18. Course Design – Procedures


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.

Model X
(cited in Paul Slater ‘Adapting. TE714’ 2016)

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.

Model Y
(cited in Paul Slater ‘Adapting. TE714’ 2016)

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.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s