College English is a compulsory course at Yunnan Agricultural University, China. The school-based curriculum development of this course meets the general outcomes and specific skills training requirement. The author critically reflects on its present curriculum design considering the student profile and other stakeholders, clarifying the emerging flaws, focusing on the oral English aspect. A comparison with Wheeler’s (1967) model helps clarify the unaligned weaknesses in curriculum alignment within the present model. With emphasis on constructive alignment, a new-designed College Oral English curriculum is shaped through the analysis of Print’s (1993) model. The 3 phases of Print’s (1993) curriculum development process account for the design and implementation of the new curriculum. 1. Contextualisation of the Learning Programme and Assessment Regime College English is a compulsory course during the first two years of undergraduate study in Yunnan Agriculture University (YAU), China. Students are required to participate for 4-6 hours every week in 4 semesters and to take at least 2 summative assessments (mid-term and final) each semester. All students are just graduated from high schools; their ages range from 17-21. They have accepted certain primary English education in schools although their competencies are varied, many mostly not capable of using English. Furthermore, they all have different approaches to learning. The English language knowledge and basic skills training are included in the course, which has the following learning outcomes set by the University and Ministry of Education: General learning objectives: * training students to possess good English reading competency and certain ability in listening, speaking, writing and translating English; * helping students construct good learning methods; * developing students’ competency in communication with English; Specific learning outcomes of skills: * reading: can fluently read and understand articles of general topics and middle-scale difficulties, with a reading speed of 70 words per minute; * listening: can understand the common conversations and lectures; * speaking: can easily participate in the daily conversations and express certain ideas; * writing: can write short letters and articles with certain topics and make notes in English; * translating: can translate short English and Chinese articles into Chinese and English with the help of dictionaries, with a speed of 300 words per hour; Assessment criteria:(for every semester) * learning performance (including attendance and at least 8 coursework assignments): 20% * mid-term test (summative assessment): 20% * final examination(summative assessment): 60% The two summative assessments for each semester consist of similar questions format, checking students’ reading, listening, writing, and translation, there are no oral tests. The mid-exam is focused on the first half of the textbook, but the final exam covers the whole textbook. 2nd International Conference on Education Technology, Management and Humanities Science (ETMHS 2016) © 2016. The authors Published by Atlantis Press 640 2. Analysis of the Present Curriculum Design Required by the Ministry of Education of China, College English module is carried out in almost every college and university. Although the general outcomes and skills training requirements are set by the ministry, universities can make adjustments based on their own context so the curriculum of College English is actually a school-based curriculum development (SBCD). At YAU, all non-English major students are required to take College English. These students are mainly from science majors and possess different fundamental English competency because of varied secondary education levels. Curriculum design is “the arrangement of the components of a curriculum... 1) aims, goals and objectives; 2) subject matter or content; 3) learning activities; and 4) evaluation” [1] and designing, implementing and evaluating the curriculum is an important professional responsibility of teachers in higher education, so the curriculum is designed using this presage by several experienced teachers of the English department, other teachers taking the role of implementers. Students are assigned an English teacher for the first semester and can choose the teacher by themselves in the following three semesters. Regardless of the teacher, the whole curriculum process will be developed as shown in Figure 1: Figure 1: Curriculum Process of College English Module in YAU Curriculum development is a creative process, but takes “place in response to the increasing demands/wishes of many and varied stakeholders”[2] This is no different at YAU. When assigned to be the English teacher, one would be given a document clarifying the teaching outcomes of this course, which is a SBCD decided by deans of the teaching group. It is not greatly different from the requirements of the Ministry of Education. These aims, goals and objectives are set based on the supposed needs of the students and future employers who are key stakeholders. According to Ramsden, “it is necessary to look at how students have experienced learning in order to judge the extent to which development takes place.” [3] Before getting to university, all students have received at least 6-year basic English education; however, because they come from different places (cities or villages) and schools, they have obtained varied English competency, so it is not ideal to put every student at the same line and suppose they can achieve the same learning outcomes regardless of their own majors and real expectations. The curriculum content, “subject matter of the teaching-learning process” including “knowledge, skills and values associated with the subject”, [4] is decided by the teachers in charge of the module and all teachers get the same teaching materials and requirements. This brings advantages to make the implementation of the whole module under control, but on the other hand brings too much limits for teachers to make reasonable changes according to students’ presage as Print says two of “criteria for selecting effective content are:... 5 Learnability and 6 Interest”.[4] When taking the assignment, every teacher has been clearly told about the assessment criteria and requirements. These two assessments, mid-term and final, are summative assessments and the exam papers are designed by several appointed teacher according to the requirements of the deans. Based on the generally low competency of students, the papers are mainly targeted to the contents of the textbooks (without too much flexibility) so they cannot show the real development of English competency of students. Most students just focus on the textbooks and take part in the exams by reciting the answers of the pre-done exercises, which make students more emphasize the lectures
[1]
P. Black,et al.
Assessment and Classroom Learning
,
1998
.
[2]
Kathryn Ecclestone,et al.
Empowerng or Ensnaring?: The Implications of Outcome‐based Assessment in Higher Education
,
1999
.
[3]
F. Marton,et al.
ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING—II OUTCOME AS A FUNCTION OF THE LEARNER'S CONCEPTION OF THE TASK
,
1976
.
[4]
Celia Popovic,et al.
Teaching for quality learning at university. (2nd Edn.)
,
2013
.
[5]
Murray Print,et al.
Curriculum Development and Design
,
2020
.
[6]
F. Marton,et al.
ON QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING: I—OUTCOME AND PROCESS*
,
1976
.
[7]
Elaine Martin,et al.
Dissonance in Experience of Teaching and its Relation to the Quality of Student Learning
,
2003
.
[8]
Kathryn Ecclestone,et al.
'I know a 2:1 when I see it': Understanding criteria for degree classifications in franchised university programmes
,
2001
.
[9]
J. Biggs,et al.
Teaching For Quality Learning At University
,
1999
.