Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

SAGE Journal User Guide

Richards, J. (2013) Curriculum Approaches in Language Teaching: Forward, Central, and Backward Design. RELC Journal, April 2013; vol. 44, 1: pp. 5-33

1. What are the three designs listed in this article and how are they relevant in this article?
2. What are the different assumptions each of the designs make about the context of the curriculum?

Nkosana, L. (2008). Attitudinal obstacles to curriculum and assessment reform. Language Teaching Research, April 2008; vol. 12, 2: pp. 287-312

1. What was found in the article about the written, taught, tested curriculum?
2. What were the findings about the importance of assessing speaking?
3. Explain the findings from this research study.

Gottesman, A. (1977).  Applying a model in curriculum planning.  NASSP Bulletin 61: 24 – 30. 

http://bul.sagepub.com/

1. How does this model compare to the model described in the text?
2. How does the article suggest that a needs assessment is designed and how is this the same or different than the model in the text?
3. At the third screening level are the goals of education that flow from philosophy and in turn are influenced by our understanding of and input from learner, society and organized knowledge.  Determine what these level of goals of education might include and creates five goals statements.

Law, E., Galton, M., & Wan, S. (2010). Distributed curriculum leadership in action: a Hong Kong case study. Educational Management Administration & Leadership  38 (3): 286 – 303.

http://ema.sagepub.com/

The decentralization of curriculum decision making has been one of the key debates in the broad discussion on appropriate change strategies concerning school improvement, teacher development and pupil learning for the past several decades.  The article is the report of how Hong Kong attempted to decentralize curriculum decision making.

1. How did they ensure that the activities were school based and problem solving in nature with a focus on student learning enhancement?
2. How did they ensure that the activities were collaborative and each member assumed an equal state in the process?
3. How did they ensure social interactions were open and reflective in nature?
4. How did they ensure activities were organized in an inquiry model and subjected to critical scrutiny?

Matczynski, T. & Rogus, J.  (1985).  Needs assessment:  a means to clarify the goals of secondary schools.  NASSP Bulletin 69: 34 – 40.

http://bul.sagepub.com/:

1. Do you agree that this is still the best method for designing a needs assessment?  Support your answer with documentation from either the article or the text.
2. What are the possible pitfalls in using the deductive approach to needs assessment?
3. What are the values of utilizing a combination of both the deductive approach versus the inductive approach?  What would you gain from each and how could they be combined in one assessment?