EXPLORING TEACHERS AND STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES TOWARD NEGOTIATED SYLLABUS IN ENGLISH LEARNING FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

IF 0.7 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
I. Ghozali, Banun Havifah cahyo Khosiyono, Muhammad Ulil Abror
{"title":"EXPLORING TEACHERS AND STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES TOWARD NEGOTIATED SYLLABUS IN ENGLISH LEARNING FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL","authors":"I. Ghozali, Banun Havifah cahyo Khosiyono, Muhammad Ulil Abror","doi":"10.18860/jeasp.v4i1.12617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Designing language syllabus is one of the important processes in the English language teaching contexts. Ensuring both teachers and students’ needs what and how their teaching and learning are applicable, negotiated syllabus can be proposed in teaching-learning processes. This study aims to find the teachers' and students' perspectives to determine whether aspects of the syllabus may be negotiable. Qualitative descriptive is used in this research. The participants involved were four English teachers and twenty students. Data were collected by using a questionnaire in the form of open-ended questions. The syllabus aspects that may be interested to negotiate according to Boon (2011) are course content, lesson aims, sequencing, material, homework, evaluation, methodology, groupings, and error correction. Both teachers and students believe the eleven areas could be negotiated. However, there are some debates in several areas. According to some teachers’ perspectives, the area of material, homework, evaluation, and error correction are not needed to be negotiated. Besides, according to some students, the area of course content, lesson aim, sequencing, material, grouping, and error correction are the teachers’ responsibilities.","PeriodicalId":42098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18860/jeasp.v4i1.12617","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Designing language syllabus is one of the important processes in the English language teaching contexts. Ensuring both teachers and students’ needs what and how their teaching and learning are applicable, negotiated syllabus can be proposed in teaching-learning processes. This study aims to find the teachers' and students' perspectives to determine whether aspects of the syllabus may be negotiable. Qualitative descriptive is used in this research. The participants involved were four English teachers and twenty students. Data were collected by using a questionnaire in the form of open-ended questions. The syllabus aspects that may be interested to negotiate according to Boon (2011) are course content, lesson aims, sequencing, material, homework, evaluation, methodology, groupings, and error correction. Both teachers and students believe the eleven areas could be negotiated. However, there are some debates in several areas. According to some teachers’ perspectives, the area of material, homework, evaluation, and error correction are not needed to be negotiated. Besides, according to some students, the area of course content, lesson aim, sequencing, material, grouping, and error correction are the teachers’ responsibilities.
探讨教师与学生对高中英语协商教学大纲的看法
语言教学大纲的设计是英语教学过程中的一个重要环节。确保教师和学生都需要他们的教学和学习是适用的,协商教学大纲可以在教学过程中提出。本研究旨在找出教师和学生的观点,以确定教学大纲的某些方面是否可以协商。本研究采用定性描述方法。参与者是4名英语老师和20名学生。数据收集采用开放式问题形式的问卷。根据Boon(2011),可能有兴趣进行谈判的教学大纲方面是课程内容,课程目标,排序,材料,作业,评估,方法,分组和错误纠正。老师和学生都认为这11个领域是可以协商的。然而,在几个领域存在一些争论。根据一些教师的观点,材料、作业、评价和纠错等领域不需要协商。此外,根据一些学生的意见,课程内容、课程目标、顺序、材料、分组和纠错是教师的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
57.10%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信