12 • Curriculum Development in Language Teaching

The teacher’s curriculum or course outline

The teacher’s curriculum is often referred to as a course outline or syllabus and is intended to assist the
teacher in planning his or her lessons. It can be thought of as an action plan based on the information given
in the school curriculum for a particular course. It will typically describe the course goals, the objectives or
SLHYUPUNV\[JVTLZHUK[OLZJVWLHUKZLX\LUJLVMTH[LYPHSZ[VILJV]LYLK0[TH`HSZVSPZ[ZWLJPÄJP[LTZ
[VIL[H\NO[HUK[LZ[LKH[KPќLYLU[Z[HNLZVM[OLJV\YZL0[TH`ILKL]LSVWLKI`HUPUKP]PK\HS[LHJOLYVY
group of teachers, or by others in the institution who have the responsibility for developing courses. The
level of detail included in the teacher’s curriculum will depend on how the teacher or the school intends it
to be used. Two teachers may develop a course that addresses the same aims and learning outcomes,
I\[LHJO[LHJOLYTH`[HRLH]LY`KPќLYLU[YV\[L[VHJOPL]LOPZVYOLYV\[JVTLZ0UZVTLZL[[PUNZP[TH`
be a requirement that teachers prepare a fully elaborated syllabus and associated scheme of work that
is available for review by others. In others much more leeway is given to teachers to develop a syllabus
[OH[YLÅLJ[Z[OLPYV^UWLYZVUHS^VYRPUNZ[`SL0[TH`ILHT\JOTVYLWYV]PZPVUHSZL[VMN\PKLSPULZ[OH[
teachers use as a “springboard” rather than a lesson-by-lesson template that he or she will follow. This
can be described as the enacted curriculum. (See Appendix 5 for an example of a teacher’s curriculum.)

Do individual teachers develop their own curriculum for the courses they teach in your
institution?

The enacted curriculum

The enacted curriculum refers to how teachers individualize the curriculum and create their own as a
response to the unique features of each group of learners. Enactment suggests the process by which
teachers adapt their institutional or course curriculum to make it as relevant as possible to their learners or
to enable it to accommodate their own style of teaching. It includes the day-to-day practices the teacher
employs, the resources the teacher makes use of, such as realia, workbooks, worksheets, videos, and
mobile devices, the teaching arrangements he or she uses, such as whole-class teaching, group work,
and individual study, as well as activities taking place beyond the classroom, such as in a media lab.
;LHJOLYZ ^VYRPUN ^P[O HU PUZ[P[\[PVUHS J\YYPJ\S\T TH` OH]L [V THRL ZPNUPÄJHU[ PUKP]PK\HS KLJPZPVUZ
concerning how to achieve the intended learning outcomes. In doing so, they will make choices
concerning the kinds of materials, resources, and activities they will use, the sequencing of activities,
the methods of teaching they will make use of, and the ways in which they will assess their students’
learning. Teachers will make such decisions based on their students’ interests, preferred learning styles,
and preference for certain kinds of classroom activities. The kind of teaching the teacher engages in
^PSSHSZVYLÅLJ[OPZVYOLYWYLMLYYLK[LHJOPUNZ[`SLILSPLMZHUKWYPUJPWSLZ/LUJLHZUV[LKHIV]L[^V
[LHJOLYZPTWSLTLU[PUN[OLZHTLJ\YYPJ\S\THUKZ`SSHI\ZTH`JVUK\J[[OLPYJSHZZLZ]LY`KPќLYLU[S`
For example, a teacher may have been given a list of 2,000 of the core words that her learners are
expected to master during a period of instruction. However, the teacher approaches her task not by
systematically working her way through the word list but by exploring with her learners their out-of-class
experiences and using these as the basis for developing vocabulary knowledge. She invites her learners
to bring words to class that have powerful or vivid meanings for them, that relate to incidents and
experiences in their lives – both happy and sad – and then the teacher and learners use these words and
collaborate in crafting poems and stories (as Sylvia Ashton Warner described in her 1963 book Teacher).
Another example of a teacher turning a topic from the curriculum into a powerful opportunity for
learning and engagement is described by Stock (2014, 190), in which a teacher demonstrates how
reading, writing, discussion, and role-playing can be used to prepare students to read Silverstein’s
 1 The nature of curriculum • 13

The Giving Tree ¶ H JSHZZPJ WPLJL VM JOPSKYLU»Z SP[LYH[\YL -PYZ[ [OL Z[\KLU[Z ^YP[L IYPLÅ` HIV\[ HU
incident where they were disappointed by a friendship, which they then share and discuss in groups.
Through discussion they explore the notion of strong friendships. After listening to the text of the story
and following on from the ideas they had developed about the nature of friendship, the students go
on to imagine roles they might play in a mock trial that charged the boy in the story with being or not
being a good friend. They read the text to identify sets of questions they might ask to prove that the
boy either had or had not been a good friend. Students then write their individual opinions on the boy
HUKÄUHSS`ILJVTLHQ\Y`HUK]V[LVU^OL[OLY[OLIV`PU[OLZ[VY`^HZHNVVKMYPLUK

*HU`V\Z\NNLZ[HUL_HTWSLVMH[LHJOPUNWYPUJPWSL[OH[^V\SKPUÅ\LUJL[OL^H`H[LHJOLY
conducts his or her teaching?

The emergent curriculum

*\YYPJ\S\TJHUHSZVIL\UKLYZ[VVK[VKLZJYPIL[OLHќVYKHUJLZVYVWWVY[\UP[PLZMVYSLHYUPUN[OH[LTLYNL
HZ [OL [LHJOLY HUK [OL SLHYULYZ LUNHNL PU JSHZZYVVT SLHYUPUN .PL]L HUK 4PSSLY  >OLYLHZ [OL
enacted curriculum describes what teachers do when they seek to implement a curriculum, the emergent
curriculum refers to the processes – both planned and unplanned – that occur during teaching. Anderson
(2015, 231) refers to the “learning opportunities” that arise during teaching as core features of lessons
rather than planned learning outcomes. These learning opportunities are described as “potential acts
of explicit or implicit learning that may occur during or as a consequence of the lesson.” This involves
viewing the classroom as a site where teachers and learners participate in classroom tasks and activities,
adapt and extend teaching materials and resources based on moment-to-moment incidents that arise
during the teaching process, and where teachers and learners negotiate their identities through the
interactional processes involved (Richards 2006). The participants in the curriculum – teachers and
learners – “create” the curriculum through the processes of interaction they make use of to negotiate
and understand the content of their course and the materials and resources that they employ. Tudor
emphasized that to understand what takes place in classrooms they have to be considered in their own
light and in their own terms. They have to be understood in terms of the people, actions and events
that unfold within them and the meanings these have for the participants at the time, for students and
teachers, rather than looking at them in terms of external criteria and assumptions.
This understanding of curriculum is discussed further below as an example of a process or ecological
approach to curriculum.

1.4 Curriculum as product and process

Curriculum as product
The most familiar form of a curriculum for many teachers is the curriculum as product, that is,
the curriculum as a document that contains a framework for teaching, materials’ development,
and assessment and that serves to direct and manage the enterprise of language teaching. Two
approaches have emerged in developing a curriculum as product: we will refer to them as forward
design and backward design (Richards 2013).
14 • Curriculum Development in Language Teaching

Forward design
Forward design is based on the assumption that curriculum design constitutes a sequence of stages
[OH[ VJJ\Y PU H Ä_LK VYKLY ¶ HU HWWYVHJO [OH[ OHZ ILLU YLMLYYLK [V HZ H ¸^H[LYMHSS¹ TVKLS ;LZZTLY
and Wedman 1990) where the output from one stage serves as the input to the stage that follows. In
language curriculum design, this approach views language as a kind of generalized commodity that can
be broken down into its core components. These form the basis for a syllabus. Wiggins and McTighe
(2005, 15) give an illustration of this process with an example of a typical forward-design lesson plan:
• The teacher chooses a topic for a lesson (e.g., racial prejudice).
• The teacher selects a resource (e.g., To Kill a Mockingbird).
• The teacher chooses instructional methods based on the resource and the topic (e.g., a seminar to
KPZJ\ZZ[OLIVVRHUKJVVWLYH[P]LNYV\WZ[VHUHS`aLZ[LYLV[`WPJHSPTHNLZPUÄSTZHUKVU[LSL]PZPVU
• The teacher chooses essay questions to assess student understanding of the book.

A similar example would be a teacher planning a topic-based lesson in a writing class. The starting
point might be for students to brainstorm and choose a suitable topic for a composition. Once a topic
has been agreed on, students work in groups and map out the kind of composition they will write.
Later, after completing their compositions, they review each other’s work in terms of style, interest
level, and choice of language.
In language teaching, forward planning may be an option when the aims of learning are not clearly
KLÄULK ;OL` TH` IL \UKLYZ[VVK PU ]LY` NLULYHS [LYTZ Z\JO HZ ^P[O JV\YZLZ PU NLULYHS ,UNSPZO VY
with introductory courses at primary or secondary level where goals may be described in such terms
HZ¸WYVÄJPLUJ`PUSHUN\HNL\ZLHJYVZZH^PKLYHUNLVMKHPS`ZP[\H[PVUZ¹VY¸JVTT\UPJH[P]LHIPSP[`PU[OL
four language skills.” Curriculum planning in these cases involves operationalizing the notions of “general
English,” or “intermediate-level English,” or “writing skills” in terms of units that can be used as the basis
for planning, teaching, and assessment. This is the approach that was adopted by the Council of Europe
in the 1970s. John Trim was a key member of the group of experts commissioned by the Council of
Europe to develop a new approach to language teaching, and he described what they wanted to achieve:

We set out to identify a number of coherent but restricted goals relevant to the communicative
needs of the learner. We then attempt to work out in detail the knowledge and skills which
will equip the learner to use the language for the communicative purposes defined. In the light
of his characteristics and resources, we then have to establish a formal language programme
leading to the mastery of this body of knowledge and skills, and a means of testing and evalu-
ation to provide feedback to all parties concerned as to the success of the programme.
(Trim 1978, 9)

A new approach to syllabus design was central to this enterprise.

With a forward-design approach, decisions about teaching processes or methodology follow from syllabus
ZWLJPÄJH[PVU0KLHSS`[OLWSHUULYZ[HY[Z^P[OH[OLVY`VMSHUN\HNLHUKHZ`SSHI\ZKLYP]LKMYVTP[HUK[OLU
looks for a learning theory that could be used as the basis for an appropriate pedagogy. In some cases
there has been a natural link between input and process, between content and method, such as the natural
link between structural linguistics and behaviorist learning theory that led to the Audiolingual Method.

What are some typical teaching procedures that are based on the principles of the Audiolingual
Method?
 1 The nature of curriculum • 15

However, in theory a syllabus does not necessarily imply a particular methodology. A structural
syllabus can be embodied in an audiolingual as well as a task-based course, and there are many
KPќLYLU[^H`ZPU^OPJOH[L_[IHZLKVYM\UJ[PVUHSZ`SSHI\ZJHUIL[H\NO[;OLWVPU[OLYLPZZPTWS`
that with forward design, decisions about how to teach follow from decisions about the content of a
course, and decisions about output or learning outcomes follow from decisions about methodology.
The curriculum design process associated with forward design can be represented as follows:

content syllabus method outcomes assessment

Syllabus design is central to the process of forward design and is the focus of Chapters 2 and 3.

Backward design
The second approach used in developing a product-based curriculum is known as backward design
(Wiggins and McTighe 2005). Backward design starts with a careful statement of the desired results
or outcomes: appropriate teaching activities and content are derived from the results of learning.
Wiggins and McTighe argue for starting with a clear description of learning outcomes as the basis
for curriculum planning. In backward design they recommend that three steps are required:
1. To identify desired results.
2. To determine acceptable evidence of learning.
3. To plan learning experiences and instruction.

In education this approach is more commonly associated with the use of objectives in curriculum
planning and with other outcome-based strategies, such as through the use of competencies,
benchmarks, and standards. These are discussed in Chapter 10.
This is a well-established tradition in curriculum design in general education, and one that in recent
years has re-emerged as a prominent curriculum development approach in language teaching. It was
sometimes described as an “ends–means” approach, as seen in the work of Tyler (1949) and Taba
 ^OV]PL^LKPUZ[Y\J[PVUHZ[OLZWLJPÄJH[PVUVMLUKZHZHWYLYLX\PZP[L[VKL]PZPUN[OLTLHUZ
to reach them. The process consists of the following steps (Taba 1962, 12):
1. Diagnosis of needs
2. Formulation of objectives
3. Selection of content
4. Organization of content
5. Selection of learning experiences
6. Organization of learning experiences
7. Determination of what to evaluate and of the ways of doing it

Tyler’s work had a considerable impact on curriculum planning and helped establish the use of
VIQLJ[P]LZ HZ WSHUUPUN \UP[Z PU PUZ[Y\J[PVUHS KLZPNU (U VIQLJ[P]LZIHZLK HWWYVHJO YLÅLJ[Z [OL
essential assumptions of backward design. Tyler argued that educational objectives should form the
basis for educational decisions concerning the selection and organization of content, for the choice
of teaching procedures, and for the development of tests and examinations. By stating objectives, it is
possible to determine the kinds of changes in students that need to be achieved and to choose and
design suitable instructional activities to enable the objectives to be achieved.
16 • Curriculum Development in Language Teaching

From the 1950s, educating teachers in how to describe learning outcomes in the form of objectives
became a minor industry, and since then generations of teachers have been taught to write objectives
as a basis for lesson and course planning. The use of objectives does not imply any particular
pedagogical approach or instructional theory or philosophy. A variety of teaching strategies can be
employed to achieve the desired goals, but teaching methods cannot be chosen until the desired
V\[JVTLZ OH]L ILLU ZWLJPÄLK 0U SHUN\HNL [LHJOPUN H U\TILY VM WYVJLK\YLZ OH]L ILLU \ZLK HZ
part of the process of backward design, including needs analysis, objectives, competencies, and
standards. These are discussed in Chapter 6.
The curriculum design process associated with backward design can be represented as follows:

needs outcomes syllabus method assessment

What are some typical teaching procedures that are based on the principles of the Audiolingual
Method?

Choice of forward or backward design

Forward design is often employed where the primary focus is mastery of a body of knowledge, skills,
and processes that are seen as providing the core or essence of a given domain of learning, as we
saw with the literature example above. It is also an option when the learners’ primary contact and
need for English is limited to the classroom, as is often the case with courses for young learners (see
Chapter 4). Since forward design can be used to develop published materials, there will generally
be a wide range of teaching resources and materials to choose from. Forward design may also be
HWYLMLYYLKVW[PVUPUZP[\H[PVUZ^OLYL[LHJOLYZTH`OH]LSPTP[LK,UNSPZOSHUN\HNLWYVÄJPLUJ`HUK
limited opportunities for professional development, since much of the planning and development
involved can be accomplished by specialists rather than left to the individual teacher.
A backward-design option may be preferred 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. Well-developed procedures for implementing
backward-design procedures are widely available, making this approach an attractive option in
some circumstances. In the case of large-scale curriculum development for a national education
system, much of this development activity can be carried out by others, leaving teachers mainly
with the responsibility of implementing the curriculum. In other circumstances, such as a private
institute developing company-specific courses, a more bottom-up approach may be adopted
and the work required is carried out by a well-trained and skillful individual teacher or group of
teachers working together.
However, forward and backward design might also work concurrently in some circumstances.
David Crabbe (personal communication, 2014) suggests that, in fact, design goes backwards and
forwards whatever the starting point: “It’s not that curriculum designers don’t think of goals when
designing a syllabus. It’s just that a content item is not expressed as a goal. Similarly, a backward
design will often take account of the process of teaching an item in formulating the outcome and it
will often have content built into it.”
 1 The nature of curriculum • 17

,HJO HWWYVHJO OV^L]LY THRLZ KPќLYLU[ HZZ\TW[PVUZ HIV\[ [OL JVU[L_[ MVY [OL J\YYPJ\S\T MVY
example:
• The need for large-scale or small-scale implementation.
• The role of instructional materials and tests.
• The level of training of teachers.
• The roles of teachers and learners.
• ;LHJOLYZ»WYVÄJPLUJ`PU,UNSPZO
• The demands made on teachers, and the level of teacher-autonomy assumed for teachers.
• The amount of support provided for teachers.

The role of contextual factors is the focus of Chapter 5.

Curriculum as process
As we noted above, curriculum can also be understood as emanating from the classroom experiences
that characterize language teaching “in action,” that is, as something that emerges from the activities
of teaching and learning. We referred to this above as the emergent curriculum. This perspective is
also referred to as a process or ecological approach to curriculum.

The word ecology comes from the Greek oikos, meaning “household”, combined with the
suffix -logy, meaning “the study of.” Thus, the discipline of ecology is literally the study of
households, including the plants, animals, microbes, and people that live together as interde-
pendent beings. It is a discipline that has increasingly placed an emphasis on holistic studies
of both parts and wholes.
(Zhao and Frank 2003, 8)

Similarly Aoki (in Pinar and Irwin 2005) talks of the “lived curriculum” and of the curriculum as “lived
practice.” Van Lier (2004) has been a powerful advocate of the ecological understanding of curriculum:

In the ecological perspective, the curriculum does not start out by specifying and sequencing
materials, but with the activities, needs, and emergent purposes of the learner. On the basis
of activities and emergent needs, the teacher makes resources available in the environment,
and guides the learner’s perception and action towards an array of affordances that can
further his or her goals.
(Van Lier 2009, 7)

;OLWYVJLZZJ\YYPJ\S\THSZVYLÅLJ[Z[OL]PL^VM[OLJSHZZYVVTHZHSLHYUPUNJVTT\UP[`>LUNLY "
Van Lier 2004, 2009). The classroom becomes a site for social participation structures that can enhance
or inhibit learning opportunity. These include both the discourse and the activities of classroom life,
^OPJOHќLJ[OV^TLHUPUNPZTHKLHUKRUV^SLKNLJVUZ[Y\J[LK>LUNLY "3HU[VSM"/H^RPUZ
2004; Singh and Richards 2006). Learning is not viewed as the mastery of pre-determined content
I\[HZJVUZ[Y\J[PUNUL^RUV^SLKNL[OYV\NOWHY[PJPWH[PUNPUZWLJPÄJSLHYUPUNHUKZVJPHSJVU[L_[ZHUK
through engaging in particular types of activities and processes.
In general education this approach was advocated by Bruner (1966) and Stenhouse (1975) who
argued that curriculum development should start by identifying the processes of inquiry and
deliberation that drive teaching and learning – processes such as investigation, decision making,
YLÅLJ[PVUKPZJ\ZZPVUPU[LYWYL[H[PVUJYP[PJHS[OPURPUNTHRPUNJOVPJLZJVVWLYH[PUN^P[OV[OLYZHUK
18 • Curriculum Development in Language Teaching

so on. Content is chosen on the basis of how it promotes the use of these processes, and outcomes
KVUV[ULLK[VILZWLJPÄLKPUHU`KLNYLLVMKL[HPSPMH[HSS

[The curriculum] is not designed on a pre-specification of behavioural objectives. Of course

there are changes in students as a result of a course, but many of the most valued are not to
be anticipated in detail. The power and the possibilities of the curriculum cannot be contained
within objectives, because it is founded on the idea that knowledge must be speculative and
thus indeterminate as to student outcomes if it is to be worthwhile.
(Stenhouse 1975, 92)

Clark’s (1987, 49–90) description of the features of “progressivism” captures the essence of the
curriculum as process:
• 0[WSHJLZSLZZLTWOHZPZVUZ`SSHI\ZZWLJPÄJH[PVUHUKTVYLVUTL[OVKVSVNPJHSWYPUJPWSLZHUK
procedures.
• It is more concerned with learning processes than predetermined objectives.
• It emphasizes methodology and the need for principles to guide the teaching-learning process.
• It is learner-centered and seeks to provide learning experiences that enable learners to learn by
[OLPYV^ULќVY[Z
• It regards learners as active participants in shaping their own learning.
• It promotes the development of the learner as an individual.
• It views learning as a creative problem-solving activity.
• It acknowledges the uniqueness of each teaching-learning context.
• It emphasizes the role of the teacher in creating his or her own curriculum in the classroom.

With a process understanding of curriculum, priority is attributed to learning processes, classroom

participation, and the role of the teacher and the learners in creating opportunities for learning. The syllabus
or learning input – rather than being something that is predetermined or prescribed and regarded as essential
in initiating curriculum development – is an outcome of teaching and learning. Whereas with product-based
curriculum approaches testing has the role of assessment of learning (i.e., achievement testing), in the
process curriculum a more dynamic role for assessment is assumed – assessment for learning – where
teaching and assessment inform each other at every stage of the teaching-learning process.

Can you suggest examples of processes that you think are essential to achieve successful
language learning in classroom-based learning?

Conclusions
*\YYPJ\S\TJHUIL\UKLYZ[VVKHUKYLHSPaLKMYVTHU\TILYVMKPќLYLU[WLYZWLJ[P]LZ6U[OLVULOHUKP[JHU
be understood as a framework that has been developed by experts to guide and manage the process of
teaching and learning. As such, curriculum development is a process of both forward and backward design
and involves well-established processes of syllabus design, needs analysis, planning of learning outcomes,
content selection, and choice of teaching methods. The role of the teacher is to understand the intentions of
[OLJ\YYPJ\S\THUK[VÄUK^H`Z[VPTWSLTLU[P[;OLLќLJ[P]LULZZVM[LHJOPUNHUKVM[OLJ\YYPJ\S\T^PSSIL
YLÅLJ[LKPU[OLL_[LU[[V^OPJO[OLJVU[LU[VM[OLZ`SSHI\ZOHZILLUSLHYULKHUK[OLJ\YYPJ\S\TV\[JVTLZ
have been achieved. This is the dominant view of curriculum in language education – one we referred to as
a product approach to curriculum – and it will be explored in depth in subsequent chapters of this book.
 1 The nature of curriculum • 19

The other view of curriculum we have introduced in this chapter is concerned with the understandings,
activities, and processes that teachers make use of as they transform curriculum goals into practical
actions. This has been described as a process approach to curriculum and is described more fully in
*OHW[LY  *\YYPJ\S\T MYVT [OPZ WLYZWLJ[P]L PZ \UKLYZ[VVK [OYV\NO VIZLY]H[PVU JYP[PJHS YLÅLJ[PVU HUK
PUX\PY`HUKPZZOHWLKI`[LHJOLYZ»PUKP]PK\HSWOPSVZVWOPLZVM[LHJOPUNHUK[OLZWLJPÄJZVMLHJO[LHJOPUN
context. This is a less prescriptive view of curriculum than that associated with the product approach, and
ILJH\ZLP[VM[LUYLÅLJ[ZZ\IQLJ[P]LHUKHќLJ[P]LMHJ[VYZ¶PLX\HSP[H[P]LKPTLUZPVUZ¶P[PZZVTL[PTLZ
regarded as fuzzy and not amenable to rigorous inquiry. However, it is a well-established alternative
WLYZWLJ[P]LVUJ\YYPJ\S\T[OH[VќLYZ]HS\HISLPUZPNO[Z^OPJOJVTWSLTLU[TVYL[YHKP[PVUHS\UKLYZ[HUKPUNZ
of curriculum, and as such it will be examined in more detail in several chapters of this book.
In order to understand the nature of current approaches to curriculum design, it is useful to consider
OV^[OLKPZJPWSPULVMSHUN\HNLJ\YYPJ\S\TKL]LSVWTLU[ILNHU^P[OPUP[PHSLќVY[Z[VPKLU[PM`[OLJVYL
vocabulary and grammar that provide the foundation for second language development. This is the
focus of the next chapter.

Discussion questions
1. Does your country have a national curriculum? If so, in relation to language teaching, is a
particular language teaching approach or method recommended?
2. Have policies or practices in regard to language teaching changed in recent years? If so, in what
way and what prompted such changes?
3. In what ways do “internal factors” (i.e., those derived from applied linguistics) and “external factors”
PUÅ\LUJLJ\YYPJ\S\T[YLUKZ&
4. (YLHU`VM[OLJ\YYPJ\S\TWOPSVZVWOPLZKLZJYPILKPU[OPZJOHW[LYYLÅLJ[LKPU`V\YUH[PVUHSVYZ[H[L
curriculum? Are other philosophies referred to?
5. 0U ^OH[ ^H`Z KV `V\ [OPUR WYVÄJPLUJ` PU ,UNSPZO JV\SK JVU[YPI\[L [V H JV\U[Y`»Z LJVUVTPJ
development?
6. What do you understand by the terms the enacted curriculum and the emergent curriculum?
7. /V^^V\SK`V\L_WSHPU[VHJVSSLHN\L[OLKPќLYLUJLIL[^LLUMVY^HYKHUKIHJR^HYKKLZPNU&
8. Why do you think there has been a move toward backward design in many countries in recent
years?
9. What are some of the “processes” that a process-oriented curriculum seeks to encourage?
10. Read the account of the education system in Austria in Appendix 2. How does it compare with
the situation in your country? Are teachers also able to operate fairly freely within the general
curriculum framework, as in the Austrian example?
11. Read Case study 1 by Dino Mahoney at the end of this chapter.
• 0U^OH[^H`ZKVLZ[OLJV\YZLKLZJYPILKYLÅLJ[MLH[\YLZVMIV[OMVY^HYKKLZPNUHUK[OL
curriculum as process?
• What role did technology play in the course?
• What was the role of authentic materials?
12. Read Christian Rudianto’s account of the development of an institutional curriculum in Case
study 2.
• >OH[HYLZVTLVM[OLJVU[L_[\HSMHJ[VYZ[OH[PUÅ\LUJLK[OLKLZPNUVM[OLJ\YYPJ\S\T&
• What was the purpose of the tracer study?
• How was the information collected made use of?