A Process-Oriented Approach to English Curriculum Design: A Case Study
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the role of instructors in English curriculum design and to further investigate whether a top-down curriculum assigned by the curriculum unit or one developed collaboratively with instructors would yield better results.
Design/Methodology/Approach: In this case study, a qualitative research design was conducted to determine instructors’ attitudes toward a process-oriented curriculum during the spring semester of 2023-2024. Data was gathered through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions and analyzed using thematic analysis procedures. The research was carried out in one of the private universities in Türkiye and included eight instructors (two male and six female) with more than ten years of experience in English language teaching at different levels.
Findings: The study revealed that both a curriculum prepared by a unit with trained staff and a curriculum including all the teaching staff have ups and downs. In addition, participants reported increased process awareness when included in curriculum design yet highlighted organizational challenges. if carefully organized and scaffolded, a process-oriented curriculum with the collaboration of both instructors and curriculum unit would generate better outcomes.
Highlights: Curriculum, content, and instructional planning are among the most influential predictors of success in language classes. The individuals involved—whether classroom instructors or curriculum designers—play a critical role in determining that success. When instructors have a voice in curriculum development, they gain a deeper understanding of its content and the rationale behind each step. Conversely, a strictly top-down approach, where each step is prescribed by the curriculum unit, may compromise quality and limit flexibility. Therefore, exploring the most effective practices is necessary and valuable.
Keywords
Process-oriented curriculum, Teacher agency, Collaborative syllabus design, English curriculum unit
References
- Alsubaie, M. A. (2016). Curriculum development: Teacher involvement in curriculum development. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 1–2.
- Bennett, S. N., Wragg, E. C., & Carre, C. G. (1992). A longitudinal study of primary teachers’ perceived competence in, and concerns about, national curriculum implementation. Research Papers in Education, 7(1), 53–78.
- Bishop, P. A., & Harrison, L. M. (2021). Teachers as curriculum designers: Inviting teachers into the productive struggle. Middle Grades Review, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.5642/mgr20210701.03
- Cincioğlu, A. (2014). Why involve teachers in the process of language curriculum development? Turkish Language Education, 1(1), 26–39.
- Dündar, E., & Merç, A. (2017). A critical review of research on curriculum development and evaluation in ELT. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 2(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.437574
- Elliott, J., & MacDonald, B. (1975). People in classrooms (CARE Occasional Publications No. 1). Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia.
- Fullan, M. (1991). The meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press.
- Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Sociology Press.
- Graves, K. (2008). The language curriculum: A social contextual perspective. Language Teaching, 41(2), 147–181. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004867
- Graves, K. (2016). Language curriculum design: Possibilities and realities. In G. Hall (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 79–94). Routledge.