Course Design – Procedures
Masuhara (2011) identifies two different models of procedures for course design. The first, Model X, I find to be too linear, and when I first saw this model, I was really struck by the absence of any input from the learner.
The second procedure, Model Y, strikes me as somewhat absurd, in that materials producers (as opposed to materials users) are conducting needs analyses and determining objectives. While I recognise the wider practicalities of such a model, in the context of exam courses, for example, neither this nor model X are representative of the way in which I design courses.
So how do I design courses? Well in both models there’s a distinct absence of learner input – an element I consider integral if the course is to be learner centred. In my own course design, I’d term this ‘content negotiation’, in which the teacher and client together negotiate what is to be done and how (and sometimes, why). The procedure is far more fluid and dynamic than either of the models Masuhara describes. I’d illustrate it something like this:
- Masuhara, H. (2011) What do teachers really want from coursebooks? In: Tomlinson, B. (ed) Materials Development in Language Teaching. (2nd edn) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 236- 266.