari, 2016), appropriate resources and training can be a challenge,

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

5

even for well-resourced universities. The disposition of instructional staff to adopt relevant teaching methodologies can also impact the successful implementation of EAP. For instance, some EAP instructors have reported a degree of reluctance to plan dynamic and relevant learning activities such as task-based projects due to the significant time investment and “buy in” required of international students expecting more traditional methods (Douglas & Kim, 2014) (see the next section for more detail on the benefits and drawbacks of task-based language teaching in Douglas and Kim’s [2014] study). Another critical aspect of diversity on an EAP teacher team, particularly in an ESL setting, may be the duality of native speakers (NS) and non-native speakers (NNS) of English. Since the 2000s, researchers have been drawing attention to the increasing numbers of NNS English teachers (NNSET) around the world. Moreover, as Moussu & Llurda (2008) noted, NNSETs “used to provide English instruction exclusively in EFL contexts, but now are found occupying teaching positions in Englishspeaking countries as well” (p. 319). While these two constructs of NS and NNS generally describe only differences in expertise and experience as language users (Moussu & Llurda, 2008), EAP instructors across the continuum of professional competence and experience are a rich source of input into an EAP curriculum. As Martinez (2017) stated, “all language educators, whether NS or NNS, deserve their place and recognition in the language teaching profession because both have much to say and offer” (p. 3). An EAP curriculum context offers an incontrovertible venue for the contributions of both NS and NNS because as Mahboob (2017) argues, no one is a NS when it comes to the specialized language requirements of the academic context. While NS teachers may offer insights on language use gleaned from their own contexts (Widdowson, 1994), perhaps as learners in the English post-secondary milieu, NNSET may be better able to anticipate and predict the language difficulties students may face (Medgyes, 1994). Furthermore, NNSETs can “empathize well with their students’ learning difficulties and understand what it is to be homesick and to experience culture shock” (Moussu & Llurda, 2008, p. 322). In the development of an EAP curriculum, the diverse voices of NS and NNSET provide a critical data set, and as Llurda (2009) observed, “We cannot afford failing to incorporate diversity in all aspects of our lives involving language: from language analysis to language teaching and language use” (p. 48).

6

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Aside from challenges at the institutional and experiential levels, teaching and learning EAP is itself a thoroughly complex undertaking. To single out only one aspect of EAP language instruction, Charles and Pecorari (2016) have written that vocabulary is “of critical importance to EAP learners”. … yet “to attain comprehension to an acceptably high level, a reader must know the vast majority of words in the text: somewhere between 95 percent and 98 per cent” (p. 115), which can be a monumental task in academic settings where new terminology appears regularly (see also McDonough, Neumann, & Hubert-Smith, 2018). In fact, “terminology is arguably of greatest relevance to EAP students, since their objective is to use English in order to learn about their subject areas, and terminology cannot be separated from subject knowledge” (Charles & Pecorari, 2016, p. 116). However, the instructor may lack the disciplinespecific knowledge to teach terminology, or there might not be enough students in the class from a given discipline to make teaching its terminology worthwhile.

Curriculum Design Models Richards (2013) groups curriculum approaches in language teaching into three categories: forward, central, and backward design. He explains that “forward design is based on the assumption that input, process, and output are related in a linear fashion” (p. 8). In other words, in this curriculum design model, the first consideration is usually the topic or theme, followed by a selection of materials and activities related to the topic, and then finally the summative assessment, which follows from the activities. Forward design is ideally suited for language teaching contexts where “the aims of learning are understood in very general terms such as in courses in ‘general English’” (Richards, 2013, p. 9) and the development of language skills remains unspecified. In theory, this model would not necessarily be well suited in an EAP class, whose overarching goals are quite specific to academic language development, and in some cases, further specified according to academic discipline or vocation. Depending on the amount of time afforded and the goals of the EAP students in a given course, forward design could be integrated into an EAP context in the form of a supplementary or reflective assignment, such as a novel study, which would have the added benefit to EAP learners of building a lexical repertoire.

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

7

Central design can be thought of as an activity- or methods-based design. The emphasis of this approach is on the learner’s experience and on learning processes; the achievement of learning goals and objectives, themes and content are all secondary considerations. Like forward design, central design has its advantages, but may not be best suited to EAP’s outcomes-oriented nature. Wiggins and McTighe (2005), strong proponents of backward design (described below) might characterize central design’s focus on activity over learning outcomes as committing one of the “sins of traditional design,” namely that it can produce an entertaining lesson that incidentally leads to learning, but that ultimately lacks intellectual intent or direction. As Richards (2013) points out, all approaches to curriculum design can be valid and productive in the right context. Backward design begins by specifying the learning objectives and then proceeds to identify the approaches (learning activities, etc.) for achieving these objectives. Wiggins and McTighe (2006) have described backward design in three stages: (1) identify desired results; (2) determine acceptable evidence; and (3) plan learning experiences and instruction. Both forward and central design would begin with the third and final stage of the backward design model, beginning with the identification of topic or theme and the identification of learning experiences or activities, respectively. One of Wiggins and McTighe’s (2006) principal critiques of other approaches to curriculum design is what they call the “twin sins of traditional design,” namely that “activity-based” and “coverage-based” designs, without explicit attention to learning objectives, foster “aimless” or ineffective learning environments (p. 16). Backward design, by contrast, has the learning goals or outcomes at the forefront of every lesson and learning experience. Richards (2013) notes that backward design has been widely applied in language teaching contexts, particularly “in situations where a high degree of accountability needs to be built into the curriculum design and where resources can be committed to needs analysis, planning, and materials development” (p. 29). Given the focused nature of EAP programs, especially the fact that conducting a needs analysis is a routine practice (Charles & Pecorari, 2016), and the instructors’ commitment to planning and materials development to meet the specific needs of their students, backward design would appear to be well suited for such programs.

8

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Backward Design and TBLT TBLT is a top down response to the form-focused and teacher-fronted classroom practices that fell out of favour after the 1970s (Van den Branden, 2006). Pioneering work by a number of scholars (e.g., Michael Long, Patricia Porter, N. S. Prabhu, Peter Skehan, Graham Crookes, and others) initiated a move away from rather decontextualized linguistic syllabi and teaching and towards approaches that focused on interaction and negotiation of meaning. This work was at least partly responsible for the emergence of TBLT, which has surfaced in the last two decades as an updated and robust variety of the meaning-focused but largely unstructured CLT approaches that dominated the field in the 1980s and 1990s. Notably, there is no unified view of TBLT, and in fact, even the definition of what constitutes a task itself can vary across TBLT versions. As Bygate (2016) notes, “TBLT does not of itself impose an ensemble or set sequence of pedagogical procedures, other than the inclusion of tasks as a central point of orientation within the programme” (p. 396). However, what proponents share is the commitment to language learning activities that closely mirror the tasks learners will need to perform in the real world. Based on a review of definitions of task, Ellis (2003) proposes key characteristics of a language-learning task, namely, a task: • • • • • •

is a workplan involves a primary focus on meaning involves real-world processes of language use can involve any of the four language skills engages cognitive processes has a clearly defined communicative outcome (pp. 9–10).

Skehan (2014) further states that tasks can be narrowly or broadly conceived, thus allowing for a range of types of activities, some with tightlycontrolled practice and others with the potential for high engagement. Whereas CLT is mainly meaning-based, TBLT focuses on meaning while also incorporating a psycholinguistic orientation, which facilitates more direct linkages to second language acquisition (SLA) research (Skehan, 2014). Like backward design, TBLT is an outcomes-oriented approach to language teaching and learning that “provides opportunities for students to engage in the authentic use of the target language through tasks”

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

9

(Richards, 2013, p. 3), which many EAP instructors and students have also found to be valuable. Indeed, TBLT has been recognized as an ideal language teaching approach for EAP settings (e.g., Newton et al., 2018). To investigate this relationship, Douglas and Kim (2014) surveyed 42 EAP professionals in Canada to understand their perceptions of TBLT for EAP. A majority (86%) indicated that TBLT was appropriate in EAP contexts, and almost three quarters (69%) reported using TBLT in their classrooms. While the task is the key characteristic and element in TBLT (Douglas & Kim, 2014), it is not to be confused with central design, where an engaging activity is seen to be sufficient to stimulate learning. In TBLT (as in backward design), tasks are created with very specific learning outcomes in mind. Indeed, the complexity of task design in EAP contexts seemed obvious to Douglas and Kim’s (2014) participants, with 16% of the participants identifying “excessive instructor preparation” (p. 14) as a significant drawback for implementing TBLT in their classes. Designing even typical academic tasks such as presentations, essays, and interviews, was time consuming due to the consideration of multiple outcomes. Task selection could be relatively simple, but the implications had to be thought through carefully, and clear connections made to learning outcomes. For instance, an interview task could include interviewing someone in the field the student hoped to pursue, and then presenting their findings and reflections on the interview to the class. Other major drawbacks teachers identified included a mismatch with student expectations for learning (teachers had to “sell” their students on the value of TBLT), and insufficient classroom time to properly execute the tasks. The benefits, however, were significant. Teachers reported practicality, effectiveness, and learner-centeredness as the main benefits of TBLT: practicality, insofar as the tasks were relevant to the specialized needs of EAP students (i.e., how these prepared them for the actual activities they were expected to perform in their degree programs); effectiveness, in terms of fostering a sense of accomplishment in students; and learner-centeredness, because the higher degree of student involvement in their work prompted greater autonomous learning and commitment. Douglas and Kim (2014) highlighted one teacher’s reflections as representative of other participants’ feelings on TBLT in EAP: Students feel a great sense of accomplishment, but you [instructors] have to weather a lot of anxiety and complaining and griping, and you have to

10

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

be very clear on what they are learning from this, and why you are doing it this way. (p. 19)

Thus, an arguably often overlooked benefit of TBLT in EAP courses that prepare students for mainstream undergraduate and graduate university programs is that in well-designed task-based learning, students come to understand that the discomfort of learning in an unfamiliar, non-traditional way can be very beneficial to their English development and overall academic socialization, which is a major asset when facing the unknowns of (Western) university culture beyond EAP.

EAP Curriculum Design Model and Principles As we strive for a practical and applicable approach in the book, in this introductory chapter we begin to establish a process chart to show how we envision curriculum to be at the heart of EAP program management, as well as a set of principles that inform and guide our EAP curriculum design approach. We elaborate on both of these components more thoroughly in Chapter 3 and refer to them throughout the book. At the outset, it is important to understand the context in which the curricular work will be carried out, as well as where it will be implemented in order to best ensure success for learners, teachers, and the EAP program. Nation and Macalister (2010) view curriculum design at a broad level. They recommend carefully considering a variety of factors that will impact the success of the course or program being developed. To this end, they suggest reviewing the students’ current language skills and needs, resources such as time and level of professionalism of teachers, as well as principles of language learning, and the overall environment. With this set of goals in mind, the importance of taking a comprehensive approach to program renewal cannot be emphasized enough. Therefore, we have analyzed the language curriculum design model proposed by Nation and Macalister (2010), and adapted it for EAP contexts (see Fig. 1.1). As an essential part of adapting the model, we carefully considered our program philosophy (the learning paradigm, addressed in detail in the next chapter), our language learning principles (also addressed in the next chapter), as well as our EAP curriculum development principles (listed below).

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

11

Fig. 1.1 Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018])

Guiding Principles for EAP Curriculum Design 1. EAP curriculum development is a highly integrative process involving a wide range of stakeholders, each with specific considerations operating in a relatively high-stakes environment.

12

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

2. EAP is a unique strand of ESL instruction, with a narrowly defined focus and clear pathways on exit, and as such, has unique considerations when undertaking curriculum design. 3. Curriculum development is seen as a continuous and ongoing process; once a curriculum plan is written, it begins to live in the classroom and so planning and evaluation are a continuous cycle. 4. Every step of curriculum development and implementation can be seen as an opportunity to engage instructors, those critical team members who will bring the plan to life, in a reflective process. 5. Program learning goals are at the heart of the EAP curriculum process, using a backward design model which puts outcomes, both general and specific, as the descriptors of how the course operates as both a preparation for undergraduate or graduate study and as a standards framework against which readiness is measured. 6. Principles for effective instructed language learning and other pedagogical priorities which align with the broader strategic vision for the language school form an important part of the context within which the EAP program operates.

Curriculum in Our Context Throughout the book we provide contextualized descriptions of our own experiences in curriculum overhaul in order to ground the book in practice. Through our own experiences as the Director of and the Curriculum Developer for a highly successful EAP program in a North American research university, we have gained important insights throughout the process of our work. In our own experiences of EAP curriculum renewal, we applied the adapted model in order to begin the curriculum evaluation with a concurrent review of the environment within the School, the needs of our students, and a reflective and candid consideration of the pedagogical principles driving our classroom instruction practices. In looking at our environment, we reviewed the context for instructors, the pathways offered between courses and programs, and the resources and constraints that greatly influenced the programs that could be offered. Given that we view evaluation as a continuous and ongoing consideration, encircling all parts of the process, we decided to modify the model to ensure that this goal is captured clearly.

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

13

As a result of our own contextualized experience, we have developed a vision for success and operationalized that vision in a very large program. It is true that we have made mistakes, but have made meaningful progress in renewing and revitalizing our program with a coherent and shared vision for learning and teaching success. In this book, we aim to help other programs to reflect on their own programming and apply some or all of the tools for program renewal and revitalization that we have developed and found useful. This type of program overhaul is a necessary part of the continuously changing nature of EAP and learner drivers, including a desire to study overseas. Pedagogical movements, such as the ever-evolving shift to a TBLT approach, require forward thinking and planning. This book answers the why and the how of implementing curriculum change, as well as the critical considerations of the curriculum as planned and lived and the imperative for teacher engagement throughout.

Outline of Book The book is organized in 6 chapters, which together sequentially outline the process for renewing an EAP curriculum; however, each chapter is at the same time self-contained and could be used independently to complete just a limited aspect of a curriculum development initiative. In each chapter, a series of questions are posed, designed to encourage reflection about how the chapter content relates to the particular context of the reader. The goal is to make the book readily applicable to the singular context within which the practitioner/reader is operating. Furthermore, while the book maintains its principles-driven approach, each chapter is filled with tools, samples, and examples drawn from our own experiences to ground the book in a notably practical outlook. In Chapter 2, we establish the importance of beginning a curriculum development or overhaul process by starting with an examination of the philosophical underpinnings of the existing educational paradigm in the EAP program. We explain that if a stated philosophy is not immediately apparent in program mission or vision statements, it can in fact be deduced by examining the decisions, documents, and pathways which have evolved over the previous decade. We guide the reader in establishing a philosophical approach carefully and sensibly as key to the ability of a program to describe changes to its stakeholders, as well as to resolve

14

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

unexpected inconsistencies that might arise in future decision-making. In a nutshell, the primary goal in Chapter 2 is to articulate how to put learners and learning at the heart of EAP programming and to inform many of the future decisions about curriculum, assessments, and pathways a program may face. In Chapter 3, we elaborate in detail on the EAP curriculum model that we introduced in the current chapter. As part of this elaboration, we carefully consider how to undertake the process of a comprehensive scan of the environment within which the EAP program operates. In a step-bystep approach, we outline the phases involved, the options for expanding or limiting the needs analysis, and some of the constraints which may be pertinent. Chapter 4 highlights how understanding what learners are able to do at the end of the course becomes paramount in the format of the curriculum itself. The chapter focuses on the nature of an outcomes-based curriculum, and how this type of curriculum seeks to describe what a learner who is successful in passing the course is able to do. The chapter explores the rationale for an outcomes-based approach to EAP curriculum and describes in detail all of the aspects which need to be considered for inclusion in the document to promote optimal learning opportunities for students. The chapter provides detailed guidance and numerous examples to demonstrate how pedagogical principles can be incorporated into the curriculum documents and tasks. Chapter 5 elaborates on a plan for program-wide curriculum implementation, including tools which can facilitate the process. In line with the original model of curriculum development introduced in Chapter 1 which illustrates evaluation of the curriculum as an ongoing process, Chapter 5 outlines an approach to conducting a formal curriculum evaluation. Finally, Chapter 6 presents the final step in the cyclical process of curricular planning, the undertaking of a formal curriculum evaluation. This chapter addresses both the important philosophical question of why it is essential to incorporate the lived experience of the curriculum into the plan but also offers a comprehensive guide to the how, when, and who of a curriculum evaluation. At the same time, this chapter aims to complete the circle as described in Fig. 1.1 by insisting that curriculum evaluation is an ongoing and enriching part of the process of curricular planning. Together, all the chapters provide a well-grounded but practical guide to this key component of EAP program management.

1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF BOOK

15

References Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing courses in English for specific purposes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bygate, M. (2016). Sources, developments and directions of task-based language teaching. The Language Learning Journal, 44(4), 381–400. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09571736.2015.1039566. Charles, M. (2013). English for academic purposes. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 137–153). Oxford, UK: Wiley. Charles, M., & Pecorari, D. (2016). Introducing English for academic purposes. New York, NY: Routledge. Cheng, L., & Fox, J. (2008). Towards a better understanding of academic acculturation: Second language students in Canadian universities. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(2), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr. 65.2.307. Douglas, S. & Kim, M. (2014). Task-based language teaching and English for academic purposes: An investigation into instructor perceptions and practice in the Canadian context. TESL Canada Journal, 31(8), 1–22. http://dx.doi. org/10.18806/tesl.v31i0.1184. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (Eds.). (2001). Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fox, J., Cheng, L., Berman, R., Song, X., & Myles, J. (2006). Costs and benefits: English for academic purposes instruction in Canadian universities (Vol. 23, pp. 1–108). Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies [CPALS]. Ottawa: Carleton University. Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2018). Innovation in EAP programmes: Shifting from teaching to learning in curriculum design. In L. T. Wong & W. L. Wong (Eds.), Teaching and learning English for academic purposes: Current research and practices (pp. 143–160). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge. Kachru, B. (Ed.). (1992). The other tongue (2nd ed.) Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Llurda, E. (2009). The decline and fall of the native speaker. In L. Wei & V. Cook (Eds.), Contemporary applied linguistics: Volume 1 Language teaching and learning (pp. 37–53). London: Bloomsbury Academic. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/10.5040/ 9781474211789.ch-002. Mahboob, A. (2017). Understanding language variation: Implications of the NNEST lens for TESOL teacher education programs. In A. J. D. D. Martinez

16

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

(Ed.), Native and non-native teachers in English language classrooms: Professional challenges and teacher education. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral. proquest.com. Martinez, A. J. D. D. (2017). Introduction. In A. J. D. D. Martinez (Ed.), Native and non-native teachers in English language classrooms: Professional challenges and teacher education. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral. proquest.com. McDonough, K., Neumann, H., & Hubert-Smith, N. (2018). How accurately do English for academic purposes students use Academic Word List words? BC TEAL Journal, 3(1), 77–89. Retrieved from https://ojso.library.ubc.ca/ index.php/BCTJ/article/view/293. Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan. Moussu, L., & Llurda, E. (2008). Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: History and research. Language Teaching, 41(3), 315–348. https:// doi.org/10.1017/s0261444808005028. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York, NY: Routledge. Newton, J. M., Stoller, F. L., Grabe, W., Vandergrift, L., Goh, C. C. M., & Ferris, D. R. (2018). Teaching English to second language learners in academic contexts: Reading, writing, listening, and speaking. New York, NY: Routledge. Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design. RELC Journal, 44(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0033688212473293. Skehan, P. (2014). Task-based performance and task-based instruction: Research contributions. Paper presented at the Plenary address to the Task-Based Learning SIG-JALT, Osaka, Japan. Snow, M. A. (2016). Content-based language teaching and academic language development. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 3, pp. 159–185). New York and London: Routledge. Tweedie, M. G., & Kim, M. (2015). EAP curriculum alignment and social acculturation: Student perceptions. TESL Canada Journal, 33(1), 41–57. http:// doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v33i1.1226. Van den Branden, K. (2006). Introduction: Task-based language teaching in a nutshell. In K. Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 1–16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Widdowson, H. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377–389. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Examining the teaching life. Educational Leadership, 63, 26–29.

CHAPTER 2

Philosophy and Learning Principles

Abstract This chapter addresses the need to begin any curriculum renewal work with an examination of the underlying philosophical approach of the EAP program, including stated or implied language learning principles. The chapter also describes the need to build a shared understanding of those philosophies with the teachers in the program. As well, special consideration is given to the role of a strategic plan or a mission or vision statement in the context of curriculum renewal, and the benefits of considering the development of such a document and statements if they do not already exist. Finally, the authors engage with the topic of pedagogical priorities, and make a case for the compatibility of a task-based methodology within the philosophical approach that is proposed in this model of EAP curriculum renewal. Keywords Educational philosophy · The teaching paradigm · The learning paradigm · Language learning principles · TBLT

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_2

17

18

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Questions to ask yourself about your context • Have we explored our philosophies of teaching and learning in the context of our EAP program? • How have we endeavoured to build a shared understanding of those philosophies with our teachers? • Have we articulated our philosophies of teaching and learning in a program mission or vision statement? • How long has it been since we revisited previously developed statements pertaining to our philosophical approach? • Do we have certain pedagogical priorities (e.g., task-based language teaching approaches)?

The Importance of an Educational Philosophy First of all, we will establish the importance of beginning a curriculum development or overhaul process with an examination of the philosophical underpinnings of the existing educational paradigm in an EAP program. If a stated philosophy is not immediately apparent in program mission or vision statements, it can in fact be deduced by examining the decisions, documents, and pathways which have evolved over the previous decade or two. Establishing a philosophical approach carefully and sensibly is key to the ability of a program to describe changes to its stakeholders, as well as to resolve unexpected inconsistencies that might arise in future decision-making. Our primary goal in this chapter is to articulate how to put learners and learning at the heart of EAP programming and to inform many of the future decisions about curriculum, assessments, and pathways a program may face.

The Learning Paradigm One useful paradigmatic approach is to examine your program, and to analyse it in light of the teaching versus learning paradigm explained in detail by Barr and Tagg (1995). Almost 25 years ago, Barr and Tagg proposed a radical shift in how we think about teaching and learning in higher education, from a focus on instructors and instruction, to a focus on learners and learning —a

2

PHILOSOPHY AND LEARNING PRINCIPLES

19

shift they call “the Learning Paradigm.” Barr and Tagg summarize the difference in approaches this way: In the Instruction Paradigm, the mission of the college is to provide instruction, to teach. The method and the product are one and the same. The means is the end. In the Learning Paradigm, the mission of the college is to produce learning. The method and the product are separate. The end governs the means. (p. 15)

Some key differences between the two paradigms include the student taking ownership for constructing knowledge within teacher-designed learning environments, rather than the teacher or expert as purveyor of knowledge to their students; identifying specific learning outcomes and results in collaboration with students, rather than merely focusing on covering syllabus-dictated material; and remaining open to whatever methods support learning—including cross-disciplinary and interpersonal collaborations—rather than the de facto classroom-lecture model (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 16). Barr and Tagg’s vision is much more detailed than these three differences can capture, but even with this cursory glance at the differences, it is still possible to see the ontological resonance that the learning paradigm (macro-level curricular planning) has with backward design (meso-level curricular planning) and task-based language teaching (microlevel curricular planning), discussed in Chapter 1 (see also Fig. 2.1). For instance, in step with backward design, The Learning Paradigm … . supports any learning method and structure that works, where “works” is defined in terms of learning outcomes, not as the degree of conformity to an ideal classroom archetype. In fact, the Learning Paradigm requires a constant search for new structures and methods that work better for student learning and success, and expects even these to be redesigned continually and to evolve over time. (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 20)

The learning paradigm emphasizes the learner’s needs and strengths, rather than instruction (content, methods), and aims to foster learning environments that help learners to successfully achieve their goals. Put differently, it “ends the lecture’s privileged position, honoring in its place whatever approaches serve best to prompt learning of particular knowledge by particular students” (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 14)—a move that is

20

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Fig. 2.1 The relationship between the learning paradigm, backward design, and TBLT

clearly well suited to language learning, particularly from a communicative or task-based language teaching perspective. Some of the ways that the learning paradigm moves learners from the periphery to the centre of their own learning include: • Stepping out of the students’ way. According to Barr and Tagg (1995), learning environments may even be “teacherless”: “While teachers will have designed the learning experiences and environments students use - often through teamwork with each other and other staff - they need not be present for or participate in every structured learning activity.” (pp. 21–22) • Recognizing that learning may take more or less time than the arbitrary demarcation of time on the academic calendar. Students who master the specified learning skills and outcomes more quickly are rewarded with commensurate progress through the program, while students who take longer are rewarded with more time to master those same skills. (Barr & Tagg, 1995) • Providing the framework for students to be successful in achieving their goals—i.e., “the achievement of overall student educational objectives such as earning a degree, persisting in school, and learning

2

PHILOSOPHY AND LEARNING PRINCIPLES

21

the ‘right’ things - the skills and knowledge that will help students to achieve their goals in work and life” (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 15), rather than to simply access the institution that confers degrees. • Recognizing the skills and talents of all students as relevant to their learning, and working with them to apply them, while identifying and developing areas for further growth. (Barr & Tagg, 1995)

Despite offering what appears to be a highly relevant and useful framework for EAP programs, there do not appear to be many (if any) EAP programs whose curricula have been explicitly informed by the teaching and learning paradigm (see Guardado & Light, 2018). Nevertheless, a number of EAP instructors in Canada use TBLT in their classrooms (Douglas & Kim, 2014). Most instructors who reported using TBLT in Douglas and Kim’s (2014) research also reported deriving benefits from this student- and learning-centered method, although they did characterize one drawback as cultural mismatches in expectations about teaching and learning (Douglas & Kim, 2014). Students used to more traditional models of teaching and learning (e.g., the teaching paradigm) may find the use of such learning-focused methods initially disorienting. Students are not alone in this sense of disorientation, however. We also found similar skepticism among some of our EAP instructors when we began the process of curriculum renewal, who voiced concerns about the degree to which optimal learning and teaching environments could truly be distinguished. Nevertheless, resistance among instructors was minimal, and was mitigated largely by involving them in every stage of the process, which ultimately fostered a sense of pride and ownership of the new curriculum, as well as a sense of responsibility to implement it. Interestingly, the participants in Douglas and Kim’s (2014) research who reported students’ initial reluctance to embrace learning-centered methods also came to see their benefits through active participation in their own learning at all levels, and derived a sense of accomplishment that came with completing tasks that were relevant to their learning goals. A Process for Re-framing and Developing a Program Philosophy In this section, we present a meaningful set of criteria against which programs and practitioners can organize their thinking and curricular planning. By the end of this process, practitioners will be able to describe

22

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

the dominant paradigm in the EAP program and recognize some significant ways to shift to a more learning-centred approach. We also consider how a paradigm shift might evolve our thinking around what Barr and Tagg called learning structures. Through the use of practical, practiceoriented questions, it is possible to focus on how a program can create an optimal environment for learning. Rather than focusing on teachingoriented questions such as: • What technology did we need to provide for teachers? • How quickly could grades be posted? • How could we ensure that class attendance played a pivotal role in course completion? • How could we ensure that the teacher was central in determining whether a student had passed a course, rather than a final, standard exit assessment? We demonstrate how an evolution of philosophy turns up a different set of questions with an evolved thinking, which will be addressed in a section below. I. Developing a philosophy: Our own process In this section, we provide a narrative description of how we engaged in the process of examining our own philosophical approach. This is intended to provide a grounded, step-by-step process to follow. We believe that it can easily be adapted to suit the contextual factors, needs, and constraints of a particular EAP context. At the outset of renewing the EAP curricula in our program, we examined the philosophical underpinnings of our existing educational paradigm. After scrutinizing the decisions, documents, and pathways which had evolved over the twenty years previous with varying degrees of revision, we concluded that the EAP program had strayed towards a largely teachercentred paradigm. This ‘traditional, dominant paradigm’ (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 13) emphasizes teaching as the end purpose of the curriculum. For instance, previous curriculum documents described only what teachers were responsible for teaching—a narrow view of curriculum more in line with the term syllabus (Finney, 2002). In turn, this had led to a situation that restricted an understanding of student language proficiency at any given level. In our EAP courses, as is the case in other settings that share similar goals (e.g., Raymond & Parks, 2002), writing had become the

2

PHILOSOPHY AND LEARNING PRINCIPLES

most important aspect of language proficiency. Given that our EAP program was housed in a university and almost all students were enrolled in post-secondary study or planned to attend university in an English speaking context, the results that the teacher-centred paradigm yielded at the time of the review were not fully unexpected. Even though teachers were accountable for what they had taught, this was not a reliable predictor of what students had learned and were able to demonstrate. Furthermore, a rigid instructional paradigm unwittingly promoted the importance of maximizing the amount of material teachers could cover during the term. Such a teacher-driven agenda may well have led the instructional team to overlook the importance of active learning approaches (Liu & Littlewood, 1997) reflecting contemporary research in instructed language learning, such as task-based language teaching (e.g., Ellis, 2003; Skehan, 2014; Van Den Branden, 2006). We acknowledged from the beginning that having a consistent and well-articulated philosophical approach was important in achieving the academic and operational linearity we desired. Indeed, we were keenly aware that establishing our philosophical approach carefully and sensibly was key to our ability to substantiate changes to our stakeholders, as well as to resolve unexpected inconsistencies that might arise in our future decisionmaking. Our primary goal was to put learners and learning at the heart of our thinking and ensure that this vision drove all the decisions about curricula, assessments, and pathways. In other words, we needed to develop a shared understanding of how each curricular component and pedagogical decision could support students in meeting their goals and what it meant exactly to pass one course in terms of academic language skills. Our starting point was a conscientious perusal of the model for undergraduate teaching and learning proposed by Barr and Tagg (1995). In this model, the authors systematically contrast the instructional paradigm with a learning paradigm. They describe how university programs, courses, and instructors concern themselves with those issues related to instruction but overlook the critical issues related to learning. The approaches are contrasted across a variety of spectra and in each case it is discussed how both might manifest operationally. As our EAP program operates in a university, but in a context of language skill development, some adaptation of the model was required. What we found, though, was a meaningful set of criteria against which we could organize our thinking and curricular planning.

23

24

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

As part of the process for establishing the dominant paradigm in an EAP program, it is important to zero in on four of the areas against which the continuum from a teaching to a learning paradigm can be effectively plotted, as proposed by Barr and Tagg. Moving from Teaching to Learning Firstly, it is essential to consider how shifting from an instructional paradigm to a learning paradigm might inform the mission and purpose of an EAP program. It is therefore necessary to understand that under the instructional paradigm, the emphasis is usually placed on the provision and delivery of instruction, discussions tend to revolve around determining the sequence of instruction, and time and other resources are invested in developing ways to improve the quality of that instruction. Following the approach of Barr and Tagg, the thinking and planning shift to considering how best to produce learning, to creating optimal language learning environments, and improving the quality of student language learning experiences. Shifting from a Focus on the Quality of Entering Students to Those Exiting Secondly, the process and method for establishing the criteria for success in the EAP program has to be considered. Under the present approach, a great deal of time might be spent discussing the quality of instruction and the assessment of the language skills of students entering the program for placement purposes. Under a learning paradigm, the focus needs to put a greater emphasis on the quality of exiting students, as well as the quality of the language learning experience they encounter in the program. Examining Learning Structures The ways in which a paradigm shift might evolve the team’s thinking around what Barr and Tagg called learning structures should also be considered. Under the existing model, as previously noted, the curricula might describe what material is covered at each level. It may focus on how the EAP program can create an optimal environment for teaching. As a program and organization, those involved in this process need to

2

PHILOSOPHY AND LEARNING PRINCIPLES

25

refocus their thinking, which will enable them to ask a different set of questions about their learning structures. Instead they could reflect on: • What learning can be demonstrated by individual learners? • What role can objective (possibly external) evaluation play in measuring language proficiency? • How can we ensure that course completion is determined by language proficiency rather than by other factors? • How can technology support language learning? Revising Learning Principles Finally, it is necessary to adopt an understanding that a new learning paradigm means that the EAP program would be fundamentally altering its learning theory principles. It may appear that a shift in learning principles should be the first consideration; however, an understanding of a shift in learning theory is directly related to how decisions are operationalized. From learning theory comes the view of how knowledge is constructed and created by students, rather than delivered piecemeal by instructors. From learning theory comes a consideration that learning will be studentcentred and to some degree, student-controlled. And perhaps most significantly, this change to learning theory asks the curriculum team to consider, as Barr and Tagg (1995, p. 17) frame it, that ‘talent and ability are abundant’ in students. These theoretical considerations directly impact the learning context and are in no way viewed as aspirational vision-type statements. These shifts may be seen as subtle, and, as some more change-resistant practitioners might argue, at times may appear semantic. Teachers might reasonably challenge the curriculum team to define, for instance: in what way is an optimal learning environment really a significant change from an optimal teaching environment? We argue that these changes are significant, over-arching, and deeply meaningful. These shifts will prove vital when designing documents, framing research questions, developing professional development around the implementation of the curriculum, and creating valid and reliable summative assessment instruments. Making such shifts will make it possible to explain in a systematic way to the instructional team, as well as to the broader stakeholder community, why those important choices for change have been made. As new approaches

26

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

are tested, such clarity will reassure them why the work was undertaken in the first place. In this chapter, we have walked practitioners and other readers through the process for how to undertake the journey of evaluating an EAP program. We applied the learning paradigm as a philosophical guide in this process, but used an EAP-specific lens for a more effective and efficient approach, which we hope will be informative and practically useful.

References Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27 (6), 12–25. Douglas, S., & Kim, M. (2014). Task-based language teaching and English for academic purposes: An investigation into instructor perceptions and practice in the Canadian context. TESL Canada Journal, 31(8), 1–22. http://dx.doi. org/10.18806/tesl.v31i0.1184. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Finney, D. (2002). The ELT curriculum: A flexible model for a changing world. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 69–79). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2018). Innovation in EAP programmes: Shifting from teaching to learning in curriculum design. In L. T. Wong & W. L. Wong (Eds.), Teaching and learning English for academic purposes: Current research and practices (pp. 143–160). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Liu, N. F., & Littlewood, W. (1997). Why do many students appear reluctant to participate in classroom learning discourse? System, 25(3), 371–384. Raymond, P., & Parks, S. (2002). Transitions: Orienting to reading and writing assignments in EAP and MBA contexts. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(1), 152–180. Skehan, P. (2014). Task-based performance and task-based instruction: Research contributions. Paper presented at the Plenary address to the Task-Based Learning SIG-JALT, Osaka, Japan. Van Den Branden, K. (2006). Introduction: Task-based language teaching in a nutshell. In K. Van Den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 1–16). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

CHAPTER 3

Getting to Grips with the Environment: Program Goals Defined

Abstract Guardado and Light consider how to undertake the process of a comprehensive scan of the environment within which the EAP program operates in order to develop broad program goals from which a detailed curriculum plan can be built. In a step-by-step approach, the authors outline the phases involved, the options for expanding or limiting the scan, and some of the constraints which may be pertinent. Moreover, even throughout this initial phase of establishing the context for curricular renewal, emphasis is placed on the importance of engaging with all stakeholders who will be responsible for implementing curriculum change or who will ultimately be part of determining if such a change has been successful. To this end, the chapter offers concrete techniques, instruments, and a variety of suggestions for collecting different types of relevant data to make informed decisions throughout the process of conducting a comprehensive environmental scan. Keywords Environmental scan · Program goals · Needs analysis · EAP stakeholders

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_3

27

28

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Questions to ask yourself about the context for your EAP program • How well do we understand the environment within which our EAP program operates? • What specific language and academic skills do our learners need when they complete our program? • Do we understand the academic pathways our students plan to follow once they leave our program? • What constraints does our program face in terms of future curriculum and broader program development? • Are our stakeholder communities satisfied with our graduates’ language proficiency? • How is our EAP program currently being experienced by both teachers and learners in the classroom? • Are there any pedagogical priorities considered optimal for classroom instruction?

This chapter focuses on how a full understanding of the context for an EAP program fundamentally shapes the development of program learning goals. These goals will in turn support the development of the learning outcomes which provide the framework for the curriculum, and allow the language learning tasks and classroom activities which make up the daily classroom operations. Language learners enrolled in EAP programs tend to have a well-defined purpose for studying in these courses: effective integration into a mainstream undergraduate program of study. This clear definition supports curriculum writing as outcomes can be targeted to supporting this purpose, but also describes a set of stakeholders who have clear expectations about those who complete the EAP program, as well as their capacities and abilities to function within the mainstream academic environment (Fig. 3.1). Our model for developing curriculum considers three main aspects of the context in which the EAP program operates for evaluation as the program goals are developed: the environment of external and internal stakeholders; the needs of the EAP learners; and the pedagogical priorities of the program and language centre.

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

29

Fig. 3.1 Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018])

Understanding the Environment In this section, we will offer a comprehensive consideration of those elements which make up the environment of external and internal stakeholders, who each play a critical role in the successful learning pathways of EAP learners. For each element, we will describe the importance of this group to the process, as well as techniques and tools for completing this consultation.

30

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

External Stakeholders English for specific purposes courses, like EAP, necessarily operate in an environment with a well-defined community of external stakeholders, in comparison to general ESL programs. For EAP programs, that community may also be quite large in members and spread across a broad range of academic faculty partners and central university support areas. EAP programs commonly occur before or during a learner’s participation in mainstream undergraduate study (McDonough, Neumann, & Hubert-Smith, 2018). This necessarily involves a number of academic partners with a vested interest in the individual students and the program itself, more broadly speaking. Understanding the needs of these academic partners, as well as appreciating the language skills truly needed for success in the academic milieu, are the foundation of developing an effective EAP curriculum. Who Are the External Stakeholders for an EAP Program? Each context for EAP will have its own uniquely defined list of external stakeholders, dependent on the post-secondary institution, structure of the EAP program within the undergraduate program of study, particular undergraduate pathways for EAP learners, and others who may be tasked with oversight of the EAP program, such as the Registrar’s Office or International Office partners. EAP programs which are formally integrated into bridging, pathway, or foundation programs are likely the most constrained by the strictures of external stakeholder partners. EAP programs that operate as less formalized academic preparation courses may want to plan around these considerations, but may not find themselves constrained by such a detailed consideration of all of them. Receiving Academic Faculties Academic faculties receiving EAP graduates can perhaps be considered as the primary external stakeholder for an EAP program. This is both in terms of providing critical input on the particular academic literacies and skills needed for success in their programs of study, as well as offering support of EAP programs by recognizing their value as part of the undergraduate admission process. Interviews with key personnel from academic

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

31

receiving faculties are a critical starting point for a scan of the external environment. Goal for environmental scan: Determine what academic literacies and skills are required for EAP students to make a successful transition to mainstream study. Goal for environmental scan: Determine how well former EAP students are currently functioning in their academic pathways. • What are the defining academic and language skills needed for nonnative speaker (NNS) students to achieve success in undergraduate programs? • Are the current skills and strategies we are teaching in our current curriculum/courses the most pertinent for the current academic milieu? • What target skills appear to currently be gaps in our program documents? • How well are our EAP students faring in mainstream programming? Consultation Process Stakeholder interviews with chairs of departments, faculty responsible for teaching, teaching assistants. When interviewing and gathering feedback from receiving academic faculty partners, it is important to design questions to elicit the information particular to this context. Questions for this group might include some of the following, which may obviously need adjusting for your context: 1. What are the strengths and weaknesses that you observe in students entering your programs from EAP courses? 2. Look at the following list of language skills. Please rate using 1 to 5 the students’ language proficiency to complete these tasks among students entering your programs from EAP courses (1 = not strong enough to complete the tasks appropriately −5 = very strong and able to complete the task at a similar level to a native speaker (NS) student): a. Writing papers b. Using correct citation format c. Writing short answer questions in an exam

32

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

d. Writing reflective blogs as part of an online assignment e. Responding to the blog postings of others f. Emailing the professor/TA g. Reading articles and papers h. Summarizing articles and papers i. Listening to lectures j. Following instructions on assignments k. Giving class presentations l. Participating in class discussions 3. Are there any other activities not included on this list which should be a priority for developing skills among students entering your programs from EAP courses? 4. Do you have any quantitative data about the performance of students entering your programs from EAP courses which you could share with us? 5. What is the one thing we could be doing better in preparing students entering your programs from EAP courses for your academic program? Although each academic department is likely to give slightly different responses depending on the specific genre and discourse patterns of academic language required in different disciplines, general trends are likely to emerge. Curriculum planning in our context I. Understanding stakeholder needs for our students When we undertook our preliminary discussions with academic faculty partners, we asked them in particular about students’ writing abilities. We wanted to know if our approach to writing was the correct one; we had heard mixed feedback from students about the benefits of writing a fiveparagraph essay with use of sources and citations. Our teachers strongly believed this was a minimum criterion for being able to enter an undergraduate writing milieu and insisted the focus needed to be on the essay’s content, accuracy of the citations, and the overall strength of the critical thinking it demonstrated. When we posed this paradigm to our academic faculty partners, they all agreed that in fact the ‘way’ we were teaching argument or essay structure was not always appropriate for their context.

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

33

Moreover, what mattered to them was that students could write clearly, and put sentences together in a structured paragraph. They expected to have to teach native speaker NS undergraduate students how to write an essay and that held true also for students entering their programs from EAP courses. This was important feedback which we incorporated into our curriculum. We did not abandon the five-paragraph essay using citations, nor did we switch entirely to teaching sentence level grammar or include only paragraphs in our final exams. However, we synthesized this feedback into our curriculum by ensuring that our rubrics and rating scales began to emphasize grammatical accuracy, sentence structure and organization along with research, content, and citations. All of these factors still combine to offer summative assessment marks but we have addressed this deficiency in our programming through this approach as well as inclusion of a detailed grammar curriculum to better meet the needs and support the success of our students as they move through their undergraduate academic pathways.

Other sources that can provide data important to better understanding the academic challenges that will be faced by students include: Course Outlines: Assessment guidelines, readings, workload, and academic expectations are usually articulated. Assignments: Instructions and expectations for assignments, as well as understanding how grading is completed. Final Exams: If academic partners are willing to share these documents for the research, they can provide a rich source for analysis of what language skills would best support student success. Lecture/Lab/Seminar observations: Getting a bird’s eye view of what students will experience can be very informative in designing EAP curriculum and determining what the focus should be. Data analysis of grade point average (GPA) & completion rates: Ultimately, students who enter university undergraduate programs will measure success as it relates to their GPA and their completion rates. Analyzing Data from Academic Receiving Faculties Synthesis of the data from these different sources will be required in order to make sense of all the different strands of information. It may be

34

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

observed that metalinguistic awareness in terms of understanding the success rates on NNS students among, for example, members of the Faculty of Science may not be high. More general comments related to student success will require analysis through a lens of second language acquisition and EAP pedagogical expertise in order to determine how these might impact curriculum design and development. Moreover, student success in final exams may need to be understood not only in terms of a student’s linguistic readiness but more broadly take into account other factors such as motivation, and more general academic acculturation processes. It is recommended that all of the data collected be reviewed and integrated with a critical eye. For example, even using GPA as a measure of success has been critiqued in the literature with academics unable to conclude whether GPA is really a measure of academic success among international students or more a measure of increasing language proficiency. Furthermore, others assert that GPA should be measured alongside credit weights taken in a particular semester to gain a clear picture of NNS student success (Fox, Cheng, Berman, Song, & Myles, 2006). Registrar’s Office/Admissions Office If EAP courses are credit-bearing and/or form part of a formal transition program, the Registrar’s Office or the Admissions office may be considered a major stakeholder in changing program goals for an EAP curriculum. Significant enhancements to an EAP program which result in changes to the length of the EAP program, for example, may have financial implications. Changes to EAP programs which result in modified learner pathways may have governance-related implications. Furthermore, these stakeholders may be able to yield valuable data related to current student success which can inform planned enhancements to the curriculum. Lastly, the Admissions Office/Registrar is a critical stakeholder in relation to establishing the English language proficiency (ELP) requirement for the institution. It is vital to understand how changes to the curriculum and assessment within the program might impact the relationship between the use of standardized language proficiency tests and completion of EAP courses. Goal for environmental scan: What specific changes to the EAP program could have a domino effect on tuition fees and may result in governance-related issues?

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

35

Goal for environmental scan: What data is available on students who have completed the EAP program in terms of program completion/graduation rates? Sample Questions: • What are program completion comparisons for domestic students, international students who entered degree programs directly without EAP preparation, and those students entering from EAP courses? • Will changes in the curriculum impact students’ readiness for undergraduate study? • Will changes to the EAP program have a cascading impact on the required ELP entry levels which may not align with the broader strategic goals of the institution regarding NNS/International students? • Are changes planned for ELP? • Will changes to the EAP curriculum impact ELP overall at institution?

Internal Stakeholders Within every school or institution offering EAP programs, there exists a unique range of internal stakeholders. These may include but may not be limited to students, instructors, administrators, student advisors, and administrative staff. Each group can offer a distinct perspective on the program and may be uniquely affected by curriculum changes. Because the needs and perspectives of the students in an EAP program are considered so fundamental to the program, we have parsed out this aspect as an entire section on its own, see later section, Understanding learners’ needs. In this section on understanding the environment, internal stakeholders, we will focus exclusively on those working in the EAP program. EAP Teachers Outside of a consideration of the impact of curriculum changes on learners, perhaps the most significant stakeholder group in an EAP curriculum process is the teaching team. Not only do the teachers bring their expertise in terms of metalinguistic awareness, experience with the learner group, and knowledge of the current curriculum, but ultimately they will

36

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

determine how any new curriculum plan is lived in the classroom setting. Not only is gathering their input vital as stated in the EAP curriculum principles, but every step of the curriculum development and implementation can be seen as an opportunity to engage instructors with its eventual implementation. Consultation with teachers, then, not only garners critical input for curriculum developers, but is vital in determining how close the group is to building a shared understanding of the program philosophy and pedagogical principles. Moreover, this consultation offers an opportunity to be transparent with instructors that change is coming and that consultation with them is a priority. Sample questions for EAP teachers: • How is the current EAP program/curriculum being lived in the classroom? • What methodology do you tend to use most frequently with your class? • What are the strengths and weaknesses of the current programming approach? • What should we put more emphasis on? Where should we focus less? • What are your students’ greatest weaknesses in terms of academic language proficiency? • What aspects of EAP programming should be explicitly stated in the new curriculum? • How well are summative assessments functioning? Administrators Those tasked with managing and administering the EAP program are likely to be closely involved with the development of a new curriculum. Individual consultations with members of this team are likely to yield critical information related to how changes in one part of the program will impact other aspects of the program, and how relations with external stakeholders might be affected by curriculum changes. Although this consultation appears mid-section in this chapter, starting with this uniquely placed internal stakeholder group may provide direction for other consultations undertaken in the environmental scan.

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

37

Sample questions for administrators: • What are the strengths and weaknesses of the current programming approach? • Are students who complete the current EAP program ready for undergraduate study? • How do receiving academic faculties experience former EAP students? • What are the most obvious program challenges associated with current program? • How might changes in the EAP program impact other programs offered by the language school? Student Advisors Student advisors are uniquely positioned to provide expert and objective information about both the learner pathways and academic readiness of students completing the EAP program. As those who spend their time discussing the goals and intentions, as well as the challenges of current and former EAP students transitioning to mainstream study, these advisors can provide firsthand information about student needs. Moreover, they have detailed knowledge of the academic pathway options available to EAP students and can inform the curriculum development process in this way. Sample Questions: • Are students completing the EAP program currently able to pursue their broader academic goals? • What specific challenges are EAP students facing in their language courses? • What changes in the EAP program might be most beneficial to EAP students? Administrative Staff Administrative staff are often the most client facing of all members of an EAP program as they deal with everyday inquiries, registration, problems, re-registering students who have not passed a course, and responding to questions around a program, exam, or even curriculum content. They are often overlooked during an environmental scan as they are not considered

38

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

part of the academic team who can contribute this kind of perspective. However, this oversight can limit a scan which is trying to take a complete 360° view of an EAP program. Administrative staff can offer a perspective that outlines the perceptions of students about the program and some of their frustrations, which may not be voiced to teachers or during a focus group with learners. These insights may not entirely shape a new curriculum but may inform the communication and messaging around the launch of a new curriculum or how information should be communicated to learners. Sample questions for administrative staff: • What are the most common reasons why students who make inquiries about enrolling in our EAP program do not complete their registration? • What proportion of students who do not pass a course, re-register in that course? • What problems do students share with you that they are experiencing in our EAP program? • What is your perception about the language level of our students? Where do they struggle? Where are they stronger? • What could be the impact of changing the program, in this way?

Understanding Learner Needs EAP programs offer a particular form of English for specific purposes courses, which are more narrowly targeted on those specific language areas that language learners will encounter on completion of the program (Basturkmen, 2010). For this reason, a learner needs analysis tends to be a central focus of the environmental scan. A consideration of the needs, perceptions, and successes of current and former EAP students are viewed as central to curriculum changes to be made; it is for students that those changes are being considered, after all. There are multiple tools that can be utilized in order to gather input on students’ intersections with an EAP course. Different tools target different aspects of data collection but can be used in a combined approach to build a comprehensive student perspective on the EAP program.

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

39

In this section, we propose that the scan of learners’ needs begin with a data-driven approach, which can then establish a concrete context for more qualitative data collection. Note: As stated in the principles of EAP curriculum development in Chapter 1, “EAP curriculum development is a highly integrative process, involving a wide-range of stakeholders each with specific considerations operating in a relatively high-stakes environment.” However, the data generated by this process should now be analyzed specifically in light of how each piece relates to learners’ needs. Former EAP students Students who have completed the EAP program and are now in degree programs are uniquely positioned to reflect on how well-prepared they felt as a result of those programs for mainstream academic study. In addition to their perceptions, data describing success rates should be used to confirm perceptions of successful transitioning. It should be noted that contacting former EAP students can be challenging, particularly in larger institutions, and moreover, their recollections of the EAP course might have diminished with time. If data has already been collected from the Registrar’s Office and others regarding students’ ‘success’ rates, this portion of the environmental scan can gather qualitative data from former students which can probe their perceptions of language readiness, levels of academic socialization, and confidence in their mainstream academic programs. Additionally, this kind of research can provide robust data about what academic pathways students actually pursue on completion of their EAP program. Goal for environmental scan: Did the EAP curriculum/program align with their perceptions of the skills needed for mainstream academic study? Sample Questions: 1. What was the best part of your EAP program? 2. What was the hardest aspect of transitioning to mainstream academic study? 3. Which learning activities in your EAP program proved to be most helpful in your academic program? 4. Which learning activities in your EAP program do you wish you had spent more time on? 5. Which learning activities in your EAP program do you wish you had spent less time on?

40

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

6. In your EAP program, you spent a lot of time writing five paragraph essays—was that a useful skill to learn? 7. What advice would you give to a current EAP student about how to get the most from the EAP courses? 8. Has there been any aspect of your mainstream academic program for which you felt completely unprepared? Current EAP students Students currently enrolled in EAP programs can offer insight not subject to the challenges of the passage of time. However, unless they are concurrently enrolled in undergraduate courses, it may be more challenging for this group to objectively reflect on how useful the courses may be for transitioning to degree programs. From an organizational perspective, this group is simple to identify and make contact with, and students in this group can reflect on how the course is meeting their expectations and supporting the development of their language skills and academic knowledge. Goal for environmental scan: How are current learners experiencing the EAP curriculum as lived and what challenges are they facing? Goal for environmental scan: What aspects of EAP programming may need to have increased or decreased emphasis as part of a new curriculum, in response to their lived experience of the EAP curriculum? Sample Questions: 1. What has been the best aspect of your EAP program so far? 2. Why do you like this part of your course? 3. What has been the hardest part of transitioning to studying at an English speaking university? 4. Which learning activities in your EAP program are most helpful in developing your academic English? 5. Do you feel that you spend enough time on these activities? 6. Which learning activities in your EAP program do you find least helpful? 7. Why do you think these aspects are not very helpful to you? 8. Which other learning activities in your EAP program do you wish you spent less time on? 9. How confident do you feel about the following parts of academic English?

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

41

1 = not confident at all −5 = very confident a. Writing papers b. Using correct citation format c. Writing short answer questions in an exam d. Writing reflective blogs as part of an online assignment e. Responding to the blog postings of others f. Emailing the professor/TA g. Reading articles and papers h. Summarizing articles and papers i. Listening to lectures j. Following instructions on assignments k. Giving class presentations l. Participating in class discussions 10.What advice would you give to a new EAP student about how to learn the most from the EAP courses?

Curriculum planning in our context II. Methods for collecting data from our learners When we were considering the alternatives for collecting data from our students, we reviewed our options. We wanted data and input from as many students as possible, but we also wanted more detailed data than could be elicited from a survey. We took a mixed methods approach and sent out a quantitative survey to a large number of students. We chose students in our highest level of EAP as we felt that they offered feedback gained from the most hours of experience of our program, and most likely from more than one teacher. In this survey we asked a number of questions, similar to those exemplified in the sample questions above. In addition, we undertook one-on-one interviews with randomly selected students to gather more detailed feedback. Due to time constraints we did not conduct focus groups, but on reflection we think that these would be an important data gathering tool as students can bounce ideas off each other, have their memories prodded by other focus group participants, and gain confidence in offering candid opinions in the safety of a group. An ideal scenario for us in our future curriculum reviews would be to conduct all three methods of collecting student data.

42

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Infusing Principles and Pedagogical Priorities In the last stage of the review process for getting to grips with the environment for the new EAP curriculum, it is critical to consider the environment in which the curriculum will be delivered for the final phase of its implementation: the classroom. The learning from this aspect of the curriculum review process has the potential to have far-reaching impacts on curriculum format and content and how this new curriculum may be optimally introduced to teachers. This section analyzes the importance of understanding the current teaching environment for the EAP program in order to understand any potential challenges and pitfalls awaiting the implementation of a new curriculum. Moreover, the section concludes with a consideration of EAP/ESL specific principles and pedagogical priorities which are integral to the development of a contemporary EAP curriculum, including communicative language teaching and task-based language teaching. In addition to offering specific and detailed descriptions of what these approaches have to offer an EAP program, the chapter will offer concrete recommendations for actions to incorporate these approaches into curriculum documents. Current Teaching Environment Goal for environmental scan: Understanding the current pedagogical principles and practices of the instructional team. Goal for environmental scan: Understanding what other pedagogical principles and practices our teaching team could develop and integrate in the future. In order to develop and implement a successful EAP curriculum, it is imperative to understand the pedagogical environment into which a program intends to plunge such a document. To what extent are instructors employing communicative language teaching approaches? Are their approaches refined to include task-based language teaching principles? Is there an emphasis on content-based instruction, or are teachers entirely focused on skills? This understanding can be built through data gathering methods, such as classroom observations, teaching surveys, and participation in group exam-marking sessions; these can all act as a window on the understanding of the pedagogical beliefs and practices of the team.

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

43

Some suggested questions for collecting data about the teaching principles employed in the classrooms of a program: Classroom Observation checklist (sample): • What skills are emphasized during classroom instruction? – – – –

Reading Writing Speaking Listening

• Which approaches to language instruction are observable? – – – –

Integrated skills approach Task-based approach Active learning approach Student-centred approach

• To what extent are the curriculum general learning outcomes observable in classroom instruction? • Are students made aware of curriculum content/objectives? • To what extent is technology integrated in a meaningful way to support language learning? • Which of the following are demonstrated in classroom instruction? – – – –

Intercultural communication skills Academic socialization skills Local community engagement Social acculturation

• Do teachers demonstrate a clear, shared understanding of what successful completion of a particular language course looks like? (For example, regarding accuracy .v. fluency, relative proficiency in language accuracy .v. critical thinking skills) • Does teacher feedback to students reflect curriculum learning outcomes? • Do classroom activities clearly connect to specific learning outcomes in the curriculum plan? • Are formative assessment tasks making appropriate use of performance conditions as described in the curriculum? • Are formative assessment tools making appropriate use of performance indicators as described in the curriculum?

44

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Are any classroom learning activities or assessments observable which are not currently described in the curriculum plan but could be integrated into the revised plan? Understanding the Underlying Principles Which Make up a Teaching Philosophy In a professional development model developed by Toronto District Catholic School Board (2012), teachers were presented with an inventory of questions designed to help them understand the teaching philosophy they may have subconsciously developed over the years. Such a set of questions could easily be adapted (as shown below) to elicit the underlying teaching principles guiding the practice of the teachers in an EAP program. Articulating a teaching philosophy (Adapted from Moving Professional Learning to Classroom Practice, An Instructor Handbook. Kaskens, Light, Peters. TCDSB, p. 79) 1. Being an ESL instructor • Why did you become an ESL teacher? • What does the word teacher mean to you? • How would you explain the most important part of your job to a friend? • What are the personal qualities of a good teacher? • What is the most rewarding part of teaching? 2. Beliefs about language teaching • How do you see your role in the classroom? • How would you define effective teaching in the EAP classroom? • What teaching methods do you try to implement in your classroom? • How do you determine if language learning has taken place among your learners? • What is your approach to classroom management? • What do learners in your class believe about your teaching? • What place do authentic materials have in your ESL instruction?

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

45

• What do you think the role of task-based learning is in your ESL instruction? 3. Beliefs about language learning • What do you think are the best ways to learn a language? • What do your learners believe about language learning? • What kinds of learning strategies do you encourage in your learners? 4. Experiences as a learner • How have your experiences as a language learner influenced your ESL teaching? • How did the approach of your instructor(s) contribute to or limit your language learning? 5. Beliefs about our EAP program • How would you characterize our successes as an EAP program? • To what extent is/can your teaching (be) based on the needs of each individual class of learners from semester to semester? 6. Ask yourself: • What are my assumptions and beliefs about teaching and learning a language? • Do my beliefs about language learning coincide with what the literature tells us about language learning? • Do my beliefs correspond to those of my employer, colleagues or funder? • To what extent do I apply these beliefs in my daily teaching?

Curriculum planning in our context III. Observing exam marking sessions to understand what our teaching team defines as successful writing One of the most insightful opportunities we had to collect data about the teaching beliefs around EAP in our program came up accidentally, as these opportunities often seem to present. One of the curriculum development team was asked to observe a group marking session for the essays written as part of the final exam. The presence of the curriculum team member

46

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

was intended to mediate some conflict among a group regarding passing levels of papers. In fact, the conversation which ensued and was recorded by note-taking, provided a rich insight into the teaching team’s opinions, preferences, and biases about the standard of English proficiency which should be demonstrated by an EAP student in their final exam, enabling them to enter mainstream university programs. It demonstrated there was an overall lack of consensus about these issues and a real lack of any shared understanding in our program about what defined student success. This, while somewhat disheartening, provided a greater sense of motivation to the curriculum team that such a shared understanding needed to be built and would require significant support and change in mindset among most members of the teaching team.

Pedagogical Priorities for a Contemporary EAP Classroom While there is no prescribed best methodological approach to teaching EAP, there can be little doubt that “skills based teaching is at the core of EAP instruction” (Newton et al., 2018, p. 1). After completing EAP, students will have to be ready to use English to achieve their academic goals. At the same time, knowledge both declarative and procedural of grammar and vocabulary cannot be overlooked if students are to be able to adapt to the complex setting of academia. Two approaches identified by Newton et al. (2018) as offering a seamless integration of skills and language knowledge are task-based language teaching and content-based instruction. Both of these approaches offer the added benefit of bridging students’ language towards their academic studies and emphasizing the integration of authentic materials which may be motivating to learners and offer a more realistic preparation for what is to come. In a context where subject-matter experts may not be part of the instructional team delivering content-based instruction, TBLT may offer the most effective approach in an EAP context. Defined by Bygate, Norris, and Van den Branden (2013) as, “an approach to pedagogy in which communication tasks are fundamental to language learning” (p. 1), TBLT offers learners a chance to develop language competencies while gradually introducing them to the rigourous tasks of an undergraduate setting (Bygate et al., 2013).

3

GETTING TO GRIPS WITH THE ENVIRONMENT …

47

Each organization will determine its own pedagogical priorities and principles, but what remains a critical consideration is how to communicate that to teachers and students, as well as how to integrate those principles flexibly into a curriculum document while allowing for some maneuverability by teachers within that construct. Building a shared understanding of how languages are learned, and, what Ellis (2005) describes as what the optimal instructed language learning environment looks like, are critical steps to building a curriculum plan which will undergo a similar and recognizable process as it is transformed into the curriculum as lived.

References Basturkmen, H. (2010). Developing courses in English for specific purposes. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230290518. Bygate, M., Norris, J., & Van den Branden, K. (2013). Task-based language teaching. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell. Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed second language acquisition. System, 2, 209–224. Fox, J., Cheng, L., Berman, R., Song, X., & Myles, J. (2006). Costs and benefits: English for academic purposes instruction in Canadian universities. Carleton papers in applied linguistics. Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2018). Innovation in EAP programmes: Shifting from teaching to learning in curriculum design. In L. T. Wong & W. L. Wong (Eds.), Teaching and learning English for academic purposes: Current research and practices (pp. 143–160). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Kaskens, A., Light, J., & Peters, C. (2012). Moving professional learning to classroom practice: An instructor handbook. Toronto, ON: Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB). Retrieved from http://wiki.settlementatwork. org/w/uploads/Instructor_Handbook.pdf. McDonough, K., Neumann, H., & Hubert-Smith, N. (2018). How accurately do English for academic purposes students use academic word list words? BC TEAL Journal, 3(1), 77–89. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York, NY: Routledge. Newton, J., Ferris, D. R., Goh, C. M., Grabe, W., Stoller, F., & Vandergrift, L. (2018). Teaching English to second language learners in academic contexts: Reading, writing, listening, and speaking. New York, NY: Routledge.

CHAPTER 4

Formatting Curriculum Content: Program Learning Goals Realized

Abstract Formatting Curriculum Content explores the rationale for an outcomes-based approach to EAP curriculum and most crucially describes, in detail, all of the aspects that need to be considered for inclusion in the document to promote optimal learning opportunities for students. The chapter examines how an outcomes-based curriculum reflects a learner centred approach, provides flexibility for instructors, and allows an EAP program to maintain ‘standards’ for the language proficiency of successful learners while focusing on the learning which actually takes place. Furthermore, through numerous examples provided, the authors demonstrate how pedagogical principles can be incorporated into the curriculum documents without limiting the options for teachers to be innovative and meet the needs of the students who present. Keywords Outcomes-based education · Performance conditions · Performance indicators · Tasks · Curriculum-as-planned

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_4

49

50

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Questions to ask about your context • What does our curriculum describe? Is the curriculum a plan? Is it a description of what is actually taught? Does it describe what is learned? • What does it mean when a student passes one of our courses? What does a pass in a certain class mean in terms of their language proficiency and readiness for the next step in the learning pathway? • Do the instructors and administrators in our program share an understanding of the language proficiency attained by students passing through the various levels in our program? • Is this understanding shared by other university stakeholders? • How do our language learning outcomes meet the needs of our learners for their future studies? • How does our curriculum address both skills such as reading and writing, as well as language items including grammar, pronunciation and vocabulary? • What steps does our program take to ensure that summative assessments reflect the learning which is described in the curriculum and taking place in the classroom?

In the process of getting to grips with the context within which an EAP program functions, as well as developing and articulating a set of philosophical principles to guide curriculum and broader program management, an emphasis on understanding what learners are able to do at the end of the course becomes paramount in the content of the EAP curriculum plan. Rather than a syllabus which may describe what will be taught during an EAP course, an outcomes-based curriculum seeks to describe what a learner who is successful in passing the course is able to do. Students who are participating in an EAP context are required to be able to function successfully in a challenging language milieu upon completion of their language preparation courses. Their ability to function in this setting will be defined by other stakeholders in terms of their communicative competence, by what they can do with the language rather than what they know about it. Their classmates, professors, support staff, teaching assistants among others will pay little attention to their EAP grades, and will only consider their ability to demonstrate linguistic, strategic, academic, and intercultural competence. Developing these skills must be the focus of an EAP curriculum.

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

51

Understanding Outcomes in EAP Curriculum This chapter will outline a highly effective outcomes-based approach to curriculum development and design. The structure for designing an outcomes-based curriculum will be demonstrated, which will cover aspects including the hierarchy of general learning outcomes, performance conditions, specific learning outcomes, performance indicators, and sample tasks. This hierarchy is represented in Fig. 4.1. General Learning Outcomes The goal of the general outcomes is to ensure that learners and other external partners and stakeholders can understand the broad goals of the course. Written in jargon-free language, these descriptors precisely

Fig. 4.1 The hierarchy of general learning outcomes, performance conditions, specific learning outcomes, performance indicators, and sample tasks

52

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

describe the activities that students who successfully complete the course will be able to undertake in the real world beyond the language classroom. The measure of a well-written general learning outcome (GLO) is that anyone, not just those with specialized insider knowledge of linguistics or second language pedagogy, should be easily able to understand these goal statements. For example, consider the notion of writing in a second language. Whereas an applied linguist or EAP instructor may recognize the intricate sub-functions involved in constructing a short answer question in an exam, including a strong topic sentence, appropriate citation, clear organization of ideas, use of supporting details, these are not likely to be immediately accessible to either students or professors in other departments, such as History or Physics. Students may not have a clear expectation of what constitutes a strong short answer question response, while academic professors merely know one when they see one without ever having deconstructed why this may be the case. For this reason, articulation of outcomes recognizable to non-experts ensures that a clear understanding of what students who have passed a particular EAP course may be able to do among the broader community of stakeholders. Write a succinct and effective short answer question in an exam-setting.

Moreover, the inclusion of GLOs connected to those tasks that are most likely to be encountered in a ‘real’ academic classroom ensures that curriculum design remains strongly rooted to the students’ real needs, a critical element of a task-based approach. Avoiding linguistic jargon in the writing of GLOs reinforces the likelihood that these outcomes will maintain the flavour of the ‘real’ world and build connections between the EAP classroom and the mainstream undergraduate classroom. Take a look at the following examples of effective EAP GLOs drawn from a variety of levels, across all four skill areas, writing, reading, listening, and speaking. As you review each GLO, consider: • Does this GLO represent an academic undertaking your EAP students could realistically expect to encounter in their mainstream academic studies? • Has the GLO been written without jargon or unnecessary complication?

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

53

• Would an academic colleague in another department understand the intent or goal of the outcome? • Is the language of the GLO accessible to a learner? Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent A2+)1 Skill area: Writing General Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to: • Describe information from formatted texts • Write a personal response to an academic text • Reflect on a topic and participate in an online forum. Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B1)− Skill area: Speaking General Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to: • Effectively prepare for and deliver short academic presentations using some visual aids (e.g., PowerPoint, poster) and demonstrate appropriate presentation delivery skills • Facilitate and participate in seminar discussions • Express ideas somewhat clearly during interactions in an academic setting. Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B2) Skill area: Listening General Learning Outcomes Learners will be able to • Analyze academic lectures and broadcasts in order to take notes and complete academic tasks • Actively participate in seminar discussions. Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent C1) Skill area: Reading General Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to:

1 Based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).

54

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Analyze and assess the content of academic texts • Analyze and evaluate the organizational structure of academic texts • Gather relevant information from more than one written source to complete specific academic tasks (e.g., critique, poster). In each case, across the different levels of EAP courses offered and across all skills, the curriculum plan outlines precise statements of what students who pass the course will be able to do with their language. The language of the GLOs is clear and accessible to those who are not linguists and sets the course for teachers and students alike. Clearly written GLOs tell all stakeholders, this is where we are going and what completing this course means. When undertaking to plan for a task-based EAP curriculum, it can at times seem that the curriculum plan is becoming repetitive. GLOs are intended to be general statements that act as course guides. When attempting to delineate across scales of language proficiency such as the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and still describe EAP as a series of tasks, very similar GLOs may seem to keep appearing in the curriculum. In part, this is because the end goals of every EAP student, regardless of level, tend to overlap. Thus, while the GLO of an A2 class may be to write a short paragraph explaining a straightforward academic relationship such as cause and effect, the same concept may reappear in the B1 curriculum in the GLO, write an effective cause and effect essay. It can be challenging for stakeholders, learners, and teachers to understand what it means to achieve the A2 level outcome in comparison with the B1 level outcome. A well-written curriculum plan offers the solution, in the form of performance conditions. Performance Conditions Obviously, it is necessary to be able to delineate the level of performance that is expected for these GLOs more concretely. For this reason, GLOs are followed in the curriculum document by a description of performance conditions. These performance conditions allow for the description of the level of complexity of each item. It is clear that at different levels of English language learning the tasks completed may be described as being very similar. Yet, there are significant descriptors that help build an understanding of a learner’s distinct language proficiency, such as the level of

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

55

complexity and formality of a text, the amount of language produced or understood, and the degree of support allowed for task completion. Take a look at the following examples of EAP performance conditions developed for a variety of levels, across all four course levels, for one skill area, writing. As you review each descriptor for performance conditions, consider: • How specific does the language of the performance conditions need to be? • Are these performance conditions specific enough? • Do they align with your own institution’s understanding of language and task complexity? • In what ways would these performance conditions help in the development of course assignments and exams? • How can teachers and programs adjust to be inclusive of multi-level classes and/or ranges of language proficiency across different skill areas? Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent A2+) Skill area: Writing Performance Conditions • Text is factual with mainly explicit meaning • Text length is under 500 words • Topics are mostly academically focused, concrete, factual and personally or globally relevant • Formatted texts are moderately complex, and may include forms, tables, schedules, graphs and maps • Input language is mostly concrete, uses some academic language, and consists of high frequency words that are within the top 3000 words. Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B1−) Skill area: Writing Performance Conditions • Topics are concrete, factual and academic, and may be unfamiliar • Language, style and register are formal and academic

56

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Essays require at least 4 paragraphs • A maximum of two pieces of research are provided/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 • Tasks are completed independently without extensive guidance/external support (e.g., dictionaries, internet). Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B2−) Skill area: Writing Performance Conditions • Topics are concrete, factual, academic, and may be unfamiliar • Language, style and register are formal and academic • Topics reflect characteristics of argument-style discourse, including supporting arguments and opposing arguments and refutations • Essays require at least 5 paragraphs • At least 1 piece of research is provided/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 60 minutes • Tasks are completed independently without extensive guidance/external support (e.g., dictionaries, internet). Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent C1) Skill area: Writing Performance Conditions • Topics may be concrete or abstract, academic, and related to the student’s proposed field of study • Academic papers are 2–3 pages in length • Papers are academic in organization and register, and use Vancouver/APA style citation • Vocabulary used is academic, may be abstract and employs some specialized terminolog • Writing tasks are completed without external support (e.g., no dictionaries, Internet in test conditions)

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

57

• Tasks demonstrate student has utilized the writing process (outlining, drafting, editing, revising). The inclusion of performance conditions into the curriculum plan allows for a much more nuanced understanding of how the different course levels of a program fit together. This approach allows for tasks to remain at the centre of the curriculum plan by elaborating the level of task complexity that is expected. A later description of how language accuracy is considered in the curriculum plan allows for the balance which appears to occur between task complexity and accuracy (Skehan & Foster, 2012). Specific Learning Outcomes In order to support instructors in terms of lesson planning and assessment it is necessary to drill down into these two sets of descriptors to determine more specific outcomes and the micro-skills involved in achieving these goals. For this purpose, we explain how a set of outcomes statements referred to as specific learning outcomes (SLOs) can be used. These are more technical and use language that is not only more specific but has more technical aspects included that relate to knowledge of teaching and learning a second language. These statements allow teachers to plan specific tasks to build skills, and later on to assess the development and mastery of those skills in order to achieve the broader communication goals of the GLOs. Making the connection between GLOs and SLOs. The GLOs of a curriculum should entirely inform the SLOs. The GLOs describe what a student needs to be able to do with the language upon completion of the course. The SLOs represent how the teacher will create a course of instruction to support them in getting there. Take a look at the following examples of EAP GLOs and SLOs presented together. As you review each descriptor of performance condition, consider: • Are the connections between the GLOs and SLOs reasonable? • Do the SLOs achieve a balance between breadth and specificity? • Do the SLOs capture the essential components of the GLO statements?

58

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Are the SLOs flexible enough to allow a variety of teachers to construct a course which meets the needs and interests of their individual classes? • Are the SLOs precise enough to ensure that all students in a program are experiencing a similar course of instruction? Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent A2+) Skill area: Writing General Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to: • Describe information from formatted texts • Write a personal response to an academic text • Reflect on a topic and participate in an online forum. Specific Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to: • Use accurate vocabulary and tense/aspect to explain the relationship between ideas • Explain relationships between ideas presented and personal experiences • Write an organized response • Respond appropriately to online postings of others. Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B2−) Skill area: Writing General Learning Outcomes—Learners will be able to: • Write short persuasive essays • Write short personal response texts (e.g., blogs, journals, forums) • Synthesize academic information into essays. Specific Learning Outcomes—Learners will develop the ability to: • Write structured researched-focused argument essays to persuade and present arguments • Employ the writing process with some guidance • Express opinions and respectful responses in short personal response texts

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

59

• Apply proper APA paper formatting and APA citation and referencing to basic types of sources • Integrate research using a combination of summaries and paraphrases with occasional quotations. Performance Indicators Given that one of the goals for the curriculum overhaul could be to help instructors build a shared understanding of the purposes of assessment, how a student might demonstrate that they are able to achieve each specific learning outcome should also be described in the curriculum plan. These measures were named performance indicators in earlier versions of the document and more broadly under the sub-heading, demonstrating the outcome. In later versions this change was made to avoid terminological confusion with performance conditions as described above. Each specific learning outcome was accompanied by a set of indicators. This set of descriptors is key for two reasons. Firstly, it allows teachers to plan the micro-skills which students need to develop to meet the outcomes of the course. This allows for the development of scaffolding activities and practice tasks to build language skills. Secondly, it allows for the quick and efficient development of assessment rubrics and rating scales by teachers to provide formative feedback to students about their progress, language strengths, and any potential gaps. Take a look at the following examples of EAP SLOs and performance indicators presented together in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. As you review each SLO and performance indicator, consider: • Are the connections between the SLOs and performance indicators reasonable? • Do the performance indicators break down the SLOs into a sufficient number of micro-skills? • Do the performance indicators support the development of formative feedback? • Do the performance indicators offer too narrow of a definition of successful task completion? Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent B1−) Skill area: Writing

60

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Table 4.1 Elaborating SLOs through performance Indicators (B1− Writing) Specific learning outcome

Performance indicators

Write short expository essays, including 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

Course Level: EAP (CEFR equivalent C1) Skill area: Reading Table 4.2 Elaborating SLOs through performance indicators (C1 writing) Specific learning outcome

Performance indicators

Identify and analyze definitional elements of academic texts

Locate definitions within academic texts Identify language elements that indicate definition within texts Classify definitions correctly as a short, sentence or extended definitions Identify elements that make up extended definitions Recognize presentations of competing ideas Identify comparative definitions Identify ‘school of thought’ definitions

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

61

One of the challenges faced when asking instructors to translate a curriculum document into a comprehensive course plan in a backwards design context is building in some predictability and certainty around what a particular task will require in terms of the micro-skills and language proficiency involved. Let’s take the example in Table 4.1 of Writing structured researchfocused essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships. While the performance conditions support the construction of shared understanding by articulating assumptions around the level of complexity of the task, such as word count, topic type, and whether supports such as dictionaries are permitted, these alone may not be enough to build a course plan or agreement among instructors about what language skills will be integral to task completion. Thus, for this specific learning outcome, “Writing structured research-focused essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships,” teachers using a set of performance indicators are able to plan the component micro skills which must be mastered by learners in order to achieve satisfactory task completion. The performance indicators are not prescriptive in that they allow for flexibility in the sequence in which each one may be addressed by the individual instructor; furthermore, individual performance indicators may not be explicitly addressed if students demonstrate proficiency in one or more of the steps in effective essay writing. Using performance indicators supports instructors’ planning and implementation of task-based language teaching. Moreover, it standardizes the approach to key academic tasks within the EAP curriculum. Formative feedback to students is a critical aspect of all second language learning classrooms. This is no less important in a TBLT setting. Language feedback in a TBLT approach may appear to shift in where it appears in the lesson sequence, or in the selection of which errors to focus on in comparison to other communicative approaches like ‘present, practice, produce,’ but it is nonetheless a critical part of the instructional plan (Skehan, 2002). Performance indicators that enable curriculum implementation for teachers also provide a rich source of formative feedback data for students. Teachers are able to quickly and easily create rating scales and rubrics with the micro skills articulated in the performance indicators. Moreover, these assessment tools can be easily shared by teachers as the micro skills are established within the curriculum team.

62

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Example rating scale: Students can gain important insights into where their strengths and weaknesses lie and which areas require focus. Teachers can offer consistent and fair feedback which supports the EAP program goals and has an improved level of inter-rater reliability across the program. Rating scales can be shared with students when the task is assigned so that expectations are clear and connections to curriculum are made explicit. The following template is easily drawn from the curriculum plan by the instructor and each section of the template can be rapidly populated. The rating scale offers an opportunity to offer detailed feedback to the students, while managing the teacher’s workload. Course Level: EAP B1− Skill area: Writing See Table 4.3. Table 4.3 Rating scale for writing (B1−) GLO: Write short expository essays, including cause/effect and compare/contrast SLO: Write structured research-focused essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships Performance Indicators

Not there yet

Meets the Satisfactory Excellent minimum requirement

Comments

*Refer to Assessment Items in the Grammar Section Write introductory paragraphs with clear, straightforward thesis statements, hooks, and background information 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

(continued)

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

63

Table 4.3 (continued) GLO: Write short expository essays, including cause/effect and compare/contrast SLO: Write structured research-focused essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships Performance Indicators

Not there yet

Meets the Satisfactory Excellent minimum requirement

Comments

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

Example Rubric A rubric offers a much more detailed set of insights into task performance. A rubric differs from a rating scale in that it describes not only individual performance indicators with a straightforward rating, but also the performance demonstrated at each of the possible levels. For example, the rubric in Table 4.4 includes a description of each performance indicator at each level of performance described. Course Level: EAP B1− Skill area: Writing

15

Not enough student language to assess, OR errors make it very difficult or impossible to follow most parts of the essay

Sentence Structure and Grammar

Rubric for writing (B1−)

EAP B1–

Table 4.4

There are no particular patterns of error, with several language items below the degree of accuracy standards (includes word choices, word forms, and spelling). In general, sentences lack fluency and control, are without variation, and exhibit serious errors that make comprehension difficult

20 A limited range of grammar assessment items is used. Sentences lack variety. If more complex grammar assessment items are attempted, these are less accurate than simpler items. There are clear patterns of repeated grammatical errors on some assessment items throughout the essay, but not in every sentence, and they seldom interfere with the meaning

25 Uses a variety of sentence structures and other grammar assessment items, meeting the degree of accuracy standards. In general, there are more sentences free of errors (on grammar assessment items) than sentences with errors

30

Sentences are mostly free of errors (on grammar assessment items), flow well, and meet or exceed the degree of accuracy standards. Some target teaching items are attempted and meet standards

35

64 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

15

Essay is not long enough to evaluate. It lacks a thesis and/or purpose, leaving the reader with more questions than answers. May not respond appropriately to the prompt

EAP B1–

Content

Essay has a thesis, but it may be somewhat unclear; the essay defines the topic but does not develop it well. Topic sentences may be unclear. Support is too limited or general, irrelevant to the thesis or inappropriately repetitive. The essay may have some off topic or inappropriate generalizations, faulty assumptions and/or errors of fact

20 Essay has an identifiable thesis, and clear topic sentences. Supporting points are general, but overall, support for topic sentences is marginally sufficient. Some details may be underdeveloped, somewhat repetitive or not always logical

25 Essay has an easily identifiable, clearly stated thesis. Support may be general, but does have some development of main supporting ideas. Most supporting details and examples are clearly stated and logical. There may be some repetition

30

(continued)

Thesis is clear and strong. Main supporting ideas are expanded upon and developed. Supporting details and examples are clear, logical, and not repetitive. Some evidence of critical thinking and purposeful analysis

35

4 FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

65

15

Writing is too short or has too many errors to demonstrate organization skills

The number of errors makes it difficult or impossible to evaluate

Organization

Vocabulary/word choice

(continued)

EAP B1–

Table 4.4

Incorrect word choices/word forms/spelling, making comprehension difficult or errors in these when using common, familiar words. Words may be nonspecific and distracting

Essay lacks a clear sense of direction; there is little to no identifiable internal structure; transitions and connections are awkward or absent. Essay has missing or irregular paragraphing and ideas that have little to no relationship to the organizational structure of the text

20 Attempts to organize the essay through an idea map and/or topic sentences, but relationships may not always be clear. Although the placement of details may not always be effective, the reader can generally follow the cause-effect or compare-contrast relationships. Attempts to connect ideas using transitions; however, transitions may not be well chosen Some incorrect vocabulary/word choices/word forms/spelling, but they seldom interfere with overall comprehension. Shows control over simple straightforward, familiar, concrete words. Language seems merely functional

25

Vocabulary/word choice/word forms/spelling is mostly accurate and appropriate. Problems with collocations. Some language may seem memorized

Organizes the essay clearly through an idea map and/or topic sentences. The placement of details is mostly effective. Transitions are usually used correctly. Minor organizational problems exist, but the reader can follow the argument with relative ease

30

Vocabulary/word choice/word forms/spelling is generally accurate. Good use of collocations. Some evidence of an expanded range of vocabulary

Organization structure may continue to be formulaic, but placement of details and transitions are entirely appropriate. Expanded range of phrases/vocabulary to connect relationships

35

66 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

15

Resource materials are not used at all. OR Essay contains significant cut-and-pasted sections (no citations or quotation marks). Automatic fail

EAP B1–

Research Use of resource materials is limited, excessive, or inappropriate. Some phrases, parts of sentences, or short sentences are cut and pasted, either intentionally or unintentionally. Serious problems with quoting, paraphrasing, summarizing, or citing

20 Some relevant resource materials are used in both body paragraphs, but they may not be integrated well or at all. Occasionally, quotes may be strung together or dropped into the essay. Use of resource material can be presented entirely as quotes. One or two quotes may be inappropriate and show misunderstanding. Paraphrases/summaries may be attempted but may be inaccurate or confusing. Attempts to document resource material

25 Resource materials are integrated by employing signal phrases. Attempts to comment on quotes, but may be repetitive or unnecessary. Most quotes are relevant. Paraphrases/summaries may be attempted and are usually accurate and clear. Documentation is mostly accurate

30

Comments on resource material provide purposeful analysis. OR Accurate and clear paraphrases/summaries, not just quotes. Information selected from the resources show critical thinking and understanding

35

4 FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

67

68

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

It is likely unrealistic to expect teachers to have time to develop formative feedback rubrics as a regular part of their teaching and assessment planning; however, an EAP program may consider utilizing resources to create rubrics which can be used both as formative feedback and as summative assessment tools across the program. In the same way that performance indicators describe micro-skills, they also articulate in detail what successful task completion looks like. This enables an EAP program to clearly articulate standards for success and build a shared understanding among the teaching team. Moreover, “rubrics are a powerful tool for learning. They help learners know what they need to do to meet or exceed the learning outcomes” (Chambers, Gnida, Messaros, Ilott, & Dawson, 2011). Through a developing understanding of the expectations of a course at higher levels of language proficiency, students can engage with their teacher about their strengths and weaknesses and become more sophisticated partners in the curriculum as lived. Thus, EAP programs may often expect to find themselves responsible for supporting students’ academic goals while simultaneously ensuring that only students with demonstrated language proficiency can be successful in achieving passing grades. Rubrics can help. They provide rigour, offer detailed descriptions of proficiency, build understanding both within the teaching team and beyond with academic partners. A well-developed curriculum plan can support the development of rubrics for use in such high-stakes contexts. Sample Tasks Finally, within the curriculum document each SLO is accompanied by a series of sample tasks . These tasks may be skill-building or more holistic in nature but all of them support the development of language skills and proficiencies needed for students to meet the goals of the course. In Table 4.5 are examples of the tasks that are included for the above-described specific learning outcome. Sample Tasks—SLOs for EAP Writing These tasks are not intended to be a prescriptive description of what the teachers should teach, but rather a demonstration of how each specific learning outcome might be brought to life in the classroom. In other words, the goal is to provide some practical clarity and exemplification for teachers who may process the plan to a greater extent in the practical

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

69

Table 4.5 Connecting SLOs to Sample tasks Specific learning outcome

Sample tasks

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

In small groups, look at student samples of thesis statements / topic sentences, identify the topic and idea map, and improve any unclear sentences. Example: The increasing number of people (moving into cities) can cause serious environmental issues Collect and scramble all of the thesis statements and body paragraphs from student essays. Students must match the body paragraphs with the thesis statements Other possible options: • introductory and concluding paragraphs • topic sentences and details • thesis statements and concluding sentences • essay maps and topic sentence

setting of the classroom and in relation to what their students will actually be doing.

Addressing the Language Focus in EAP Curriculum One common weakness in curriculum development guides is the failure to adequately address the integration of language focus into a skills and outcomes-based curriculum. Often the outcomes, both general and specific, are fully elaborated, yet the means by which to integrate grammar instruction or even which grammar items learners are expected to master or teachers are expected to teach are vaguely left to the individual discretion of the teacher, based on the task. One example of such an approach is the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) Framework (2012). CLBs are defined on the organization’s website as: “a descriptive scale of language ability in English as a Second Language (ESL) written as 12 benchmarks or reference points along a continuum from basic to

70

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

advanced. The CLB standard reflects the progression of the knowledge and skills that underlie basic, intermediate and advanced ability among adult ESL learners” (CLB, 2012). The Framework is rich in its description of language learning outcomes, dedicating pages to describing what learners can do at all twelve levels of proficiency across skills and competency areas. However, there is scant description of linguistic expectations. For example, at the CLB 6 level (CEFR equivalent B1), descriptions of grammatical knowledge are summarized in phrases such as, “Some variety of grammatical structures, with developing control of more complex structures,” and “Grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation difficulties may sometimes impede communication.” It is understandable that in a task-based approach, grammar items would not be prescribed, but this also may lead to confusion among students and differing interpretations by teachers as to what constitutes language proficiency in an EAP course. The belief that an explicit description of the grammar items expected to be mastered during a TBLT course is not an acceptable part of a TBLT curriculum may in fact be a misinterpretation of the central tenets of TBLT. As Ellis (2009) points out that “in neither [a task-based syllabus, nor in task-based teaching] is it accurate to claim that grammar has no place” (p. 231). Indeed, our initial needs analysis with our teachers uncovered that in fact they strongly wanted a curriculum plan which explicitly identified what grammar the students should be mastering in the course and exactly what the priorities for summative assessment were. In this section of the chapter, we will explain how curriculum documents can integrate language focus in a concrete way, which indicates to teachers and learners the expectations for which grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation items will be taught and mastery of which of these items is expected to be achieved by successful students. This is a challenging undertaking and the chapter provides an entirely novel approach which the authors have been involved in leading and extensively field testing in their EAP program. Building an Explicit Grammar Curriculum In beginning to describe the elements of a grammar curriculum within a TBLT context, there are two major hurdles to overcome. Firstly, the curriculum developer has to determine how to distinguish between what grammar items students will be expected to demonstrate adequate mastery of in language use, and which items may be learned for the first time.

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

71

Beyond that, the curriculum developer will need to determine what levels of accuracy in usage will be considered acceptable. Here, we will share how we approached the selection of items for our own context as an example approach which could be adapted to different contexts. Curriculum planning in our context I. 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 taskbased 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 demonstrated. 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 dealbreakers? 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 definitions of grammar items presented here? • How might teachers and students respond to the notion of using percentages for demonstrating grammatical accuracy?

72

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• 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 accuracy 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. Instruction is intended to be centred almost entirely on different types of corrective 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.

Articles and nouns

Relative clauses

Infinitives Gerunds Present continuous

There structure

(continued)

One independent clause and one subordinate clause (adverb clause) Subordinating conjunctions used: although, (even) though, whereas, while, because, as, since, after, before, if, when, unless, until Any modal verb + infinitive Focus is on the structure (not necessarily on best modal verb choice) There + is/are + noun phrase + infinitive e.g., There are many good reasons to study in EAP NOT Studying in EAP has many good reasons There + is/are + noun phrase + prepositional phrase e.g., There are many good reasons for studying in EAP NOT Studying in EAP has many good reasons Object position Subject and object position Actions in progress at the present time Intermediate degree of accuracy: The student shows ability with less control (approximately 60% accuracy), can occasionally self- correct, and can accurately correct with feedback Adjective clauses with the following relative pronouns: that, which, who, where Countable and uncountable nouns with/without articles e.g., I have to write an essay e.g., I have homework every day Countable and uncountable nouns with/without plural form e.g., Farmers spray chemicals every year e.g., Farmers need more water

Complex sentence

Modal verb structure

Subject is short and simple Noun(s) + verb e.g., The problem is / Bigger problems are / Canada and America are

An example of the grammar assessment items in the curriculum from a B1− EAP course

Subject-verb agreement (basic)

Table 4.6

4 FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

73

(continued)

Wh-questions

Present perfect

Linking adverbials (basic)

Subject-verb agreement (complex)

Conditionals

Subject-verb agreement (basic)

Table 4.6

Distinguishes between general and specific nouns e.g., Students should study hard e.g., The students in Paul’s class don’t study Zero conditional e.g., If there is a drought, plants die First conditional: e.g., If you study hard, you will improve More complex structure in the subject: Noun phrase as subject + verb e.g., High levels of air pollution cause problems Common linking adverbials that are less likely to cause confusion in meaning e.g., consequently, finally, furthermore, in addition, however, moreover, similarly, then, therefore, thus, for example, also Common regular / irregular verbs Present perfect continuous and present perfect passive are not the target, but can be presented and practiced as an option “Wh”-word as subject e.g., Who wants this? “Wh”-word as object or adverb e.g., What does “motor skill” mean?

Subject is short and simple Noun(s) + verb e.g., The problem is / Bigger problems are / Canada and America are

74 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Parallel structure

3-clause sentences

Noun clauses

Transitive and intransitive verbs

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

(continued)

Common linking adverbials that may be more likely to cause confusion in meaning e.g., on the contrary, on the one hand/on the other hand, besides, in a word, nevertheless, thereby, in contrast, lastly vs at last Use of “If…would” e.g., If I had a million dollars, I would travel the world Transitive verbs need to be followed by an object, and can take a direct object which does not require a preposition e.g.„ It affects people NOT It affects NOT It affects on people Intransitives do not require an object, but will need a preposition if followed by a noun e.g., He arrived He arrived at the party NOT He arrived the party “That-clauses” e.g., The students know that it is difficult “What-clauses” e.g., I know what you want Compound-complex structure e.g., Elite athletes can win, but they can be unhappy because they cannot do other activities Complex-compound structure e.g., Young athletes can win because they specialize in one sport, but they may suffer serious injuries Gerunds in the object position e.g., The best methods are exercising every day and eating nutritious foods Gerunds in the subject position e.g., Exercising every day and eating nutritious foods can improve people’s health

Linking adverbials (complex)

Second conditional

Students are able to use the following grammar items with 40% accuracy Level of complexity

An example of the target teaching items in the curriculum from a B1− EAP course

Target teaching items Grammar item

Table 4.7

4

75

Using simple present, simple past, and simple future tenses Able to distinguish proper usage of the passive and active voice forms Parsing noun and pronoun relationship within a simple sentence and between simple sentences e.g., Students must submit their work on time

Passive voice

Pronoun–antecedent agreement

Students are able to use the following grammar items with 40% accuracy Level of complexity

(continued)

Target teaching items Grammar item

Table 4.7

76 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

77

Table 4.6 provides an example of the grammar assessment items in the curriculum from a B1− EAP course. Table 4.7 provides 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 further pressure to the function of summative assessments which are operating 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.

78

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

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 scaffolding activities they can ensure that these are all effectively aligned to the final exam format and task complexity expectations.

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

79

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 referencing 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.

80

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

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 Table 4.8). 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

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

(continued)

Advanced degree of accuracy: Student makes occasional errors (approximately 80%) and can self-correct Subject-verb agreement (basic) Noun(s) + verb e.g., The problem is / Bigger problems are / Canada and America are Complex sentence One independent clause and one subordinate clause (adverb clause) Subordinating conjunctions used: although, (even) though, whereas, while, because, as, since, after, before, if, when, unless, until Modal verb structure Any modal verb + infinitive Focus is on the structure (not necessarily on best modal verb choice) There structure There + is/are + noun phrase + infinitive e.g., There are many good reasons to study in EAP. NOT Studying in EAP has many good reasons Infinitives Object position Gerunds Subject and object position Present continuous Actions in progress at the present time Linking adverbials (basic) Common linking adverbials that are less likely to cause confusion in meaning: e.g., consequently, finally, furthermore, in addition, however, moreover, similarly, then, therefore, thus, for example, also Plural nouns Distinguishes between plural and singular nouns e.g., Students should study hard. NOT Student should study hard Intermediate degree of accuracy: The student shows ability with less control (approximately 60% accuracy), can occasionally selfcorrect, and can accurately correct with feedback Relative clauses Adjective clauses with the following relative pronouns: that, which, who, where Articles and nouns Countable and uncountable nouns with/without articles e.g., I have to write an essay. e.g., I have homework every day

Level of complexity

Description of grammar items in the assessment rubric

Grammar item

Table 4.9

4

81

(continued)

Wh-questions

Present perfect

Conditionals Subject-verb agreement (complex)

Grammar item

Table 4.9

Countable and uncountable nouns with/without plural form e.g., Farmers spray chemicals every year. e.g., Farmers need more water Zero conditional: e.g., If there is a drought, plants die More complex structure in the subject: Noun phrase as subject + verb: e.g., High levels of air pollution cause problems Common regular / irregular verbs Present perfect continuous and present perfect passive are not the target, but can be presented and practiced as an option “Wh”-word as subject: e.g., Who wants this? “Wh”-word as object or adverb: e.g., What does “motor skill” mean?

Level of complexity

82 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

4

FORMATTING CURRICULUM CONTENT …

83

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 demonstrated 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 benchmarks 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 Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/language-policy/cefr. Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. 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 taskbased 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 Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.

CHAPTER 5

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. Furthermore, 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, suggestions 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

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_5

85

86

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

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 modify 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 elaborated 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 the curriculum as lived. “If the curriculum is to be successful, [the plan and the lived experience] need constantly to be interacting with and informing each other. In other words, a good curriculum is alive and subject to change” (Sauvé, 2009, p. 22).

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

87

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

88

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

should accordingly be led and managed by qualified and experienced professionals.” 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 argument 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 investment in internal capacity to make the plan work? In our setting, the decision to use a combination approach to writing our curriculum document was incidentally supported by two critical contextual factors. Firstly, as a university-situated EAP program our EAP teachers are required to have a minimum credential of a master’s degree in TESL or applied linguistics. This means that within our teaching team we have teachers who are well versed in modern pedagogical theory and in many cases, have taken graduate courses in curriculum development specifically for second language. Moreover, among our teaching team we were able to identify an individual teacher with extensive curriculum development experience outside our program. This person had been the project manager for a province-wide ESL curriculum guidelines project previously and had led similar curriculum projects at other institutions. This gave us inhouse expertise which had been gained externally, providing a balance of contextual knowledge with external perspective. Onto our curriculum team we recruited several experienced teachers who had sound pedagogical backgrounds, and had demonstrated a keen desire to participate in projects which stretched them professionally. This team was initially made up of three teachers, the project lead and two others. This team of three was tasked with completing the needs assessment,

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

89

drafting the initial curriculum plan, fleshing out the general and specific learning outcomes, and establishing both the performance conditions and performance indicators for each level of our EAP courses. This project was substantial in scope, time, and resources. It took close to one year to complete but in doing so the EAP program was able to develop a robust plan, informed both by principles of pedagogy, our own context for teaching, the needs of learners, and input from all stakeholders. From this plan we were able to form a solid plan for implementation, and equally importantly as teachers went through some of the challenges that come with implementation, they were able to identify and relate to the plan which had been created with one eye to bringing about change while being able to see their own teaching reality reflected in that plan.

Once a plan has been created describing the learning outcomes, performance conditions, and indicators, a successful curriculum document still needs to link itself directly to the classroom experience if the teaching team is to identify what implementation will look like for them. Outcomes do not provide a description of what should be taught, rather a description of what learners who successfully complete a level will be able to do in terms of academic English language proficiency. Teachers will still be required to be the architects of their own lesson plans and coursework assessments. They will need to assess where their students are on the first day of the term and what program of study needs to be created to help them move to demonstrating sufficient proficiency by the end of the course. This requires a flexible learner-centred approach. An outcomes-based curriculum describes learning goals; however, it still asks teachers to put all the complex pieces together for their own students. Moreover, in a TBLT classroom, “teachers have a central role in organizing task-based work, motivating their students to become engaged with tasks, explaining to them why performing a particular task is important and interactionally supporting them while they are at it” (Bygate, Norris, & Van den Branden, 2013, p. 4). In both outcomes curricula and in TBLT classrooms, teachers maintain the primary role of designing and sequencing daily activities. This aspect of the curriculum plan is likely, then, to capture the focus of their attention. For these reasons, including a set of sample tasks is a crucial element of the plan. This is the point at which much larger scale teacher involvement can take place. Teachers can be given small pieces of the curriculum document, such as one skill,

90

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

for example reading, at one course level and co-create a set of example tasks in teams. This process can enhance the development of the curriculum document with a useful repository of example activities and tasks. Secondly, this process offers teachers a chance to see that some of their current practices, favourite teaching activities, and collections of classroom resources may well align relatively easily with the new curriculum plan, providing some practical reassurance that the impending change to their practice will be manageable and achievable. The ATESL Curriculum Framework (Chambers et al., 2011) neatly refers to this as honouring past effort while encouraging innovation. It brings together forces for growth and improvement without simply dispensing with all of the good work so painstakingly created in the past. Furthermore, teachers can now feel that they are fully part of the curriculum development process, engaged with the changes, and having a say in how the plan will be actualized in their classrooms. Curriculum planning in our context II. Bringing the plan to life…gradually The final element to be added to our curriculum plan was the sample tasks. Sample tasks were previously defined in Chapter 4 as not representing a prescriptive description of what the teachers should teach, but rather a demonstration of how each specific learning outcome might be brought to life in the classroom. In other words, sample tasks were included in the curriculum plan to provide some clarity and exemplification of the curriculum in the context of a practical classroom setting and in relation to what students will actually be doing. In terms of our curriculum development process, sample tasks became a critical factor in moving our plan for the curriculum into a fully realized implementation. As described above, we had chosen to develop our GLOs , SLOs , and performance indicators using a team of experienced teachers seconded from teaching for the entirety of the curriculum writing project. With the sample tasks we took an entirely different approach. The sample tasks were created by the teaching team at planned professional development events, as well as during contracted supplemental work time, or even as individual professional development projects. At planned professional development events, teachers were introduced to the goals and the backwards design philosophy behind the curriculum, and were then encouraged to use existing materials, textbooks, tasks, and other activities to connect the more theoretical aspects of the plan

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

to what tasks they might create to support curriculum implementation. This process offered a bridge between the abstract notion of a curriculum developed away from the classroom and those teachers who would ultimately be asked to bring the plan to life. In addition, it gave the teaching team an opportunity to collectively contribute to this significant academic undertaking. The School provided dedicated, paid time for the teachers to develop activities, resources, and handouts which would ultimately support their implementation of the curriculum. Working in teams as well as individually, teachers were able to give and receive peer support and co-create meaningful and concrete representations of what the curriculum actually meant to their classroom practice. Moreover, when confusion arose and could not be resolved or duplication/gaps became apparent, the curriculum development team was able to use this as preliminary feedback to make real time adjustments to the documents. This process had the effect of engaging the whole teaching team, ensuring a realistic plan for implementation had been initiated, and the content of the plan would offer practical ideas rooted in the reality of being a team member in our EAP program. Examples of specific learning outcomes and sample tasks created by teachers working at a dedicated planning retreat: Course Level: EAP B1+ Skill area: Listening SLO: Interpret the main information and supporting ideas. Sample Task: Textbook: Learn to Listen 2, (Lebauer, 2010, p. 38), Women at work. Students listen to the lecture and take notes. In groups, students decide on which information was in the introduction, body and conclusion. Students listen again and note the cues for each section. Stduents share their findings with other groups. SLO: Employ listening strategies to be more accurate and efficient in note taking. Sample Task: Textbook Learn to Listen 2, (Lebauer, 2010, p. 10), Maslow’s Hierarchy. Students listen to each sentence for stress and intonation to pick out the most important words. Students identify ‘chunks of speech’ to identify unstressed function words (e.g., hierarchy of needs) and the stress patterns. Students try to count syllables in individual words (e.g., maximum potential) and listen for the pattern of stressed syllables. Student read passages using the information they collected. Course Level: EAP B1− Skill area: Writing

91

92

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

SLO: Write structured researched-focused essays to convey cause/effect and compare/contrast relationships. Sample Task: Collect and scramble all of the thesis statements and body paragraphs from student essays. Students must match the body paragraphs with the thesis statements. Other possible options: • introductory and concluding paragraphs • topic sentences and details • thesis statements and concluding sentences • essay maps and topic sentences. Sample Task: Analyze the sentence structures and common phrases used to convey compare/contrast relationships in Attractive and Informative Food Packaging, p. 79, or Differences between Dot-Coms and Bricksand-Mortar Businesses, p. 100 (Academic Inquiry 2, Jamieson & Papple, 2018). Write sentences following those structures as practice. ‘Similarly, older people also enjoy the outdoors.’ ‘Another difference is related to the way students learn grammar.’

The Implementation Regardless of all the steps taken to engage with teachers throughout the curriculum development phase, implementation means that change is about to become real rather than an abstraction to be considered and debated. Special attention to the timing, piloting, and phased nature of curriculum change should be considered as part of the implementation plan. EAP semesters and terms tend to fluctuate in many contexts in terms of student enrolment. It may be desirable to implement a new curriculum document during a quieter period of the year when teachers, administrators, and resources are not stretched thin. The curriculum can be phased in one course level at a time. Teachers can be selected for those most able to handle change and administrators can focus attention on ensuring the curriculum is rolled out in an orderly and manageable way. However, this approach can have some disadvantages. If an EAP program has four levels, how can just one level at a time be changed? If you change the highest level first, it may be that students entering from lower levels are not able to handle the new expectations of the curriculum, as it is no longer part

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

93

of an aligned series of courses. If you change the lowest level first, students once again may no longer ‘fit’ into the course which they graduate into. One solution to this problem is to change the lowest level first and then change each level which those students potentially graduate into, as illustrated in Fig. 5.2. This process of implementation maintains many of the advantages of a staged rollout while never allowing a graduating student to pass into a new course which is not aligned with their program of study. Teachers can develop expertise in the new curriculum and its implementation and in turn can become mentors to others as they begin the process of working with the new curriculum. The obvious disadvantage of this process is

Fig. 5.2 A staged curriculum implementation to ensure seamless learning experience for students

94

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

that in fact it takes a long time to implement, perhaps over a year, depending on the length of a semester. The gradual approach, while managing anxiety and operational considerations around change, can also be seen as a frustratingly slow way to manifest real change in the program, particularly for those committed to a new curriculum as an enhancement of ways of approaching EAP in the program. Moreover, this slow rate of change could result in some confusion about the value of the new approach to EAP in the revised curriculum. Allowing the previous curriculum to linger means that students will continue to complete the EAP program for several years who may not be sufficiently ready for mainstream undergraduate study. Many in the institution may not be willing to ‘sacrifice’ so many students to the old and potentially inadequate ways of doing EAP. Curriculum planning in our context III. Implementing the plan: change is good After considering all factors in our implementation of the new curriculum, we determined that a phased rollout would not be the best way for us to move forward. Our curriculum changes had impacted every course, in all ways. We were transitioning from a syllabus with lists of items to teach and no true articulation of what learners needed to be able to actually do with the language at each level. Teachers were not truly accountable for what their students learned, only for what they had taught. While we had many dedicated teachers who took on the full responsibility of ensuring their students had sufficient language proficiency for success in their next steps, this was not described in any part of our curriculum. Our stakeholders had described that their greatest problem with our program was that it produced graduates with vastly wide ranging levels of language proficiency and unpredictable capacity to succeed in mainstream academic programming. We felt that this situation was urgent enough that for the sake of our students that we could not afford to roll out our curriculum over a year. For these reasons, we determined that it would be expedient to roll out new curriculum for our three levels of EAP in one semester. Furthermore, we also decided to roll out the curriculum during our time of highest enrolment. In part this decision was mediated by the completion of the curriculum documents, but in part it was an extension of our thinking that the highest number of students could be helped by a speedier implementation at this time. So our implementation took place over all levels and with all students at our busiest time of year. As can be imagined it was a challenging transition

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

95

for all involved. Having said that, it was not a surprise to anyone on our team. We had been working on the project with regular updates to all staff for over a year and teachers had been heavily engaged as the document components were finalized. There was an air of anticipation and for the most part our implementation launch went smoothly and even created a sense of renewal and positivity in our unit. This is not to overstate the transition and a later section of the chapter will address the importance of monitoring the curriculum as it came to life in the classroom.

Steps Towards a Successful Curriculum Launch The steps in Table 5.1 are suggested as possible activities which can be undertaken to ensure a smooth curriculum launch: Monitoring the Initial Curriculum Implementation Launch Throughout the implementation period it is recommended that administrators maintain ongoing dialogue with teachers. This will provide reassurance but more importantly recognizes that launching a new curriculum is only the start of the process of bringing about change, not the last step. After allowing a period of adjustment, perhaps four weeks, it may be a good idea to have a teachers’ meeting or town hall event to allow them to ask questions about the curriculum or to share some of the challenges they may be facing. It is recommended that this type of event have a clear focus of sharing or it can easily become a forum for sharing generalized discontent with all matters other than the curriculum. Teachers should also be encouraged to share reflections on specific aspects of the curriculum launch through shared online documents, and be encouraged to respond to comments of colleagues. Formalized surveys can be sent out to teachers which can probe more deeply into specific aspects of the implementation and how teachers are managing the change. Open communication and ongoing dialogue with all those impacted by the curriculum change is the most effective way to ensure the implementation launch is as smooth as possible and engages all team members to be invested in the plan’s success.

Questions around this step Do all stakeholders know that the curriculum is changing? What messaging is needed for different stakeholders? How and by whom will curriculum changes be communicated? What critical information around philosophy, pedagogical principles, and project goals do teachers need to best implement the plan? Seamless rollout of the plan can be achieved when teachers are involved in steps of the curriculum process, which then can merge into broader orientation to goals for the project and expected project outcomes Managing teachers’ expectations that implementation will be seamless and communicating that ongoing monitoring will be needed to ensure that feelings of anxiety do not extinguish initial positivity

Communications

Teacher orientation

• Can first emerge during environmental scan stage of development • Six months prior to launch • Within the last month prior to the launch • Dedicated time for the teaching team to work on aspects of the curriculum development • Professional development retreats to allow dedicated time for reflection and materials and activities development • Ensure plan for monitoring implementation is explained at the time of implementation

Timeline

Activities which can be undertaken to ensure a smooth curriculum launch

Step

Table 5.1

96 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

It can be challenging to anticipate comprehensively everything that teachers will need to effect a successful curriculum implementation, but an effort is needed to ensure that textbooks, materials, and assessments are aligned with the demands of the new curriculum. If for example, grammar is being emphasized more than previous iterations of curriculum, are pedagogically sound grammar resources available to teachers and students alike? If students are now being asked to demonstrate skills in using support resources such as dictionaries, are those dictionaries required textbooks for the course, or is the program planning to provide them? How much information needs to be communicated to administrative staff to help them to support the implementation? What should the messaging around this information be? How much detail is needed? How will administrative staff be able to use this information?

Planning for appropriate resources and supports for teachers

Administrative staff orientation

Questions around this step

Step

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

(continued)

• Engage administrative staff with the curriculum launch by ensuring they are aware of timelines, goals for the project, and communications needed around it • Recognize that administrative team members are often the front-facing staff for the organization for communicating with students and may need specific orientation on how to communicate the change with this group and what the central messages should be

• Review the outcomes, performance conditions, and sample tasks of the new curriculum to ensure that textbooks support curriculum implementation • Review textbooks, online supports, final exams to confirm that alignment with new curriculum is sufficient • Take steps to plan for changing these elements of the program if there is an apparent lack of alignment with the new curriculum

Timeline 5

97

Questions around this step Do students need to be made aware of changes to EAP curriculum? How should a change of such magnitude for an EAP program be communicated to students? How can students’ anxiety around changes be managed?

Information for students

(continued)

Step

Table 5.1

• Ensure positive change around improved student experience and ultimate success is the core of the messaging • Ensure the message is comprehensible by students and takes account of their anxiety around fears that the course will become more difficult to pass, etc.

Timeline

98 M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

99

Some questions which could be asked of teachers during this initial implementation launch could include: • Do the general and specific learning outcomes reflect the needs of learners in your class this semester? • Were any of the outcomes entirely new to you? How have you been handling including these new aspects into your course? • Were learners at the appropriate language proficiency level to meet the outcomes of the course? • Were the outcomes and tasks described in the new curriculum appropriate in terms of level? • Do the course textbooks support the learning outcomes? • Did the tasks you have been using to implement the new curriculum engage the learners? If not, why not? • Was enough support provided to implement the new curriculum? • What more support do you feel would assist you in this implementation?

Curriculum planning in our context IV. Monitoring the curriculum launch: our biggest challenge It was not a huge surprise to the team leading the curriculum project that the greatest friction felt on our teaching team, upon the launch of the new curriculum, was around the inclusion, for the first time, of an explicit grammar curriculum, including expectations for mastery. This was a highly innovative approach, particularly within the construct of a taskbased curriculum and was new for our entire teaching team. This aspect of the curriculum was challenging for the teachers to adjust to and required the most focused effort on their part. Initial discomfort resulted among some teachers leading to a reporting of generalized dissatisfaction with the new curriculum; while others opted to ignore this aspect of the curriculum entirely. It took a much longer period of time to fully implement this portion of the curriculum than any other. It took several semesters for those with discomfort to become comfortable as teachers of language in the EAP classroom; it took several exam cycles for those in avoidance mode to accept that these criteria were going to be part of the summative assessment cycle and thus could not be ignored in perpetuity. It is in this area where perhaps

100

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

the curriculum has had its greatest impact in ensuring students are able to enter mainstream academic programming with stronger English language proficiency in addition to preparation for the academic language milieu. Trends in student achievement in mainstream courses appear to support this assertion. Even with the good will of the instructors and a relatively engaged and well-informed team, there were still areas of discomfort and dissonance that could only be overcome with consistent commitment to implementing the innovative vision represented in the plan.

Monitoring the Ongoing Curriculum as Lived Monitoring the curriculum as lived is a more complex undertaking than simply overseeing the new curriculum launch. It is a process which is ongoing, but over a much longer period of time and must consider a wider range of data. As the ATESL Curriculum Framework explains, “the curriculum-as-lived should contribute back into the curriculum asplanned. There must be a process in place for this to happen” (Chambers et al., p. S5-8). The Framework goes on to point out that if there is any kind of mismatch between the curriculum plan and the learners who are taking the course, it is the teachers who will first become aware of this and attempt to mediate such a gap. Teachers find themselves on the frontline in the classroom and over time they will adjust their teaching to meet their students’ needs, as they must. As teachers adjust their instruction and individuals are brought into update curriculum documents, adjust exams, and/or select new textbooks, “the curriculum-as-plan [is left] unattended or the revisions [are] haphazard as multiple individuals do what they can, or what they believe to be necessary, without the unifying logic of a shared vision or a shared understanding of learner needs” (Chambers et al., p. S5-15). Some questions which could be considered by an organization when contemplating the ongoing monitoring include: • Do we have adequate time and resources to ensure that a curriculum review yields fruitful information? • Is the review possible with the resources at hand (e.g., qualified staff, learners who have fully experienced the course)? • How much time and money are available to do the evaluation?

5

IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: BRINGING THE PLAN TO LIFE

101

• Have there been changes in the external environment since the implementation? • Have the requirements of the course’s stakeholders changed? • If the review uncovers changes that need to be made, is there support for allocating resources to curriculum revision? • How can we ensure all stakeholders can contribute to the process? (Questions adapted from ATESL Curriculum Framework, 2011) In the next chapter, a model for approaching a meaningful evaluation of the curriculum as lived is presented whereby necessary adjustments can be made systematically to the plan, without the initial central essence of the plan being lost.

References Aoki, T. T. (1993). Legitimating lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of multiplicity. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8(3), 255–268. Bygate, M., Norris, J., & Van den Branden, K. (2013). Task-based language teaching. In C. Chapelle (Eds.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Wiley. Chambers, W., Gnida, S., Messaros, C., Ilott, W., & Dawson, K. (2011). ATESL adult ESL curriculum framework. ATESL, Canada. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 363–401). New York: Macmillan. Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2018). Innovation in EAP programmes: Shifting from teaching to learning in curriculum design. In L. T. Wong & W. L. Wong (Eds.), Teaching and learning English for academic purposes: Current research and practices (pp. 143–160). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Jamieson, J. S., & Papple, J. (2018). Academic Inquiry 2. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press. Lebauer, R. S. (2010). Learn to listen—Listen to learn 2: Academic listening and note-taking (3rd ed.). London, NY: Pearson Education. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York, NY: Routledge. Sauvé, V. (2009). A curriculum frameworks research project. Unpublished report for Alberta Employment and Immigration. Stabback, P. (2014). What makes a quality curriculum? UNESCO International Bureau of Education, IBE/2016/WP/CD/02. Retrieved from https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000243975.

CHAPTER 6

Evaluating the Plan and Lived Experience of the Curriculum: Completing the Circle

Abstract Evaluating the Plan and Lived Experience of the Curriculum considers the final stage in the curriculum development process, evaluation. In fact, this chapter describes the ongoing cyclical nature of curriculum evaluation, rather than viewing it as one, final stage in a linear process. The authors consider the practical aspects of curriculum evaluation, the why, when, how, and who of the process. Practical tools for the process are included, in particular, potential goals for the evaluation and questions to ask, and what data to gather to achieve these goals are discussed. As in every chapter, Guardado and Light provide a candid summary of how they engaged with this evaluation process in their EAP context. Finally, some resources to support curriculum planning are included. Keywords Curriculum evaluation · Stakeholder consultation · Direct and indirect measures · Managing change

Questions to ask yourself about your context • How do we evaluate change in our EAP program?

© The Author(s) 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3_6

103

104

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• How do we measure the impact of the changes we make? • Over time, how do we monitor changes in the curriculum-as-planned after it comes to life in the classroom? • How do we determine if our curriculum plan has achieved its stated goals? • Do we follow up to determine if our stakeholders are satisfied with the changes we have implemented

Why Evaluate? Evaluating the Plan in Light of the Lived Experience Throughout this book, we have strongly made the case for viewing the curriculum plan as only part of the process of effecting curricular change and determining the best outcomes for students. Our construct for this perspective has been largely informed by the writing of Ted Aoki, and Virginia Sauvé. Their work aligned with our own experiences as program administrators with program planning over the years; the notion that the perfect plan often looked very different in practice, if not immediately, then over time. The work of both Aoki (1993) and Sauvé (2009) underlies this shift within a framework that elucidates the processes driving the shift from plan to lived experience. While the plan for a curriculum may be created in ideal conditions, by a small team, in reality, “curriculum is a shared event, it unfolds as instructor and learners interact with the …course of study (curriculum plan) and with each other within the context of the [classroom]” (Chambers, Gnida, Messaros, Ilott, & Dawson, 2011, p. S5-13) (Fig. 6.1). In this book, we have endeavoured to consistently place curriculum evaluation as part of the circular process that includes planning, implementing, and evaluating a curriculum, in an ongoing process that is nonlinear and perhaps can be viewed as never-ending. In this way, evaluating a curriculum in an EAP context will be a formative process. The goal is to inform ongoing improvement to the EAP program, and to continuously engage in a review of how students’ needs can be met to support their successful integration into mainstream undergraduate study within the realities of the context. Some general inquiry questions which may guide the evaluation process may include:

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

105

Fig. 6.1 Model of EAP curriculum design (Adapted from Nation and Macalister [2010] by the authors, Guardado and Light [2018])

• How can this curriculum evaluation help us to identify strengths and weaknesses in our curriculum plan? • Have our general learning outcomes created the desired impact on our EAP students’ language proficiency? • Have we succeeded in identifying the best learning experiences to support our students’ transition to mainstream undergraduate study?

106

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

• Is our curriculum plan consistent with our pedagogical principles and preferred methodological approaches? • How has the plan shifted as it has moved from a plan to a lived experience? • Why has this shift happened and should these changes be incorporated back into the plan?

When to Evaluate? How Frequently Should an EAP Curriculum Be Evaluated? Formative assessment of a curriculum plan should be undertaken frequently throughout the planning stages, the initial implementation, and within the first year of implementation. This type of monitoring ensures that the impact of the changes is being actively considered, that student outcomes are not jeopardized in the short run, and that teachers do not feel abandoned during a time of potential upheaval and change. Undertaking a complete curriculum evaluation should be built into the initial curriculum plan and is likely to be completed on a longer time frame. ATESL Best Practices (2009) only recommends that each English as a second language program has a plan for regular curriculum review without stating any particular given time frame. Languages Canada (2018) suggests, in its standards document, that a curriculum review be undertaken every five years. This amount of time allows for full implementation to have taken place, for real impacts of the curriculum change to be evident and measurable, and for the impact of the curriculum as lived to have exerted some influence on the plan’s interpretation. Realistically it allows for reallocation of resources to the project, with a reasonable distance from the initial curriculum project. The purpose of the evaluation is not viewed as an opportunity to completely re-write the original document, but rather to keep the original document in a continuously adaptive process described by Diamond (2008) as the “transition from the ideal to the possible” (p. 127). A curriculum review can be a resource-heavy process, taking time and effort away from other seemingly more urgent endeavours. However, incorporating curriculum evaluation as a critical part of a curriculum project reframes it not as a nice to have option but rather as an integral element.

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

107

How to Evaluate? In this section, we will consider how to undertake a curriculum evaluation: the processes, the questions, and the data which might be collected. In each case, we will reflect on our own context and recommend resources that might be more applicable in a different context. Direct and Indirect Measures of the Curriculum Impact When collecting data, it is widely regarded as good practice to collect both direct measures and indirect measures of the impact of a curriculum. Beile (2008) succinctly defines these approaches: Direct measures assess the skills, competencies, behaviors and attitudes faculty expect the graduates to have attained. (n.p.)

Direct measures, then, may include such data as summative assessments, in-house or standardized, portfolios of students’ work, and class presentations. These direct measures may be the most effective way to measure students’ learning against the specific learning outcomes stated in the original curriculum plan. …Indirect measures of student learning rely on self-report data that ascertains the perceived extent of value of the learning experience. (n.p.)

Indirect measures, then, may include such data as surveys, retention and GPA data, focus groups, classroom observations, and exit interviews. These indirect measures provide an enhanced understanding of the data collected using direct measures. They offer an opportunity to understand how the curriculum was experienced which can offer deeper insights into the data such as summative assessment scores. Questions to Ask During a Curriculum Review Earlier in the chapter, we identified some overall questions to guide the curriculum evaluation process. In this section, we suggest some specific questions which may be helpful in developing survey questions or focus groups discussion points. A useful resource for developing curriculum in a post-secondary setting is Designing and Assessing Courses and Curricula, by Robert Diamond (2008). Although not focused on EAP or language

108

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

courses in particular, it offers a number of case studies and resources for curriculum development. From his suggested list of questions to ask during a curriculum evaluation, we have adapted the following list to be suited for an EAP curriculum evaluation: Is the curriculum meeting the EAP program’s learning goals? • Is the curriculum, as planned and lived, consistent with the organization’s vision and mission? • Were the assumptions we made about the students’ language levels, motivations, and academic goals accurate? • Are the general and specific articulated in our plan still appropriate for the students and having a positive impact on their academic goals? • Has the language of our curriculum plan been easily understood by teachers, students, academic faculty partners, and other stakeholders? • Are the learning outcomes still the most relevant for the language requirements of EAP graduates? • Are there stakeholders in the external community who we now identify as significant partners, but perhaps did not initially consult with? • Have we addressed a wide enough range of learning outcomes in our original plan? • Have we considered issues beyond language proficiency such as those related to academic socialization, integration with the broader university community, a positive student life experience? Is there a place for these in our EAP curriculum? Has the curriculum contributed to higher levels of academic language proficiency among the students? • Do the formative and summative assessments reflect the learning outcomes described in the curriculum plan? • Can we triangulate direct and indirect measures to demonstrate whether or not students’ proficiency levels are matched by confidence in their capacity to perform in mainstream programming? • Are the findings of summative assessments and ongoing GPA performance being adequately communicated to partners?

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

109

• Do teachers understand the impact of the curriculum on summative assessment data, and are they using this data to support improvements in student achievement? • Do teachers have data which they have collected during class time to contribute to the curriculum evaluation? Does the curriculum plan and lived experience reflect the pedagogical principles and preferred methodological processes proposed in the original plan? • Is the curriculum sequence appropriate for the students’ academic language development according to the input of stakeholders and in alignment with the most recent literature? • Has the curriculum been designed to ensure that each student has the opportunity to achieve their academic goals through improved language proficiency? • Does the curriculum encourage active, student-centred learning and does the plan adequately incorporate engagement with the local community, opportunities to understand technology, and develop intercultural communication skills? • What level of awareness do the students have about the curriculum? Does the program need to do more to explore the learning outcomes with students at the outset of the course and throughout the summative assessment process? From these guiding questions, more detailed questions may be prepared with detailed considerations for the particular context.

Who to Consult During the Evaluation? Most curriculum guides, specifically for language programs and others for undergraduate courses, recommend consulting a broad range of stakeholders in the data collection in a curriculum review. Languages Canada (2018) recommends consultations take place with students, teachers, administrators, and recruiters. Diamond (2018) suggests the consultation group also includes university administration, other faculties, and even accreditation bodies. For our purposes of evaluating an EAP curriculum plan, we suggest the following groups for consultation:

110

• • • •

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Students Teachers Program administrators External stakeholders (academic faculty partners, registrar’s offices).

The Most Important Stakeholders: Students We began our discussion of a curriculum renewal process with an examination of the shift from a teaching paradigm to a learning paradigm. In this shift, the centre of the process is the students; their needs, goals, motivations, aspirations, and the processes they undertake as learners. In turn, the most important part of a curriculum evaluation must be the students. Student data can be collected either by direct measures, such as summative assessment performance and quality of class presentations, or by indirect measures including interview or survey feedback, GPA in academic courses, and classroom observations. Students may express confusion or discomfort with their EAP program in a wide variety of ways: through feedback, through appeals of final grades, through enrolment rates, or through low engagement levels. The purpose of the curriculum evaluation is to investigate and analyze the students’ reactions to the EAP program, and adjust to enrich their experience and success in achieving their goals. Curriculum planning in our context I. Responding to the curriculum as lived: summative assessment While we had completely overhauled our EAP program curriculum, our summative assessment content remained relatively intact. The rubrics had been adjusted to reflect the changes made to the learning outcomes but the structure and content of the exam had remained pretty much the same. Initially, the exams appeared to be performing well as both a measure of the course’s specific learning outcomes and ultimately as an objective measure of English language proficiency. However, the inclusion of the innovative grammar assessment section in the curriculum plan was proving to be an implementation challenge. The rubric for the essay portion of the summative assessment stated the following criteria for a satisfactory grade in our B1- course:

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

111

A limited range of grammar assessment items is used. Sentences lack variety. If more complex grammar assessment items are attempted, these are less accurate than simpler items. There are clear patterns of repeated grammatical errors on some assessment items throughout the essay, but not in every sentence, and they seldom interfere with the meaning.

Teachers could refer to the grammar assessment items which were printed on the back of the rubric; however, the language of this rubric has many of the hallmarks of the vague language found in curriculum documents without a specific grammar curriculum which we had been trying to avoid. Over a two-year period, we compared and analyzed in particular those papers which were not considered to be at a passing level. It was clear that there was little in the way of a shared understanding of a paper that did not demonstrate sufficient mastery of grammar. There was limited inter-rater reliability and the number of students appealing failed papers was growing and the process was becoming unwieldy. When administrators reviewed the papers which were failing, students’ concerns and confusion about failing papers appeared to be understandable and justifiable. In response to this situation, a team of teachers was charged with developing a user-friendly checklist that captured the essence of the grammar mastery levels for each course level. After a great deal of negotiation and drafting, checklists were developed. Assessment of the final written portion of the summative assessment continued to be done using the rubric, considered by the administration and the teaching team to be the more holistic, task-focused tool. This rubric included five categories for assessment: grammar, content, organization, vocabulary, and research. Of these categories for assessment, only grammar and content are alone considered as grounds for failing a paper. Papers could be judged as meeting the satisfactory requirements for passing the course using just the rubric. However, any papers which were considered not to meet the requirements on grammar or content would then require the teachers rating the paper to provide a detailed analysis for why the failing grade had been assigned. The introduction of the checklist for failing papers had an immediate impact on the inter-rater reliability of final exam marking and resulted in a significant decrease in the number of students appealing their exam grades (see Table 6.1). Interestingly, anecdotal feedback and observation of teachers made it clear that the introduction of the checklist had another, if less immediately obvious, impact: the entire teaching team finally accepted the reality that the curriculum had changed, and that their instructional planning needed to become aligned to the new plan.

112

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Table 6.1 Checklist for grammar portion of summative assessment B1 Sentence structure problems Several (3 or more) language and vocabulary items below degree of accuracy standard

Grammar/vocabulary items

Punctuation & capitalization Simple/compound sentences Complex sentences Simple tenses Subject-verb agreement (basic) Modal verb structure There structure Linking adverbials (basic) Verb forms (infinitives and gerunds) Plural nouns Relative clauses Articles and nouns Subject-verb agreement (complex) Several serious grammar errors make comprehension difficult Not enough student language to assess

Standard Below 95% accuracy

Below 80% accuracy

Below 60% accuracy

3 or more individual errors Either 60% (or more) of entire essay quotation AND/OR substantial repeated memorized/lifted language

Internal Stakeholders: Teachers Throughout this book, we have posited that teachers are the interface between the plan and the lived experience of the curriculum. They notice the mismatches the plan and the students and in fact they are tasked with the gradual transition from the ideal as described in the plan to the possible as determined by the classroom context (Diamond, 2008). Feedback with teachers should be ongoing but also form a significant part of the formal evaluation.

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

113

Curriculum planning in our context II. Responding to the curriculum as lived: grammar As was noted in Chapter 4, one of the most innovative aspects of our EAP curriculum was the inclusion of specific grammar assessment items and target teaching items. Included along with these grammatical items were stated levels of mastery that learners were required to demonstrate during summative assessments in order to pass an EAP level. Along with a stated preference within the curriculum document that teachers take a taskbased approach to instruction, the inclusion of this course level-specific grammar curriculum was among the most challenging aspects of our new curriculum for teachers. In our preliminary monitoring of the curriculum launch, and during mid-term curriculum evaluation, it became apparent that teachers were struggling to meet learners’ need for support in this area. Feedback from teachers indicated that grammar resources suggested in the curriculum, such as YouTube links and textbook references, among others, were not sufficient or specific enough to offer meaningful help for students who might struggle to achieve the required levels of mastery by the end of the course. In addition to teachers reporting that they simply did not have time to research grammar resources on numerous items, classroom observations revealed a more problematic trend was taking place. A much greater proportion of class time was being spent on teaching grammar assessment items than the curriculum plan had ever intended. In fact, the curriculum clearly stated that grammar assessment items were to be addressed as incidental focus on form episodes, in other words, only when mistakes arose and mostly through individual written feedback, on essays for example. What we observed in practice was that teachers had become so concerned about this new measure of language proficiency and with few suitable resources at hand, had resorted to dedicating a considerable proportion of class time to these relatively simple grammar items. In turn, there was almost no time remaining for time to be spent on the grammar target teaching items, leaving students less well-prepared for the next EAP course they would take. This situation was a clear representation of how a curriculum plan only exists in the ways it is realized in the classroom setting. Teachers will always veer towards providing the support their students need and the bottom line of passing a summative assessment may well become predominant. It became apparent to us that there would need to be more than a straightforward solution of providing extra textbooks. Instead, we took a dual approach. Through analyzing teachers’ open-ended responses to survey questions about TBLT and grammar teaching, as well as through

114

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

classroom observations, it became clear that teachers needed some professional development support in terms of more easily integrating grammar instruction seamlessly into task-based lessons. This would allow students an authentic opportunity to see the grammar items in action in an authentic text or to get feedback on their own grammar use in a given task. We held several professional development sessions with leading experts in TBLT and grammar both from within our university setting, as well as from outside. We encouraged teachers to attend and present at professional development conferences on TBLT and on teaching grammar as a way for them to deepen their own understanding around this topic. As a second approach to overcoming this challenge, we accepted that there was a need for a targeted grammar support for our teaching team to share with students. As a result, we developed a blended course for the two entry-level courses in our EAP program. For each of these courses, we created a blended course, Grammar for Accuracy I & II; these courses were designed to review and offer practice in the grammar assessment items for each level. The courses were divided into five modules designed to be completed over the seven-week term. Each module consisted of a series of videos with one of our EAP teachers reviewing the form, meaning, and use of a particular grammar assessment item, and included practice activities and answer keys. The entire module was to be completed individually by the student, except for a question and answer review session which took place briefly in class along with a short quiz. The blended component of the course was intended to provide a limited forum where students could ask questions as well as an opportunity for a quiz which provided some positive motivation to students to complete the online portion of the course. The response to the blended course was generally positive and later evaluation noted that the balance of grammar instruction was restored to the initial intentions, and teachers also demonstrated an improved capacity for integration of grammar instruction into their task-based approach. The goals for the Grammar for Accuracy I & II courses and the professional development emphasis on TBLT were intended to respond to both students’ and teachers’ needs, and as such to ensure that the curriculum as planned could be successfully implemented. In fact, no specific changes were made to the curriculum plan as a result of the feedback from teachers garnered during this stage of the curriculum evaluation; rather, the approach to the curriculum as lived was better supported to ensure the plan could be realized.

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

115

External Stakeholders: Beyond the Organization A curriculum evaluation provides an ideal opportunity for once again consulting with external stakeholders, who, in the case of an EAP program, tend to be academic faculty partners and others involved with international students within the campus community. These additional groups may include recruitment teams, registrar’s office team members, and the international office. External stakeholders can provide realistic feedback on EAP graduates’ performance, strengths and weaknesses, and provide insights about the context of undergraduate course requirements in terms of language and academic skills. In turn, this feedback can inform curriculum revisions and ensure students are better prepared for their academic pathways. Curriculum planning in our context III. Responding to the curriculum as lived: changing the plan Ongoing discussion with stakeholders, in particular academic faculty partners, revealed that in some areas, our curriculum changes had resulted in significant improvements in student outcomes. For example, four years after the new curriculum was introduced, grades in mainstream undergraduate courses in the English department showed EAP graduates were achieving higher than expected grades in their introductory English courses. However, perceptions and realities about student success of international students passing EAP courses successfully continued to languish at levels of dissatisfaction in some faculties and departments. In our unit, we understood that in part the problem could lie in the restricted number of months our students received academic English support: fourteen weeks in EAP courses and then into mainstream academic programming without any further English language help. Moreover, we recognized that perhaps our general approach to EAP was leaving students ill-prepared for and virtually unaware of discourse-specific language requirements in their receiving academic faculties. After beginning our evaluation process and taking stock of the feedback from our stakeholder partners, we began to grapple with the notion that we need to undertake a more systematic evaluation of our students’ target language needs. As Hyland and Tse (2007) identified, different members of the university academy have “…different views of knowledge, different research practices and different ways of seeing the world [which] are associated with different forms of argument, preferred forms of expression, and … specialized use of lexis” (p. 247). These considerations led us to revisit and review the way we were approaching our

116

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

curriculum plan and how we were addressing the nature of English for specific academic purposes. To consider such a large undertaking as reviewing whether we should continue with English for general academic purposes or English for specific academic purposes, we determined that the most manageable way to begin was with a limited pilot study. We chose one department, Economics, with whom to begin our work. We chose this department as it receives the largest number of EAP students of any individual department and was immediately receptive to our efforts to better support the needs of international students majoring in Economics. We collaborated with members of the Economics department to find out in what ways they felt our EAP graduates were still struggling with academic English language and in what tasks their performance was particularly weak. The results of this collaboration highlighted several key areas for us to rethink our curriculum approach to EAP as it related to Economics majors. Firstly, our writing emphasis on grammatical accuracy was very much needed, but writing, particularly the argumentative essay style of writing we included in our curriculum would not be the primary requirement for an Economics major. The skills valued in an Economics undergraduate student, particularly in years one and two, would be an ability to read contemporary articles about economics topics from news sources and specialist publications, as well as an ability to effectively summarize the opinions of others. This information was not well-aligned by our curricular approach which placed value on synthesizing the views of multiple authors into a new argument which reflected the position of the writer. In addition to a need for a more robust introduction to the technical language of economics, there was also a need for our EAP Economics majors to develop an understanding that, “writers must encode ideas and frame arguments in ways that their particular audience will find most convincing, drawing on conventional ways of producing agreement between members and frequently moulding everyday words to the distinctive meanings of the disciplines” (Hyland & Tse, 2007, p. 247). As a result of these preliminary findings, we determined that a modified curriculum plan would be developed as an option for Economics majors during the highest two levels of EAP courses offered. In this Economicsonly cohort, the focus would be on developing academic English proficiency through studying Economics-related texts and the inclusion of genre-specific writing tasks, as well as general and technical vocabulary

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

117

use in Economics. Our partners in the Economics department had indicated that a new writing assessment would be introduced for all Economics majors wishing to enter the third year of Economics. This assessment would require them to read and summarize an article from The Economist. This is a challenging exercise for a NNS student as the language in this publication is rich and varied, frequently peppered with idiomatic language and on contemporary topics. Moreover, writing an effective summary also requires a great deal of focus on reading skills, such as identifying the main idea and being able to follow the logical sequence of a text. In our modified curriculum, we covered both basic essay structure, to support language expectations in other courses and summary writing. We modified summative assessments and rubrics and we selected different textbooks and created new classroom activities. In addition to the modifications to the curriculum plan, we extended the period of English language support to continue into the first semester of mainstream undergraduate study. Students would have the option of attending a workshop designed to offer ongoing vocabulary support and reading strategies development. Our curriculum plan has been modified to meet this new and emerging need. Our stakeholder partners have given ongoing feedback and given us a chance to re-think how to achieve our program goals. Moreover, our philosophy and principles for EAP have been evolving as we have begun to embrace an English for specific academic purposes approach, and our plan is evolving to adapt to those changing priorities. As the context for our students changes, our plan and our process for modifying that plan have to be adaptable and dynamic in response.

There are many resources available for program administrators responsible for curriculum projects in EAP programs. These resources offer comprehensive guides to developing and designing curricular documents or standards for English as a second language programs, including EAP, or for the post-secondary setting in general. Some of these are included for reference: ATESL Curriculum Framework Prepared by the professional association for ESL teachers in Alberta, Canada, this publication is composed of eight sections addressing many aspects of ESL curriculum planning and program development. It is intended to be a reference guide rather than a prescriptive description of

118

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

curriculum approach. It was written by and for “teaching professionals, particularly curriculum developers, and while the document is grounded in current second language research and theory, it aims to be both accessible and practical” (p. 4) The document can be accessed through the ATESL website, www. atesl.ca. ATESL Best Practices Prepared by the professional association for ESL teachers in Alberta, Canada, this publication is composed of 67 statements of best practice organized around nine themes, followed by indicators that demonstrate that best practice. The themes include, learner support, curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The purpose of this document is to describe the common expectations around best practice in adult ESL programs in Alberta. The intent is to offer a “common frame of reference, or perhaps a common language, for all involved in providing ESL… programming” (p. 2). The document can be accessed through the ATESL website, www. atesl.ca. TESOL Standards for Adult Education ESL Programs TESOL’s Standards for Adult Education ESL Programs describes the standards for a quality adult ESL program in the US. There are eight areas of programming described, including curriculum. This document can be purchased in either a print version or a PDF version through the TESOL website, https://sites.tesol.org/Bookstore/ ItemDetail?iProductCode=034&Category=STANDARDS. Designing and Assessing Course and Curricula (Diamond, 2008) This practical guide, written in plain language, is an accessible guide to course and curriculum development in post-secondary colleges and universities. Although not specific to the second language milieu, it is an invaluable guide to the steps to take in preparing a curriculum, with interesting case studies and ready-made resources included. This book can be purchased in paper version or e-version through all major booksellers.

6

EVALUATING THE PLAN AND LIVED EXPERIENCE …

119

Conclusion Throughout our book, we have suggested a comprehensive and cyclical process for developing, implementing, and evaluating a curriculum for an EAP program which puts learners and learning at the centre of the curriculum process. The process we described focuses on the context specific to EAP programs, the students and their goals, the teaching team, and the external stakeholders who play a critical role in the future academic success of the students moving forward. We described a curriculum design plan which focuses on learning but also on the aspects of language learning critical to an EAP student, the ability to use the language in an academic milieu, and integrate into the undergraduate community. We aspired to describe a plan which could offer a framework for other EAP programs wanting to create a structured and organized curriculum plan, with approaches to engage teachers and other stakeholders with the process for change, and how to implement a comprehensive program renewal and revival. Following that initial implementation, we have considered how a formal evaluation could be completed with a focus on ensuring that ongoing formative feedback and input find its way back into the curriculum documents where the project began. We want to leave you with a reflective summary of the nature of curriculum development and evaluation from Robert Diamond, described by his editor, David Brightman, as a “bright star in the constellation of higher education improvement” (2008, p. 5): Designing a course or curriculum is always difficult, time-consuming and challenging. It requires thinking about the specific goals you have for your students, the demands of accreditation agencies, and about how you as a teacher can facilitate the learning process. This demanding task will force you to face issues that you may have avoided in the past, to test longheld assumptions with which you are very comfortable, and to investigate areas of research that may be unfamiliar to you. At times you may become tired and frustrated and wish to end the project. Just keep in mind how important this work is and press on.

References Aoki, T. T. (1993). Legitimating lived curriculum: Towards a curricular landscape of multiplicity. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8(3), 255–268. ATESL. (2009). Best practices for adult ESL and LINC programming in Alberta. ATESL.

120

M. GUARDADO AND J. LIGHT

Beile, P. (2008). Information literacy assessment: A review of objective and interpretive measures. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008—Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1860–1867). Las Vegas, NV: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/27469/. Chambers, W., Gnida, S., Messaros, C., Ilott, W., & Dawson, K. (2011). ATESL adult ESL curriculum framework. ATESL, Canada. Diamond, R. M. (2008). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: A practical guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Guardado, M., & Light, J. (2018). Innovation in EAP programmes: Shifting from teaching to learning in curriculum design. In L. T. Wong & W. L. Wong (Eds.), Teaching and learning English for academic purposes: Current research and practices (pp. 143–160). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”? TESOL Quarterly, 41, 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00058.x. Languages Canada. (2018). Quality assurance scheme standards and specifications. Retrieved from https://www.dropbox.com/sh/73vvpeafcwcqo53/ AAAxh7gT_CwF0mXSwiQrnLE8a?dl=0&preview=LCS01_STANDARDS_ SPECIFICATIONS_February_2018+highlighted+changes.pdf. Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York, NY: Routledge. Sauvé, V. (2009). A curriculum frameworks research project. Unpublished report for Alberta Employment and Immigration.

Index

A Administrators, 35–37, 50, 92, 95, 104, 109–111, 117 Aoki, T., 86, 104 Assessment, 2, 14, 18, 23, 24, 57, 59, 61, 68, 79, 80, 89, 111, 117, 118 formative, 43, 106, 108 needs, 88 summative, 6, 25, 33, 36, 50, 68, 71, 72, 77, 99, 107–111, 113, 117 Assessment items, 111 ATESL, 118 best practices, 106, 118 curriculum framework, 90, 100, 101, 117

B Backward design, 6–9, 12, 19, 61, 90 Barr & Tagg, 18–25

C Chambers, W., 68, 88 Consultation, 29, 31, 36, 109 Curriculum, 5–7, 10–14, 18, 21, 22, 25, 52, 108, 112, 113 as lived, 40, 47, 68, 86, 100, 101, 106, 110, 113–115 design, 7 developer, 12, 36, 70, 71, 118 evaluation, 12, 14, 104–110, 113, 114 plan, 36, 43, 44, 47, 54, 57, 59, 62, 68, 70, 72, 78, 88, 100, 104–110, 113, 114, 116, 117. See also Curriculum-as-planned review, 41, 42, 100, 106, 107. See also Renewal Curriculum a plan, 50 Curriculum-as-planned, 13, 86, 100, 104 Curriculum renewal, 12

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 M. Guardado and J. Light, Curriculum Development in English for Academic Purposes, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47468-3

121

122

INDEX

D Designing and assessing course and curricula, 118 Diamond, R., 107, 109, 112, 118, 119 E English for general academic purposes, 116 English for specific academic purposes, 116, 117 Environment, 12 Environmental scan, 31, 34–40, 42 Evaluation, 14, 28, 86, 100, 101, 104, 106, 109, 112, 114, 115, 119 F Feedback, 31–33, 41, 43, 61, 62, 86, 91, 110–115, 117 formative, 59, 61, 68, 119 Formative, 104 G Grammar, 33, 46, 69–72, 83, 92, 99, 111, 113, 114 assessment items, 72, 77, 111, 113, 114 target teaching items, 113

general (GLO), 43, 51–54, 57, 58, 89, 90, 99, 105, 108 specific (SLO), 43, 51, 57–59, 61, 68, 79, 80, 89–92, 99, 107, 108, 110

M Measures direct, 107, 108, 110 indirect, 107, 108, 110

N Needs, 19, 22, 28, 30, 37–39, 50, 52, 58, 88, 89, 99, 100 NNSET (non-native speakers of English teacher), 5

O Outcomes, 7–9, 12, 19, 20, 51 Outcomes-based approach, 14, 51 curriculum, 14, 50, 51, 69, 77

I Instructional paradigm, 24 Instructors, 4–7, 9, 12, 18, 21, 23, 25, 35, 36, 42, 50, 52, 57, 59, 61, 62, 100

P Paradigm, 2, 13, 18, 19, 22–24 learning, 10, 18–21, 23–26, 110 teaching, 21, 110 Performance, 32 conditions, 43, 51, 54–57, 59, 61, 78, 80, 89 indicators, 43, 51, 59, 61, 63, 68, 80, 83, 89, 90 Plan, 14, 86, 87, 91, 104, 106, 108, 114

L Learning outcomes, 7, 9, 28, 43, 108, 110

R Rating scale, 33, 61–63 Renewal, 95

INDEX

Review, 12, 42, 100, 101, 104, 115, 116 Rubrics, 33, 59, 61, 63, 68, 71, 77, 110, 111, 117

S Sample tasks, 51, 68, 89–92 Sauvé, V., 86, 104 Stakeholders, 11, 13, 28, 31, 34, 39, 51, 52, 54, 77, 86, 88, 89, 94, 101, 104, 108–110, 115, 117, 119 external, 28–30, 36, 51, 108, 110, 115, 119 internal, 28, 29, 35, 112 needs, 32

T Target teaching items, 72, 77, 113 Task, 8, 9, 14, 21

123

Task-based, 10, 80, 89, 99. See also TBLT (Task-Based Language Teaching) approach, 43, 52, 70, 83, 113, 114 cycle, 72 essay, 71 language teaching, 2, 5, 8, 18–20, 23, 42, 46 learning, 45 lessons, 114 syllabus, 70 teaching approach, 13, 70, 72 TBLT(Task-Based Language Teaching), 8–10, 21, 46, 61, 70, 79, 89, 113, 114 Teacher, 2, 5, 8–10, 13, 18–20, 22, 23, 25, 38, 42–44, 47, 57, 59, 61, 62, 68, 69, 71, 86, 88–95, 99, 100, 106, 108–114, 117–119. See also Instructors; NNSET (non-native speakers of English teacher) Teaching, 18