0% found this document useful (0 votes)

100 views50 pages

Ferris and Hedgcock CH05

Uploaded by

Meryem MOLDUR

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

100 views50 pages

Ferris and Hedgcock CH05

Uploaded by

Meryem MOLDUR

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 50

Chapter 5

Course Design
and Instructional
Planning for the L2
Writing Course

Questions for Reflection

1. Do you recall any of the course syllabi or outlines presented in second-
ary or postsecondary courses that you have taken? If so, how did you use
them, if at all? Do you remember aspects of syllabi or course outlines that
helped you with your own learning, time management, and achievement?
2. In what ways should the design of a literacy course—in particular, a
course that focuses on developing writing skills—accommodate stu-
dents’ sociocultural and educational needs? How should a course plan
reflect an educational institution’s requirements and philosophy?
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

3. What features of a literacy or composition course necessitate some-

what different planning strategies than might be required for a content
course in an academic discipline such as physics, history, sociology, art
history, or literature?
4. Considering your experience as a student, what are the essential com-
ponents of a successful lesson? What activities or tasks should form the
basis for lessons designed to teach literacy skills, including the writing of
academic and nonacademic genres? How should lessons be sequenced,
and why?
5. Based on your experiences as a student (and, if applicable, as a teacher),
identify the hallmarks of productive classroom instruction (planning
and delivery)? What is required for effective classroom management?

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 147

In Chapters 1–3, we introduced theoretical foundations of L1 and L2 writing in-

struction, explored the unique demands placed on L2 writers, and surveyed influ-
ential pedagogies. This chapter introduces operational principles for planning L2
literacy courses that feature writing; it also proposes flexible tools for designing
and executing appropriate lessons for cultivating L2 writing skills and strategies.
Building on the socioliterate, integrated-skills approaches addressed in Chapters 3
and 4, we will suggest procedures for designing courses, planning lessons, and con-
structing purposeful classroom tasks.
To understand the complexity of these processes and to execute them in the
“real world,” it is instructive to examine the theoretical and empirical bases of in-
structional design. Paradoxically, L2 writing—despite its strongly “applied,” prac-
tical orientation and close connection with TESOL (see Chapter 3)—presently
lacks a robust, or even coherent, framework for curriculum and syllabus design.
In their comprehensive survey of the field, Leki and colleagues (2008) observed
that

one would be hard pressed to identify foundational concepts that have

aspired to provide a single, guiding basis on which to organize writing
curricula comprehensively . . . [L]ittle research and few models of L2
writing have tried to relate curriculum content directly with L2 students’
writing achievements. (pp. 72–73)

Hinkel (2011b) further commented on this ongoing gap in the knowledge base
supporting L2 instructional practice: “[R]esearch on principles for effective cur-
riculum design or instructional methods for L2 writing is conspicuously missing”
(p. 531). This peculiar curricular void can be partly attributed to the minimal
attention devoted to curriculum and instructional methods in the discipline’s re-
search agenda (Leki et al., 2008; Polio & Williams, 2011). Hinkel (2011b) aptly
portrayed this state of affairs:
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

[F]ew, if any, combinations of techniques or theoretical models have been

empirically validated in terms of their pedagogical effectiveness or even
usefulness. Rather, many of the currently prevalent approaches to teach-
ing L2 writing have become established instructional practices that typi-
cally fall under the umbrella term of “what works” (also known as “best
practice”) in pedagogy and curriculum design. (pp. 531–532)

Of course, L2 writing professionals are deeply engaged in instructional design,

though curricular models tend to be influenced predominantly by conventionally
repeated practices. “Trends in L2 writing instruction and curricula,” wrote Hinkel
(2011b), “have gravitated toward . . . sets of incremental teaching techniques and
theoretical approaches that have gathered enough momentum to form particular
schools of thought” (p. 531), such as those surveyed in Chapter 3. Despite the lack
of a unified curriculum development model in L2 writing instruction, we do not

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
148 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

have to rely solely on “what works.” Rather, we will propose a framework for in-
structional design informed by the rich tradition of curriculum theory in general
education and language education. General education sources are helpful for their
breadth and theoretical depth, though they may lack the disciplinary depth that
we seek. Curriculum studies in language education exhibit a historical bias toward
oral and aural skills (Leki et al., 2008), yet their principles are appropriately sensi-
tive to the complexity of language development and the details of classroom peda-
gogy (Nation & Macalister, 2010).

Curriculum Development Essentials

Before we delve into the procedural dimensions of course design and instructional
planning, it will be helpful to review essential principles of curriculum making, a
complex process that Null (2008) described as “both timeless and context depend-
ent” (p. 478). It is timeless “because it deals with how to take knowledge of any
kind and connect it with a group of students located in time and space” (p. 478).
Curriculum design must also be contextually grounded, for its purpose entails
“the preparation and transmission of knowledge within an institution whose pur-
pose is to educate” (p. 478). Tyler (1949), a social scientist and pioneer of cur-
riculum development in the 20th century, proposed four global questions to guide
educators, administrators, and materials writers in creating curricula:

1. What purposes does the institution, program, or teacher wish to fulfill?

2. What educational experiences are most likely to lead to the fulfillment
of these purposes?
3. How can educational practice best organize these experiences?
4. How do we evaluate the success of these experiences?
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

To address Tyler’s questions in a recursive, cyclical manner, Taba (1962) intro-

duced a seven-step process intended to offer professionals concrete procedures for
curriculum development:

1. Diagnose needs;
2. Formulate objectives;
3. Select content;
4. Organize content;
5. Select learning experiences;
6. Organize learning experiences;
7. Determine what procedures and performances to evaluate—and how to
do it.

Rather than addressing global principles concerning the design of entire cur-
ricula, this chapter will concentrate chiefly on the day-to-day planning tasks of
writing teachers: planning courses, sequencing components of a writing cycle, de-
signing lessons, and executing learning tasks. In our first section, we survey the
needs assessment process, as addressing the unique characteristics of L2 writers is
essential to shaping effective L2 literacy instruction.

Needs Assessment: Mapping Learner Needs

and Institutional Expectations
Needs assessment (NA) broadly entails “procedures for identifying and validating
needs, and establishing priorities among them” (Pratt, 1980, p. 79). This process
entails gathering and interpreting information about a particular “client group” in
an institutional setting. In education, NA focuses on learners’ needs: “Once they
are identified, needs are translated into learning objectives, which in turn serve as
the basis for further development of teaching materials, learning activities, tests,
program strategies,” and so forth (Brown, 2011, p. 269). In their framework for
designing L2 curricula, Nation and Macalister (2010) proposed interrelated cat-
egories of qualitative and quantitative information to be gathered in NA. The first
of these is environment analysis; the second consists of needs analysis (a term that
we will use interchangeably with needs assessment). We will briefly characterize
both processes and their component processes, which should yield reliable and
valid data for constructing appropriate course plans, lessons, assignments, and as-
sessments. Where relevant, the discussion refers to Figure 5.1, which presents a list
of tools for gathering objective and subjective NA data.

Environment Analysis
In environment analysis (Tessmer, 1990), teachers and curriculum developers care-
fully examine “the factors that will have a strong effect on decisions about the goals
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

of the course, what to include in the course, and how to teach and assess it” (Na-
tion & Macalister, 2010, p. 14). Also known as situation analysis (Richards, 2001)
or constraints analysis, environment analysis offers assurance that the design, con-
tent, delivery, and evaluation of a course or curriculum can actually be carried
out. For example, common constraints that can undermine the potential success
of a curricular innovation include class size, a shortage of material resources, in-
adequate instructor training, and institutional resistance to experimentation with
novel instructional methods (see Chapter 3).
Learners. Chapter 2, which explores L2 writer populations in some detail, cata-
logues both general and specific factors that we should use to identify students’ in-
structional requirements. This information should, of course, include demographic
information such as age, multilingual proficiency, cultural background and affilia-
tions, educational experience, career aspirations, and so on (Graves, 2000; Richards,
2001; Smagorinsky, 2008). Clearly, we want to know who our student writers are,

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
150 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

administrators, administrators,
* S urveys and q u e s tio n n a ire s. Collect needs data by devising and
administering context-appropriate surveys and questionnaires to relevant
stakeholders (i.e , current and former students, writing instructors, instructors in
the disciplines, and so on). Target information can include biodata, opinions,
and self-assessments. Surveys and questionnaires can be distnbuted and
colfected in traditional paper-and-pencil format. To maximize efficiency and
return rate, administer electronic surveys via a course management system
(CMS) or free online tool such as Survey Monkey.
» interview s. Using a simple interview schedule or protocol, conduct structured
or semi-structured interviews with stakeholders (learners, writing instructors,
administrators, i n s t r u c t o r s jn gt^ademic discip lm e s , prospective employers, and
administrators,
* in s titu tio n a l data c o lle c tio n and analysis. Gather and analyze
documentation such as curriculum plans, goat statements, course syllahi,
textbooks, assessment plans, placement and exit exam data (e.g., TOEFUBT,
i ELTS, or PTE scores), student grade reports, samples of students’ written
administrators,
administrators,
* O bservation. With the help of a systematic, easy-to-use observation
instrument, conduct observations of writing courses, writing center tutorials,
and faculty meetings. Follow an individual student or cohort of Student writers
administrators, administrators,administrators,

FIGURE 5.15.1 Tools for

fo r collecting
c o lle c tin g objective
o b je ctive and
and subjective
su b je ctive needs assessment
assessm ent
data. Adapted
A dapted from
from Brown
Brown (1995, 2011) and and Nation
Nation and
and Macalister
M acalister (2010).

what they know and can do, and what they need to learn in order to advance as
writers and readers. As we will demonstrate below, demographic data collected from
them should be used systematically to design course syllabi and classroom tasks
(Brown, J. D., 2011, 2012; Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998; 1998; Long, 2005b; Nation &
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Macalister, 2010).
Teachers. Working from a thorough profile of the student population is vital to
the success of implementing a curriculum or course, but NA must consider all stake-
stake
holders (Brown, J. D., 1995,
1995, 2011, 2012; Graves, 2000; Long, 2005a, 2005b; Richards,
2001). Naturally, the instructors who teach the courses that we design, as well as those
who will work with our students in subsequent courses, are equally important stake-stake
holders in the process of literacy education. Among the factors that should be taken
into account in environment analysis are instructors’ level of training, their familiar-
familiar
ity with course material, and their versatility in adopting and adapting novel instruc-
instruc
tional approaches, methods, strategies, and content. Similarly influential information
includes teachers’ expertise in selecting and creating appropriate material, as well as
their skill in developing assignments and assessing student writing (see Chapters 6
and 77).
). Furthermore, one should never overlook factors such as teachers’ workloads,
their willingness to take on instructional innovation, or the ways in which their teach-
teach
ing philosophies align or clash with a new approach to instruction or course design.
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 151

Situation. For the same reasons that we should consider the diversity of learn-
ers in our classrooms and the educators who serve them in making pedagogical
decisions, we should be mindful of the student demographics described in the
research literature. As discussed at length in Chapter 2, an obvious characteristic
to consider in environment analysis is the type of institution in which students
undergo L2 instruction (Long, 2005a; Nieto, 2002; Nieto & Bode, 2008; Nieto,
Bode, Kang, & Raible, 2008; Silva, 1993). Even within a single institutional setting,
we also find diverse types of students. Students at Japanese universities enrolled
in EFL writing courses, for instance, may have received little or no preparation
as writers of English, despite having studied English continuously throughout
secondary school (Casanave, 2012; Kubota & McKay, 2009; McKay, 2012). In the
North American context, high schools and community colleges often serve a high
proportion of immigrant students, depending on geographical location. In con-
trast, four-year colleges and research universities may attract a high proportion
of international students while also serving immigrant and Generation 1.5 stu-
dents. Community colleges often serve higher numbers of immigrant students, as
these institutions offer opportunities to transfer to four-year institutions (Bailey &
Santos, 2009; Ching, McKee, & Ford, 1996; Patthey et al., 2009). Chapter 2 also
highlighted the need to distinguish between intensive English programs (IEPs)
and college or university departments that offer composition courses (DeLuca,
Fox, Johnson, & Kogen, 2001; Dimmitt & Dantas-Whitney, 2002; Matsuda & Mat-
suda, 2009; Roberge, 2002, 2009; Silva, Leki, & Carson, 1997; Tribble, 2010). In
L2-track writing courses that parallel NS courses, instruction may be driven by the
mainstream curriculum and L1 composition principles (see Chapter 3). Conflicts
may understandably arise between philosophies and approaches to the literacy
processes that students must master (cf. Atkinson & Ramanathan, 1995; Costino
& Hyon, 2007; Johns, 2003, 2008; Kroll, 2001; Silva et al., 1997).

Needs Analysis
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Following on Pratt’s (1980) broad definition, Nation and Macalister (2010) pro-
posed that needs analysis (NA) “examines what . . . learners know already and what
they need to know” (p. 24). The NA process likewise targets a course’s goals and
content, ensuring “that the course will contain relevant and useful things to learn”
and “asking the right questions and finding the answers in the most effective way”
(Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 24). To make the range of needs more manageable,
Hutchinson and Waters (1987) introduced two categories of educational needs:
target needs (the things that learners need to accomplish in the target setting) and
learning needs (what learners must do in the learning process). Nation and Ma-
calister (2010) further subdivided target needs into three helpful subcategories,
which we describe below: necessities, lacks, and wants. These divisions help us to
set present knowledge and skill apart from required knowledge and skill, as well
as to distinguish objectively observable needs from subjectively perceived needs.
Necessities. As the label implies, necessities refer to the requisite knowledge
and skills that students must master and that a course or program may target
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
152 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

(Brindley, 1984). Nation and Macalister (2010) suggested that “the first thing to
look at in necessities is the demands of the target tasks” (p. 27). For academic and
preacademic L2 writers, relevant literacy tasks might include:

j listening to academic lectures and taking notes;

j revising and reviewing class notes to prepare for timed quizzes and
exams or to integrate into formal writing assignments;
j participating in classroom speech events, such as interacting with instruc-
tors, collaborating with peers during group activities, and so forth;
j writing under timed conditions, such as short-answer and essay exami-
nations;
j writing brief academic texts (writing-to-learn assignments) such as jour-
nal entries, reading responses, text summaries, blog posts, lab reports,
problem sets, memoranda, and so on;
j planning and writing extended (learning-to-write) academic assignments
such as literature reviews and bibliographic, analytic, and argumentative
essays;
j producing and delivering discipline-specific texts and genres such as
annotated bibliographies, book reviews, data-based research papers, case
studies, classroom presentations (using PowerPoint, Keynote, or Prezi,
for example), posters, websites, digital and print portfolios, and so forth.

After identifying the particular products and performances that students will
be required to generate (see Figures 5.1 and 5.2), we can then analyze these genres
and texts formally by scrutinizing their rhetorical arrangement, linguistic features,
and lexical properties. Further, as we argued in Chapter 4, we must examine them
contextually by studying the socioliterate situations, values, and practices of the
discipline, literacy, or Discourse where these texts enjoy currency and prestige
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

(Belcher et al., 2011; Hyland, 2009; Johns, 1995a, 1995c, 1997, 1999, 2003, 2009a).
These analyses often intersect with aspects of environment analysis (particularly,
situation analysis) and are crucial, as they serve as the basis for Step 2 in Taba’s
(1962) framework: formulating course goals in measurable terms, a process de-
scribed below. A further outcome of appraising necessities serves Step 7 in Taba’s
model, evaluating the effectiveness of the course syllabus or curriculum. With an
inventory of necessities, we can later ask important questions such as: “Can we
see . . . evidence that the course has helped the assignment writing of learners . . . ?
What kind of improvement did the course make? Did learners . . . do well in their
later study?” (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 28).
Lacks. Not surprisingly, discovering lacks involves starting with the broad ques-
tion, “What do . . . learners lack?” (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 25). As with the
assessment of necessities, capturing lacks (gaps) is complemented by situation
analysis (Richards, 2001; Tessmer, 1990). In the case of L2 composition instruction,

we can penetrate concerns about writing proficiency by reviewing the quality of

students’ written production (see Chapter 6). Ideally, we should also inquire into
the effectiveness of their composing processes and strategies (see Figure 5.2). We
can draw accurate inferences about processes based on writing quality, but the
most reliable means of identifying lacks and weaknesses is to observe student writ-
ers engaged in a composing cycle (Nation & Macalister, 2010). In addition, our
discussion of environment analysis featured the role of teachers, whose functions
as respondents and assessors can contribute a great deal to identifying lacks or
gaps in a course or program. Nation and Macalister (2010) recommended posing
broad questions about what instructors see as the strengths and weaknesses of
students’ writing assignments and processes.
Students, of course, are key stakeholders whose writing performance and
perceptions can point toward specific lacks that a course of instruction should
address. We can gather valuable data concerning students’ literacy needs, includ-
ing those pertaining to writing skill, by measuring their composing proficiency
by gathering writing subscores on international college entrance examinations
such as TOEFLiBT, IELTS, PTE, and local placement and exit instruments (see
Chapter 6). Also valuable, though unfortunately less reliable, are students’ per-
ceptions of their needs as L2 learners and writers, as we note in our discussion
of wants (see below). We should query student writers about their skills and skill
gaps; we should additionally capture what they believe about the writing skills
and strategies that they will need in the future, keeping in mind that students’
self-reported perceptions may not always fully or objectively reflect their measur-
able needs (Dörnyei & Taguchi, 2009; Molle & Prior, 2008). To complement and
counterbalance the inherent subjectivity of student perceptions (which we might
more appropriately characterize as wants), we can elicit somewhat more objective
information about lacks by investigating their learning and writing processes with
the aid of questionnaires, brief reflection memos, five-minute papers, and so on
(Brown, 2011; Long, 2005b; Nation, 2009; also see Figure 5.1).
Wants. As the label indicates, wants (also called felt needs) constitute a dis-
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

tinct category from needs (Brindley, 1984), as “learners have their own views about
what they think is useful for them” (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 29). Learner
wants are perhaps the easiest category of NA information to capture and are “use-
ful in working out whether . . . learners’ views and the needs analyst’s views are the
same or not” (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 29). Because teachers have ready access
to their students, they can easily elicit student wants and expectations with simple
tools such as informal conversations, interviews, and surveys (see Figure 5.1). Be-
cause student wants, expectations, and perceived needs often shift, it is useful to
collect such information at intervals, preferably by deploying a variety of elicita-
tion methods (Brown, 2011; Buckingham, 1981). Not only can learner wants be
inherently unstable, they can also generally only be captured through self-report,
a sometimes unreliable means of data collection (Brown, 2001). That is not to say
that we should not focus on self-reported wants, expectations, or perceived needs.
To the contrary, knowing what our student writers think about their felt needs is

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
154 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

vitally important to engaging them in the learning process and to adjusting our
teaching appropriately. At the same time, as student opinions and beliefs may not
always (or even often) align with genuine necessities and lacks, it is appropriate
to view these data sources as complementary. Preserving the complementarity of
necessities, lacks, and wants also facilitates triangulation, a procedure in which
“researchers [compare] different sets and sources of data with one another” (Long,
2005a p. 28). Triangulation strengthens the credibility and validity of NA data and
their interpretation (Brown, 2001; Gilabert, 2005), establishing a strong founda-
tion for formulating goals and constructing a syllabus (Taba, 1962).

Needs Assessment Instruments

Having considered the “what” and “why” of the NA process, we now turn to the
“how.” As Buckingham (1981) observed, “a great variety of assessment instru-
ments and processes are available” (p. 15), making our task as needs analysts
both easy and difficult. The abundant array of NA tools and instruments eases
our workload, as we can adapt existing models, rather than starting from scratch.
On the other hand, the “great variety” can make the selection of appropriate and
practical instruments a formidable challenge. As our scope here is confined to the
context of L2 writing courses (in contrast to program-wide NA and curriculum
development), we concentrate primarily on instruments that are easy to adapt
and construct, practical to administer, and simple to analyze in the context of an
individual program or course. Figure 5.1 lists and describes numerous tools for
conducting NA, several of which we will examine below. We encourage readers
seeking more extensive treatments to consult the NA sources listed under Further
Reading and Resources at the end of this chapter.
Familiar to teachers and students in many educational contexts, survey and
questionnaire instruments offer several practical benefits, including their ready
availability, the ease with which they can be administered, and the abundance of
quantitative and qualitative data that they can supply (Brown, 2001; Dörnyei &
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Taguchi, 2009). Electronic administration can enhance the ease and speed of
data collection while also significantly raising survey return rates. Needs ana-
lysts can construct and efficiently distribute paperless surveys using a course
management system (CMS) (e.g., Canvas®, Moodle®, or BlackBoard®) or a free
(or low-cost) online survey tool (e.g., surveymonkey.com, surveygizmo.com,
kwiksurveys.com, or Google Docs). Well-known drawbacks of questionnaire
research include their reliance on self-report, as we noted above. Moreover,
“questionnaires are notoriously difficult to design well” (Nation & Macalister,
2010, p. 29): Articulating the variables being surveyed requires great clarity and
precision (Brown, 1997). For instance, survey writers must take care to avoid
excessively long, ambiguous, negative, and incomplete items (Brown & Rodg-
ers, 2002).
Instead of presenting a static, “one-size-fits-all” survey or interview format,
we offer the variables in Figure 5.2 as elements to consider in constructing needs
analysis instruments tailored to your learner population, institutional setting, and
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 155

1. S tu d e n t d e m o y ra p h ic s
□ Age J Educational experience
LI Gender J Work background
U Nationality □ Career aspirations
□ Ethnic backgroiMid _i immigration status {if A m icable)
LI Primary languaêls) □ Family background
2. S tu d e n ts ' tc v o l o f LZ p ro fic ie n c y and' k n o w le d g e
□ Mea&ured proficiency in reading, listening, speaking writing, and grammar
U 12 vocabulary size
3. Students' L1 an-d L2 literacy skills
□ Lilerale experience and knowledge in home <L1}cultureis), including school-based and oilier literacies
LI L iir a te experience and knowledge in target (L2) culture including school-based and olhcr literacies
4. S tu d e n ts ' in tc re u ltu ra l a n d c r o s s - lin g u is tic k n o w le d g e
□ Prior experience In she L2 end other sociocultural environments
IJ Fa mil rarity with sociocultural and pragmatic dimensions of iho L2
□ Awareness of cross-linguistic similarities and differences. especially those involving writing systems
aftd affecting literacy development
5. S tude nts' interests
U General topics and issues of H e ra s t to students
□ Personal experiences and areas of Interesf
□ iâliunaii'^rofessionai experiences and a n i l or Merest
S. Students' preferred learning styles and strategies
□ hjcpectalions cojKerning teaching and assessment methods
□ Preferred methods and strategies far learning
U Preferences (and d ere fe re n ce s) for collaborative learning
□ Preferences (and d ere fe re n ce s) for digitaity mediated reaming. communication, and collaboration
7. S tude nts' attitudes and m o tivationa l profiles
IJ Attitudes toward1themselves as learners
□ Attitudes toward fellow learners
□ Attitudes loward me le a d * *
U Attitudes toward formal instruction
□ Attitudes toward: the target language (L2}, Its user communities, and jI s literate practices
S. S tude nts' and o th e rs ’ learning aims
IJ Reasons for enrolling in an L2 Heracy course
□ Short- and torvgMerm goels as L2 readers and enters
□ Expectations concerning course outcomes
9. T a rg e t c o n t e x ts )
□ Situations where students wfll engage in literacy events (particularly writing!* beyond the classroom
□ Topics about w‘t:d i students will read and w; 1k in iheir Reids or study and careers;
LI Disciplinary and professional settings where students will use and produce L2 text a * d speech
□ Interactional ares relabcnship vaâbles (e.g., identity, power, gender, sociel status, and so on)
10. L ite ra cy s k ills and stra tegie s needed fa r academic-, profession al, and w orkp lace tasks
U Purposes for which studenis w i read and produce L2 lexis
□ Need tor understanding and giving directions
□ Need lor seeking and sharing mformation in print-based and digital environments
LI Communicative functions genres, and registers typical in students' larget disciplines, professions, and
________klerate communitas_______________________________________________________________________

FIGURE 5.2 Checklist of demographic, educational, motivational, and aspira-

tional variables to consider in the NA cycle. Based on Chapter 2 and adapted

from Hedgcock and Ferris (2009); compare with Brindley (1984); Brown (1995,
2001, 2011); Graves (2000); Seymour and Walsh (2006).

teaching style. To exemplify, the sample questionnaire in Appendix 5.1 provides a

sample of a pre-course survey developed by an instructor preparing a syllabus and
course outline for an EAP course for international students. Clearly geared toward
nonimmigrant students with limited experience in English-medium classrooms
(see Chapter 2), items include both controlled-response prompts (which allow for
easy quantitative analysis) and constructed response (or open-response) prompts
that elicit qualitative, verbal input from students. To make the items easy to re-
spond to, they are presented as descriptors or belief statements to which students
assign a numeric value based on a fixed Likert-type scale. The belief statements,
self-assessments, and prompts are specifically designed to invite students to re-
port their perceived expertise as readers and writers, in addition to their opinions
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
156 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

about the uses of digital technology, collaborative work, drafting processes, feed-
back, and revision. Because he administered the survey prior to the start of the
course via CMS, the instructor used student responses to address these issues in
the course syllabus and to plan instruction to accommodate the reported needs,
preferences, and learning styles of the class. Questionnaire results not only guided
the instructor’s course planning, but also provided information about which
students could subsequently reflect as a measure of their literacy development
as the course progressed. During periodic writing conferences and online chats,
the teacher informally queried students about their level of satisfaction with the
course, the usefulness of the assignments, and the value of peer and instructor
feedback. Near the end of the term, the instructor devised a retrospective assign-
ment in which students wrote a comparison of their initial perceptions and their
cumulative achievements as writers.
Regularly examining formally and informally gathered self-report data about
their students’ work patterns, study habits, drafting styles, task type preferences,
and so forth can effectively inform teachers of ways in which they might adjust or
alter their planning and teaching. Informed by student perceptions, opinions, and
self-assessments, teachers can design syllabi, plan lessons, construct assignments,
and lead activities that capitalize on students’ strengths and overcome their weak-
nesses. Also valuable is information about how to avoid student resistance to dis-
preferred task types and modalities, such as collaborative activities, peer response
tasks, and digitally mediated interaction. If the teacher elicits student attitudes
toward these learning tools, she or he can take steps to provide appropriate learner
training in advance—or perhaps opt for alternatives. Instruments used to collect
students’ wants and perceived lacks (opinions, attitudes, beliefs, and expectations)
are perhaps most suitably developed by adapting and combining styles and strate-
gies resources already available.1 Other valuable NA instruments include inter-
views with stakeholders and classroom observations, admittedly labor-intensive
methods that can nonetheless yield useful complementary data for triangulation
with complementary NA data sources.
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

An equally rich source of qualitative data that is usually readily accessible to

the needs analyst consists of classroom instruction itself, as well as interactions
outside the classroom (e.g., writing center tutorials, student–teacher writing
conferences, and so on). Like interviewing, observation can be time consuming
and labor intensive, as is the process of analyzing and interpreting observational
data. Nonetheless, observations of learners, teachers, and tutors in the settings
where they most frequently interact can generate vital triangulation data (Brown,
2011; Saginor, 2008). Simply defined, observation entails “the watching of be-
havioral patterns of people in certain situations to obtain information about the
phenomenon of interest” (Johnson & Christensen, 2008, p. 211). Not so simple,
alas, are the tasks of selecting from among the more than 200 instruments pres-
ently available, learning how to use them consistently and systematically, taking
complete field notes, and parsing notes and transcripts for analysis (Brown &
Rodgers, 2002). With the help of a few easy-to-use, context-appropriate observa-
tion instruments, however, capturing and interpreting samples of instructional
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 157

• Like the assessment process (see Chapter 6), NA must involve processes
and instruments that are reliable, valid, and practical to administer.
• As needs (necessities, lacks, and wants) vary over lim e and by context, NA
administrators, administrators,
■ Q uality NA must address multiple needs and feature a combination o f data-
gathering tools lhat elicit evidence for triangulation
• NA instrum ents and processes should be selected and adapted for the
particular context. Ready-made, "off-the-rack" tools can provide helpful
starting points but usually require tailoring to the local setting.
• Effective NA is continuous and cycJical, rather than sporadic. Experts
recommend conducting NA tjofore the start of a course, during the early
stages o f a course, at one or two intervals during a course, and at ils
conclusion. In this way, formal and informal NA output can inform subsequent
administrators,
• In reporting NA outcomes, work toward consensus on high-priority
necessities, lacks, and wants by emphasizing robust results and discoveries.
Respect and accomm odate minority perspectives as much as possible.
(Brindley, 1984; Brown, 1995, 2011; Buckingham, 1981. Long, 2005b; Nation &
administrators,
administrators,

FIGURE 5.3 Guidelines for effective needs assessment (NA). Adapted from Brind-
ley (1984); Brown (1995, 2011); Buckingham (1981); Long (2005b); Nation and Ma-
calister (2010); Tyler (1949).

interactions can contribute meaningfully to the NA process.2 For example, obser-

vation can provide insight into a program’s implicit theories, ethos, and values.
The process can also reveal how the stated principles of a program or instruc-
tor match pedagogical practice, pointing toward necessities, lacks, and wants
(Nation & Macalister, 2010).
This brief survey of selected data gathering tools is designed to provide read-
ers with simple yet practical tools for conducting environment and needs analy-
ses efficiently. We conclude this section with Figure 5.3, which proposes general
guidelines for planning and carrying out an effective NA process, which can sub-
sequently lead to the formulation of objectives and course design.
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Setting Targets for Learning and Teaching:

Goals and Objectives
The immediate and natural result of NA involves the specification of aims or ob-
jectives, leading next to the selection and organization of content and learning
experiences—Steps 3 through 6 in Taba’s (1962) sequential framework. Although
it is common practice for NA procedures to culminate in formal reports dissemi-
nated to key decision makers (see Brown, 1995, 2011; Gilabert, 2005; Nation &
Macalister, 2010), we will advance to the identification and formulation of learn-
ing objectives for L2 literacy courses and units. A crucial component of curriculum
development and implementation, “objectives are the link that connects the NA
to the rest of the curriculum (i.e., to the materials, testing, teaching, and program
evaluation)” (Brown, 2011, p. 284). Systematic programmatic information (from
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
158 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

a satisfactory environment analysis) and data on student writers and their literacy
profiles (based on a careful appraisal of needs; see Chapter 2) should provide suf-
ficient material for outlining what Brown (2011) called “a defensible curriculum,”
course syllabus, or unit plan (p. 287). A defensible instructional framework is “one
that satisfies the . . . learning and teaching requirements of the students and teach-
ers within the context of particular institution(s)” (p. 269).
Goals, “the main purposes and intended outcomes of your course,” constitute
the global learning targets around which we design curricula, syllabi, and instruc-
tional units (Graves, 2000, p. 75). Most often expressed broadly, goals allow for
backward design planning (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005), which “begins with a focus
on the end results,” leads to the determination of acceptable evidence of student
learning, and consequently suggests specific options for planning learning experi-
ences and teaching (Shrum & Glisan, 2010, p. 92). Objectives, in contrast, consist
of a narrower range of desired outcomes or “statements about how . . . goals will
be achieved” (Graves, 2000, p. 76). As we work our way through objectives (e.g., in
a sequence of lessons or units as a course unfolds), we break goals “into learnable
and teachable units. By achieving . . . objectives, the goal will be reached” (Graves,
2000, p. 76).
Just as curriculum experts insist that NA results should directly inform course
goals, they similarly maintain that the formulation of goals and objectives should
be an integrative, reciprocal task. That is, goals frame objectives, while the in-
cremental or cyclical achievement of objectives should eventually fulfill goals.
Moreover, goals should guide (and be guided by) ongoing assessment of student
achievement, progress, and proficiency (see Chapter 6). Essential to connecting
objectives to goals is understanding the distinctions between them (and planning
courses, units, and lessons so that they lead to the fulfillment of goals). Simply put,
an objective “describes what learners will be able to do” (Shrum & Glisan, 2010,
p. 98). Whether they form the basis for a course, unit, or lesson, meaningfully
stated objectives “contain an indication of the realistic context” for which students
must exhibit knowledge and display a skill. Objectives should not “consist of a
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

listing of textbook exercises” or a sequence of instructional procedures (Shrum &

Glisan, 2010, p. 97). Rather, to be useful, objectives must state target outcomes in
terms of behavioral referents. Specifically, appropriate objectives “use action verbs
that represent desired student behavior. Verbs such as ‘learn’ or ‘understand’ are
too vague for use in objectives” (Shrum & Glisan, 2010, p. 97). Examples of suit-
ably (and measurably) formulated objectives would include: “Learners will be able
to describe their daily routine” and “Learners will be able to write an e-mail message
to a key pal” (Shrum & Glisan, 2010, p. 97). Useful action verbs in a category such
as collaboration might include co-create, compromise, contribute, give feedback, re-
ceive feedback, and share; measurable verbs in an information literacy category
might include determine significance, evaluate, gather, locate, and utilize (National
Writing Project, 2010, pp. 100–101).3 In contrast, examples of poorly crafted ob-
jectives might include: “The teacher will explain the key elements and sequence of
a good summary” and “Students will learn about topic sentences.”

To illustrate the interdependent relationship between objectives and goals,

consider the following goal statement for an advanced-level L2 literacy course:
“Students will be able to utilize the skills of reading and writing for the purposes
of: socializing, providing and obtaining information, expressing personal feelings
and opinions, persuading others to adopt a course of action in the targeted topic
areas” (Graves, 2000, p. 242). The objectives derived from the preceding goal state-
ment (below) are crafted to guide instruction and assessment over the course of a
semester or academic year.

Students will be able to:

j Read and comprehend materials written for [English speakers] when
the topic and language are familiar;
j Read simple materials independently, but may have to guess at mean-
ings of longer or more complex material;
j Write short notes, uncomplicated personal and business letters, brief
journals, and short reports;
j Write brief analyses of more complex content when given the oppor-
tunity for organization and advance preparation, though errors may
occur more frequently. (Graves, 2000, pp. 242–243)

It is worth noting that these learning aims are expressed in terms of behav-
iorally observable (and, importantly, measurable) outcomes, framed by the “Stu-
dents will be able to . . . ” (SWBAT) stem. We find the SWBAT stem to be especially
useful in specifying particular performance targets, whether these are to serve as
macro-level goals (e.g., for a curriculum, course, or instructional unit) or as rela-
tively specific objectives (e.g., for an instructional unit, lesson sequence, or single
lesson) (Brown, 1995; Glanz, 2009; Shrum & Glisan, 2010). Irrespective of the
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

magnitude and scope of instructional aims, specific performance characteristics

enable the teacher to monitor student progress as reflected in expected outcomes:
“Clear goals help to make teaching purposeful because what you do in class is
related to your overall purpose. Goals and objectives provide a basis for making
choices about what to teach and how” (Graves, 2000, p. 79).
The predetermination of learning outcomes and their behavioral referents
“may be seen as conflicting with the essential speculative nature of the education
process” (White, 1988, p. 30). Some critics have charged that stating objectives
and teaching toward them trivializes education by forcing instructors to focus on
narrowly defined skills and written products (Benesch, 2001; Hillocks, 1995; Jo-
seph, Bravmann, Windschitl, Mikel, & Green, 2000). It is certainly appropriate to
exercise flexibility in planning courses and leading lessons; we should allow for
contingencies and discoveries that emerge as students grapple with novel content,
experiment with new strategies and skills, and diverge from well-laid plans (Roen,

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
160 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

Pantoja, Yena, Miller, & Waggoner, 2002; Smagorinsky, 2008). However, embracing
the unexpected and departing from a solid outline does not necessarily preclude
gearing instruction toward valid aims (which are ideally derived directly from
systematic NA). Indeed, teachers should view goals and objectives not as rigid,
prescriptive targets, but as flexible guidelines keyed to performance outcomes em-
bedded in the curriculum.
We encourage composition instructors to plan and evaluate courses, lessons,
and student performance with explicit reference to institutionally accepted bench-
marks for progress, achievement, and skill. Such benchmarks are commonplace in
primary and secondary education in many settings, but are perhaps less common,
consistent, and formalized in postsecondary education. We would nonetheless
encourage writing teachers at all levels to understand and implement goals and
benchmarks (often called standards in the United States) that are appropriate (or
mandated) for their student writers. For example, the Common Core State Stand-
ards (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010), developed to ensure “that
all students are college and career ready in literacy no later than the end of high
school,” describe global literacy outcomes and specific writing objectives for K–12
students that are “aligned with college and work expectations” (p. 3). Because the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) “lay out a vision of what it means to be a
literate person in the twenty-first century” (p. 3), they are as relevant to college-
level instructors as to K–12 educators. The following College and Career Readiness
(CCR) Anchor Standards for Writing frame benchmarks that are explicitly speci-
fied for each grade level (grades 6–12):

Text Types and Purposes*

1. Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics
or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
2. Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex
ideas and information clearly and accurately through the effective selec-
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

tion, organization, and analysis of content.

3. Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events us-
ing effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event
sequences.

Production and Distribution of Writing

4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organi-
zation, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, edit-
ing, rewriting, or trying a new approach.
6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing
and to interact and collaborate with others.

Research to Build and Present Knowledge

7. Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects based on
focused questions, demonstrating understanding of the subject under
investigation.
8. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources,
assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the in-
formation while avoiding plagiarism.
9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis,
reflection, and research.

Range of Writing
10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection,
and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two)
for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.

(Source: Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 41)

* These broad types of writing include many subgenres.

The CCR Anchor Standards not only lay out performance benchmarks around
which one could build a writing course or curriculum, but also convey an inte-
grated perspective on writing and academic literacies (see Chapters 3 and 4; cf.
Gottlieb, Katz, & Ernst-Savit, 2008; National Writing Project, 2010; Vause & Am-
berg, 2013). For instance, the document characterizes writing as “a key means of
asserting and defending claims, showing what [students] know about a subject.”
Specifically, the CCSS hold that students must “know how to combine elements
of different kinds of writing—for example, to use narrative strategies within argu-
ment and explanation within narrative—to produce complex and nuanced writ-
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

ing.” Further, students must demonstrate an ability “to use technology strategically
when creating, refining, and collaborating on writing” (Common Core State Stand-
ards Initiative, 2010, p. 41). Grade-level anchor standards subsequently articulate
college and career writing benchmarks, including this goal for writers in grades 11
and 12: “Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or
texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence” (Common Core
State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 45). To guide teachers and assessors, the anchor
standards further describe target skills and textual evidence for their mastery, as in
this benchmark: “Introduce precise, knowledgeable claim(s), establish the signifi-
cance of the claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims,
and create an organization that logically sequences claim(s), counterclaims, rea-
sons, and evidence” (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 45).
Established literacy goals and standards such as the CCSS can supply teach-
ers and curriculum developers with tremendously productive tools for planning,

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
162 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

teaching, and assessment, particularly when standards are comprehensive, specific,

and evidence-based. Equally valuable resources for the teaching of L2 writing (and
broader literacy skills) include standards developed by professional organizations
and educational agencies such as the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other
Languages (TESOL); the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and its
affiliate, the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC);
the National Writing Project (NWP); the National Assessment of Educational Pro-
gress (NAEP); and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
(ACTFL) (see the links and references in the Further Readings and Resources sec-
tion at the end of this chapter). The explicit instructional objectives in a curricu-
lum plan or course syllabus enable teachers to accomplish crucial design tasks.
These tasks include transforming needs into learning objectives, specifying teach-
ing and learning activities, adopting suitable course materials (see Chapter 4),
determining appropriate methods of learner assessment (see Chapter 6), and
evaluating teacher effectiveness (Calkins, Ehrenworth, & Lehman, 2012; Gottlieb
et al., 2008; Graves, 2000; Lea, 2004; NCTE, 2008; National Writing Project, 2010;
Panofsky et al., 2005; Robinson, 2011; Tanner & Tanner, 2007).
Naturally, making appropriate use of standards, goals, and objectives requires
caution and knowledge of the unique features of the local context. We conclude
this section by suggesting several general guidelines for formulating goals and ob-
jectives, planning courses, and carrying out instruction:

j The type and level of specificity of goals and objectives can vary.
j Objectives can (and often should) evolve as environmental constraints
and measured needs change—goals and objectives are most helpful
when they reflect the needs of learners in the local context.
j Instructors should formulate goals and objectives through a collabora-
tive process based on reliable NA evidence, ideally leading to the con-
sensual identification of reasonable teaching and learning aims.
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

j Though goals and objectives should be articulated clearly and concretely,

they should not be overly restrictive or prescriptive. Flexibly formulated
objectives enable teachers to plan instruction in ways that effectively
serve their learners (rather than confining or hindering teachers’ efforts).

(Sources: Brown, J. D., 1995, 2011, 2012; Hyland, 2004a; Smagorinsky, 2008).

From Goals and Objectives to Syllabus

As Robinson (2011) noted, “syllabus design is based essentially on a decision about
the ‘units’ of classroom activity, and the ‘sequence’ in which they are performed”
(p. 294). We have found it useful to think of a course syllabus as a guiding docu-
ment comprising two main parts. First, in addition to pre-revealing course goals, a
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 163

syllabus serves as a contract between instructor and students, summarizing expec-

tations and how they can be met (Hafernik, Messerschmitt, & Vandrick, 2002; Kroll,
2001; Robinson, 2011). Second, a syllabus provides a framework and planning tool.
It structures and sequences instructional aims, units, lessons, assignments, class-
room activities, and assessment procedures for both the instructor and students
(Bruce, 2005; Graves, 2000; Nunan, 2001). The checklist in Figure 5.4, though not

1. Descriptive Information _
u Course name, number, meeling times, location, and access y \
Information for course Websila or CMS v , \S /
□ Prerequisites and other requirements jU lf
□ Instructor's name and contact information (office location,
consultation hours. campus telephone number. e-mail address, or CMS ID)
2. Course Goals and Primary Content
□ Program-level and course-specific goals, optimally crafted in behaviorally
observable terms {e.g., Students will be able to |SW 0AT|. )
j Core course content; aspects of literacy and composing processes lo be
presented, practiced, and assessed
□ Dimensions of rtietoric, textual analysis, grammar, and vocabulary to be
addressed
Q Description of how students will stiow progress toward meeting aims (see item 7)
□ Quantify and scope of reading matenal lo be oovened in classroom {or online)
activities end writing assignments
3. Reading Materials
□ Bibliographic information for required and optional text sources: details about
their aveilability (including information about studenl access to digilal resources)
u List of reeding assignments, Iheir sequence, pega renges, and deadlines (if this
information can be determined in advance)
4- W riting and Multimodal Assignments
q Number and description of writing assignments, including information aboul
genre, length, use of published sources, etc. (see Chapters 4 and 6}
J Descriplion of assignments requiring mulli-drafting, peer response, teacher
feedback, online collaboration (e.g.. oo-construtlion of wikis or Googiedocs. etc.)
□ Indication of whicTi assignments will involve timed (in-class) or online writing
□ Policies governing late and revised assignments, collaboration, plagiarism, etc.
□ Presentation requirements, required or preferred slyle sheet {e.g., APA, MLA},
length criteria, text formatting, mechanical conventions, digital file formatting, etc.
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

5. tn struction al P rocesscs a nd P roced ures

□ Descriplion of how class time and synchronous online sessions will be allocaled
(e.g., balance of planning, drafting, online and face-to-face collaboration, peer
review sessions, discussions, leclure, in-class writing, quizzes, etc.)
J Expectations for studenl preparedness and participalion in discussions, group
tasks, peer review sessions, contributions to eleclronic bulletin boards, etc
6. Course Requirements
□ Summary of compulsory assignments and their deadlines
□ Descriplion of assessment criteria, including how sludent vvorK will be evaluated
j Explicit policies concerning attendance, participation, missed assignments, etc.
7. Assessment Plan
□ Explicit description of assessment criteria and how they will be applied
q Account of how final course grades are weighted (if applicable) and calculated
li Justification of assessment and marking procedures
3. Course Schedule or Timetable
'■J If appropriate, a session-by-session or weeK-t?y-week calendar of dates, themes,
events, assignments, and deadlines (considerable flexibility may be required with
course oultines to accommodate inevitable delays and negotiated syllabi j

FIGURE 5.4 Syllabus checklist.

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
164 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

exhaustive, offers a framework for providing students with the information they
will need about course goals and content, workload, participation requirements,
institutional and classroom policies, assignments, and performance expectations. A
further function of Figure 5.4 is to serve as an advance organizer for the discussion
of course planning that follows. A sample syllabus for a postsecondary composition
course appears in Appendix 5.2.

Nuts and Bolts: Prioritizing, Sequencing, and Planning

for Writing
One of the most challenging tasks facing novice and even experienced classroom
teachers is mapping a sequence of instructional activities to scaffold student
learning over the span of a course. Nuts and bolts of this demanding planning
process include selecting and organizing content (course books, primary reading
selections, and so on), thematic and skills-based units, literacy tasks, and class-
room processes (see Chapter 4). As Widdowson (1990) observed, a syllabus fun-
damentally formalizes targeted knowledge and skills and “arranges this content
in a succession of interim objectives” (p. 127). Before introducing practical tech-
niques for completing these tasks, we offer several guiding insights and principles
to assist in laying groundwork for developing a syllabus and course outline. Sma-
gorinsky (2008) identified developmental tendencies “that could help us make
decisions about what is developmentally appropriate” (p. 132). These tenden-
cies are consistent with Vygotsky’s (1978, 2012) sociocultural notion of the ZPD,
the distance between an individual’s current developmental state and the next
(more sophisticated) stage of cognitive functioning (Chaiklin, 2003). Primarily
descriptive of the maturation of cognition and reasoning among children and
adults, these developmental trends have also been observed among adult learn-
ers. In literacy development, learners tend to advance to reasoning about complex
concepts and relationships after capturing structurally simpler ideas and con-
nections. They similarly move from understanding concrete (or literal) notions
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

before moving on to abstract ideas and symbols, shifting from a personal to an

interpersonal (or multipersonal) orientation as they read and write (Smagorin-
sky, 2008).
As sociocultural approaches have increasingly been applied to literacy devel-
opment and instruction (see Chapter 3), Vygotskian concepts have gained wider
influence in conceptualizing writing processes and models for teaching them
(Daniels, 2001; Glenn et al., 2007; Hyland, 2004a; Mahn, 2008; Prior, 2006). We
must nonetheless exercise caution when interpreting developmental patterns for
instructional planning. For example, Smagorinsky (2008) acknowledged the soci-
ocultural view that “teaching leads development,” stressing that teaching itself does
not necessarily precipitate or produce learning. He also pointed out that:

if you think that students are at a particular level, don’t teach to that level.
Rather, lead them to a higher level of development—think of it as a sort
of cognitive carrot and stick. Instead of designing a static curriculum
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 165

targeted at students’ presumed levels, teachers who follow this principle

are attentive to where students are and where instruction might take
them. (Smagorinsky, 2008, p. 133)

Informed by sound developmental principles and reliable NA information,

teachers need a systematic means of selecting texts, assignments, activities, and
processes. Once selected, these components must be sequenced into a meaningful
progression leading to the achievement of learning outcomes. Macken-Horarik
(1996) proposed a model for constructing genre-oriented unit plans and course
outlines in which four learning domains allow for the flexible arrangement of
situations and topics. Placing different demands on learners, these experiential
domains enable teachers to recycle topics and genres through multiple levels of
complexity in multiple registers (Hyland, 2004a), as shown in Figure 5.5.
Based on Macken-Horarik’s (1996) model and contemporary approaches to genre
instruction, Hyland (2004a) proposed a matrix of genre families that enables the course
designer to determine how “elemental genres are similar and make it possible to link
one text with the next in a learning sequence designed to scaffold progress through
texts that draw on the same grammatical features to express broadly similar purposes”
(p. 111). Though not a linear or sequential model, Figure 5.6 illustrates textual rela-
tionships that would allow the teacher or course planner to focus on a text family, pro-
totypical feature or function, or genre category in organizing an instructional outline.

Dom ain: Everyday ■+ Applied > Theoretical > Critical

Type o f Common Praclical Formal Informal
K now ledge sense t ducat ion
Id e n tity and Familiar Practitioner Impersonal Complex
Roles
Topics and Home, family Work skills, Technical and interpretive,
Language community domestic profession a! persuasive
hobbies

FIGURE 5.5 Experiential content domains. Based on Macken-Horarik (1996).

Text Family Prototypical Feature(s) Sample Written Genres

_______________________ and F unctions_______________________________
Exchanges Joint construction internet chat, text (SMS)
messages., personal e-mail
correspondence
Forms Pnnted or digital, with Simple and complex
respondent spaces formatted texts
Procedures Sleps to achieve a goal Instmclions, procedures,
and protocols
Informational Texts Provide news or data Descriptions, explanations,
and reports
Story Texts Retell events and respond to Recounts and narratrves
them
Persuasive Texts Argue for or against a Expositions, discussions,
_________________________ premise or thesis____________ and opinion texta_____

FIGURE 5.6 Genre families for course planning. Adapted from Hyland (2004a).
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
166 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

When designing units of work (e.g., curricula, course outlines, project sequences,
thematic or genre units, assignment sequences, and lesson plans), we should con-
sider several factors likely to affect a unit’s success:

1. Length. Source material should be sufficient (and sufficiently extensive),

but not so long or demanding that learners might lose interest.
2. Development. One sequential component should lead smoothly and pro-
gressively toward the next, reflecting a logical (e.g., linear, hierarchical) or
ideally recursive (e.g., cyclical, spiral, or matrix) arrangement (see below).
3. Coherence. The unit exhibits a discernible sequential logic.
4. Pacing. Each component (task, activity, literacy assignment) moves
along at a comfortable but purposeful speed, with no single component
disproportionately longer than others.
5. Outcome. At the conclusion of the unit, students exhibit an ability to
perform a related series of targeted tasks. (Adapted from Richards, 2001,
p.166; additional sources include Aranha, 2009; Bruce, 2005; Graves, 2000;
Hyland, 2004a, 2006; Nation & Macalister, 2010; Smagorinsky, 2008)

Decisions about how to organize a unit or course involve the relevance of top-
ics and themes, reading selections, processes, and products (Smagorinsky, 2008).
Planning decisions also involve how much instructional time should be devoted to
these components. Hyland (2004a) observed that units of work in literacy courses
are perhaps “best seen as real-life activities or situations in which people do spe-
cific things through writing” (p. 115). He recommended assigning a high priority
to writing activities by focusing units on one of the following:
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

j A written text. The focus and goals of the course may feature a text such
as a sales letter, a job application letter, a blog entry, a narrative essay, or
a section of a longer genre, such as a literature review from a research
paper, the problem–solution stage of a narrative text, or the discussion
section of an engineering thesis.
j A particular writing strategy. Strategies might include collecting sources
for and planning an argumentative essay, planning and drafting a report
of a workplace simulation, or the collaborative writing of an investiga-
tive news report or business plan (see Chapter 3).
j A sequence of genres (or part of that sequence). Based on course length
and students’ language proficiency, literacy skills, and genre familiar-
ity, a focus on genre sequence might entail the development of a series
of oral and written communications responding to a customer inquiry

(e.g., in a workplace setting) or compiling a professional webfolio

(including, for example, a résumé or CV, professional autobiography,
goal statement, documents demonstrating academic and professional
achievements, and so on) and preparing for a job interview. (Adapted
from Hyland, 2004a, p. 115)

To plan a course or unit, teachers frequently create an outline or a calendar; in

fact, postsecondary institutions generally require both a syllabus and course out-
line. A common method for constructing an outline or calendar relies on a linear,
item-by-item approach, which we do not recommend. Such a planning method
overlooks the need to account for absenteeism, to recycle processes and strategies,
and to accommodate diverse learning styles (see Chapter 2). Citing evidence from
research on human memory and cognitive development (e.g., Baddeley, 1997;
Bruner, 1962), Nation and Macalister (2010) argued that “the worst kind of linear
development assumes that once an item has been presented in a lesson, it has been
learned and does not need focused revision [review]” (p. 82). While recognizing
the need to plan instruction chronologically, Nation and Macalister (2010) pro-
posed “variations of linear progressions [that] try to take account of the need for
repetition,” including spiral and matrix models (p. 82).
Figure 5.7 presents a scheme and set of procedures for incorporating overlap-
ping phases of a process-oriented multi-drafting cycle (see Chapter 3), which re-
flects features of the spiral curriculum described by Nation and Macalister (2010)
and which is adapted specifically for writing instruction. These phases represent
overlapping, recursive, and increasingly complex phases and subprocesses, not all
of which are mandatory (Clark, 2011; Williams, 2003). As Hillocks (1995) ob-
served, “the general model of the composing process” can be useful, but “it can-
not begin to account for variations in process that appear to be dependent on a
variety of factors” (p. xix). We would stress that the stages leading from prewriting
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

through publishing are not mechanical, autonomous steps to be trivialized or slav-

ishly followed, although we have found that students often find discrete steps to be
helpful and even reassuring.
Similar to the cyclical model shown in Figure 5.7 (which is inspired by a spiral
design), a matrix model entails planning multiple and diverse encounters with
the same skill, strategy, or genre. In a matrix design like the one illustrated in
Figure 5.8, “one unit of progression is systematically varied against another, so that
the same items are met with different contexts” (Nation & Macalister, 2010, p. 83).
For instance, the same task or skill (e.g., writing from sources, planning for writ-
ing, drafting) receives systematic attention across diverse topics, themes, genres, or
assignments. Each lesson consists of alternative matchings, offering students the
benefit of repeated opportunities to encounter texts, genres, and literacy strategies,
thereby enriching both declarative and procedural knowledge (Baddeley, 1997;
Bruner, 1962).

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
168 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

administrators,
J Involve wnters in text-biased tasks featuring both reading and writing (see Chapter 4),
J Lead activities requiring students to wnte from texts.
J To prepare for intensive writing (i.e . drafting and revising formal assignments), allow
for extensive writing for discovery, both in class and out; promote production of texts
that address the tasks, audiences, and genres at hand,
J Weave idea generation tasks (eg., brainstorming, mapping, clustering, cubing, e tc )
into the instructional sequence. Practice multiple pre-writmg activities (see Chapter 4),

administrators,
administrators,
J Encourage students to plan as they go along and to understand the evolving
administrators,
administrators,
J Continuously supply content- and theme-based 'nput in the way or readings,
discussions, and so forth to develop and sharpen students' emerging ideas and plans.
J Allow sufficient time for students to exchange ideas, share their plans, and elicit new
information for further development of a schema for the writing task

administrators,
administrators,
J Give students practice envisioning the text's audience, the reader’s knowledge and
expectations, strategies
administrators, for satisfying
administrators, reader expectations, and soon
administrators,
J Provide students with practice incorporating peer and expert feedback into their
administrators,
administrators,
J Continue to supply content- and theme based input by way of readings and
discussions to supplement and narrow students' emerging ideas and plans.

Feedback, Incubation,
administrators, and Revision
administrators,
administrators,
J Demonstrate productive and supportive ways in which students can respond to tfis
administrators, administrators,
J Conduct peer response sessions in a safe environment where students act as critical
readers, but not as evaluators (see Chapter 7).
J Emphasize the benefits of responding to the work of others, noting that the greatest
contribution of pee? feedback may be to the peer reviewer, rather than the writer.
J Demonstrate procedures and techniques for evaluating peer and expert feedback,
and for applying that information to students' changing drafts.
J Build in incubation time between composing subprocess.

administrators,
administrators,
□ Build sufficient time into the teaching sequence for peer, teacher, and self-editing of
mature, reader-centered prose (see Chapter 7).
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

administrators,
J Provide opportunities for students' "finar products to be disfribuled. shared, and
administrators,
J Systematically engage students m making decisions regarding written products that
might be included in their writing portfolios (if applicable).

FIGURE 5.7 Writing process schema for course planning: A cyclical model
Adapted from Elbow (1973, 1998a, 1998b); Johns (1997, 2003); Kroll (2001); Mur-
ray (1987); Nation and Macalister (2010); Weigle (2014); Williams (2003); Zamel
(1982, 1983).

To operationalize an iterative, recursive unit or course plan, we must first and

foremost establish student and program goals as our highest priority, organizing
material, instructional procedures, and tasks accordingly (Brown, J. D., 2012; Glanz,
2009; Glenn et al., 2007; Purgason, 2014; Robinson, 2011; Shrum & Glisan, 2010).
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course 169

n
■4-1 +*
. E . c . C
I f <U m a* ^ 3J

* E. i i i I 51
je cn *e ra I & JZ os

§ | i g 1 8
5.5 a < a *
o « O a> o a> o ^
1“ c *" £ »- c <- c
aj & at <u
O o O

Task/Skilt 1 Lesson 1 Lesson 2 Lesson 3 Lesson 4

Task/Skill 2 Lesson 5 Lesson 6 Lesson 7 Lesson 6
Task/Skill 3 Lesson 9 Lesson 10 Lesson 11 Lesson 12
Task/Skill 4 Lesson 13 Lesson 14 Lesson 15 Lesson 16

FIGURE 5.8 Sample of a matrix-based unit or course outline. Adapted from

Nation and Macalister (2010).

Second, it is crucial to understand how our planning decisions (materials selection,

sequencing, balance of instructional activity types, assignment development, and
so on) will help students to meet course goals. If textbooks and assignments are
prescribed by an academic department, program, institution, or educational agency,
our syllabi will still not write themselves; our teaching will be most effective when we
can justify—to ourselves and to our students—our planning decisions with direct
reference to course objectives (Cumming, 2003; Nation & Macalister, 2010; Smagor-
insky, 2008). Third, flexibility is essential: Teachers must devise course schedules that
are realistic for them and for their students, as no timeline can be etched in stone.
Some teachers can efficiently follow and complete a detailed, preplanned course
timetable. New teachers and those assigned to teach a course for the first time may
prefer a highly structured course calendar, step-by-step lesson outlines, and detailed
assignment descriptions inherited from more seasoned instructors. We readily ac-
knowledge the value in working from an established course outline and tested lesson
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

scripts. Before they gain their footing and develop confidence and flexibility, novice
teachers and newcomers can benefit tremendously from following a prescribed plan
and replicating a veteran teacher’s syllabus and instructional methods. In contrast,
more experienced teachers may find it difficult to adhere too closely to a course
outline that lays out a day-by-day plan for a multiweek module, 10-week term, or
15-week semester. Under certain conditions, teachers can work with students to ne-
gotiate a syllabus, involving learners in decision making about literacy development
tasks, reading selections, the nature and number of assignments, multi-drafting pro-
cesses, revision requirements, assessment criteria, portfolio contents, and so forth
(Bamberg, 2012; Nunan, 2001; Shaw, 2009). Under such circumstances, a quarter- or
semester-length timetable is perhaps unnecessary. Admittedly, successfully deliver-
ing a negotiated or process syllabus requires even more scrupulous attention to cur-
ricular goals and course objectives, as teachers must ensure that writers achieve the
outcomes stated in the syllabus without the explicit structure of a detailed timetable
(Breen, 1987; Breen & Littlejohn, 2000; Clarke, 1991).
Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
170 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

With these general planning precepts in mind, we can begin to lay out the work
of a thematic unit within a course or an entire semester with institutional and
student learning goals (as operationalized in our course objectives) as clear, meas-
urable targets (Shrum & Glisan, 2010). It is useful to start the process with an aca-
demic calendar or planner showing the exact number of traditional or virtual class
meetings to plan for. Holidays and planned cancellations (e.g., professional con-
ferences, in-service training sessions, and so on) should then be noted; required
make-up meetings should be built into the schedule. Class days should also be re-
served for prescribed midterm and final examinations to give a clear picture of ex-
actly how many meetings can be planned for teaching, workshops, peer response
sessions, writing conferences, and the like. We further suggest designating one or
two sessions per term as “free” or “flex” (flexible) sessions, if the academic calendar
permits. Flex sessions can provide highly valuable padding that allows the teacher
to carry over units, tasks, and assignments without having to rework the entire
course timetable when a class falls behind schedule, as many inevitably do. If the
course proceeds as planned, flex sessions can then be used for extra writing time,
teacher–student conferences, portfolio preparation, and even working ahead.
Next, it is a helpful to schedule deadlines for formally assessed writing assign-
ments, particularly if those deadlines are prescribed by the program, department,
or institution. We recommend working backward from target outcomes and final
submission deadlines to include intermediate deadlines for drafts, peer feedback
sessions, editing workshops, student–teacher conferences, and so forth (Glanz,
2009). The sample syllabus and course outline in Appendix 5.2 illustrates one way
in which the backward design planning method (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) can
be employed. We recommend allocating adequate time for multi-draft assign-
ments and revised texts, particularly near the beginning of a term, when writ-
ing assignments tend to take longer to work through. Extra class periods may be
necessary early on to discuss preliminary drafts, demonstrate and practice peer
response techniques, and revise assignments in class or online.
Many experienced instructors likewise find it valuable to build into the course
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

timetable sufficient time for them and their students to read assigned texts, practice
prewriting and drafting techniques, and work through peer response activities. The
timetable should also allow sufficient time for the teacher to annotate and evalu-
ate student writing (see Chapters 6 and 7). We similarly recommend as much time
between class sessions as is practical to make a multi-draft approach worthwhile,
particularly if multi-drafting is a central feature of the course. To maximize the multi-
drafting approach and provide sufficient incubation time between drafts, it can be
useful to initiate a new writing assignment while the preceding one is still in progress.
For example, it may be time-efficient to collect a set of short assignments for feedback
or assessment while students embark on a more involved and complex assignment.
Once core assignments are in place and deadlines for preliminary work (drafts,
peer and teacher feedback, revision, and so on) are established, the course outline
has a skeletal form that allows for the planning of reading assignments, discussions,
lectures, student presentations, writing group sessions, peer response workshops,

online chats, and other class activities. If reading figures prominently in the course
objectives (as Chapter 4 strongly suggests it should), reading selections should be
assigned with great care so that they correspond meaningfully to the themes, gen-
res, rhetorical patterns, and discursive forms to be featured in the syllabus, as well
as the writing assignments and literacy tasks that are based on them (Hirvela, 2004;
Hyland, 2004a, 2006; Johns, 1997; Kroll, 2001; Smagorinsky, 2008). These guide-
lines should apply as readily to the planning and delivery of online and hybrid
literacy courses as to traditional-format courses. Of course, planning for an online
or hybrid course will likely necessitate careful management and deployment of the
digital resources available (i.e., CMS platforms, websites, blogs, wikis, social media
platforms, chat tools, slideshow software, audio and video editing software, and the
like) (Bedard & Fuhrken, 2013; Hewett & Ehmann, 2004; Jensen, 2011; Kessler, Os-
koz, & Elola, 2012; National Writing Project, 2010; Oxford, 2009; Reinders & White,
2010; Spector, 2012; Tekobbe et al., 2012; Warnock, 2009; Wilbur, 2010).
Instructors who use published anthologies and rhetorical readers as required
textbooks will often find that reading selections in such collections are presented
as units, topically linked, and connected to particular genres (e.g., critical and per-
suasive essays, summaries, op-eds, and so on) or specific literacy tasks (e.g., ana-
lytic and critical reading, text analysis, planning for writing, writing from sources,
and so forth) (Hewings, 2010). Examples of themes included in contemporary
mainstream and L2 composition textbooks include affirmative action, educational
policy, environmental controversies, gender issues, globalization, human sexuality
and equality, immigration, language rights, multiculturalism, racism, reproduc-
tive rights, and so forth. Where such textbooks are not part of the curriculum, a
thematic approach may still be used as the basis for syllabus design, with a the-
matic unit revolving around an identifiable topic or context (Keller, 1999; Shrum &
Glisan, 2010; Smagorinsky, 2008). As with writing assignments, reading assign-
ments should be allotted generous time. Lengthy reading selections may need to
be divided into smaller parts to enable students to complete them and to provide
for effective treatment in class (Bernhardt, 2010; Grabe & Stoller, 2014; Hirvela,
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

2004; Nation, 2009; Toledo, 2005). Finally, teachers should lay out their plans so
that they and their students can see the chronology of the entire term, whether in
print or digital form. Before finalizing the course schedule, it is wise to ensure that
adequate time has been allocated for especially labor-intensive literacy tasks (e.g.,
extended reading selections, multistage writing assignments, research projects).
Because it is so easy to underestimate the time required to get things done in and
outside of class, we urge readers to adopt a ruthlessly realistic approach to dedi-
cating time to teaching and learning activities. In fact, we have at times advised
apprentice teachers to write their course and lesson outlines, assign a reasonable
time frame for each activity or assignment, and then go back and double the time
designated for each step. For multi-draft assignments, teachers should track the
sequence they have sketched to allow enough time for multiple iterations of draft-
ing, feedback, revision, and editing (Kessler et al., 2012; Kroll, 2001; National Writ-
ing Project, 2010).

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
172 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

Lesson Planning: Practices and Procedures

Our discussion now turns to the day-to-day demands of planning and delivering
lessons, a process that may make the greatest contribution to the development
of students’ literacy knowledge and skill. Somewhat paradoxically, principles and
techniques for lesson planning tend to be neglected, if not entirely overlooked,
in composition studies. Before we introduce these principles and techniques, we
should consider Smagorinsky’s (2008) commonsense observations about the basic
value of careful planning: “It’s important to design good individual lessons that
are related to the unit goals. It’s also important for the lessons to be interrelated
and to build cogently toward the unit goals” (p. 184).

Identifying Lesson Objectives

In the same way that the instructional objectives specified in a syllabus identify the
knowledge and skills that students will display at the end of a course, effective les-
son objectives describe the observable behaviors that students will demonstrate at
the end of a class period, lesson sequence, or unit (Glanz, 2009; Purgason, 2014;
Shrum & Glisan, 2010). If instructional objectives are clearly specified in the sylla-
bus, identifying lesson objectives should be an easy task when it comes to planning
individual class periods, whether physical or virtual. Lesson objectives should ema-
nate directly from instructional objectives and at least indirectly from program or
course goals. Consider, for example, this performative aim from the CCR Anchor
Standards for Writing presented earlier in this chapter: “Write narratives to develop
real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen de-
tails, and well-structured event sequences” (Common Core State Standards Initia-
tive, 2010, p. 41). A corresponding performance objective for a lesson derived from
this course or curricular aim might read “Plan and compose the opening passage of
a first- or third-person narrative.” The following multistage, collaborative writing
assignment might embed this intermediate or enabling objective:
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Draft the opening passage of a story about one of the three photos
posted on the blog available on our course website. Write two to three
paragraphs (250 to 400 words or so) describing the image and the set-
ting for your story. Your blog post might even begin part of the story. Your
classmates will read and comment on your entry; each writing group
will then select one opening passage and collaborate on constructing a
short story based on that opening passage. Envision as your audience
both the other members of your writing group and the entire class.

The anticipated outcome is described in terms of an observable, measurable

student performance as well as a written product that students can work with and
that can ultimately be published, shared, and assessed. The objective statement is
also worded with action verbs such as “compose” and “describe” (as opposed to

verbs such as “learn” or “understand,” which are difficult to observe and even more
difficult to appraise) (Shrum & Glisan, 2010).
Many experienced and skilled teachers plan and execute productive lessons with-
out writing out their objectives in detail, but effective teachers do have a clear pur-
pose in mind when they select classroom tasks and organize them into coherent
lessons. As Glanz (2009) emphasized, this purpose or aim “will be the backbone of
the lesson. All activities should point toward the achievement of that aim” (p. 85).
It is advisable for both novice and experienced teachers to identify lesson objectives
routinely in their planning (Brown, 2007; Glenn et al., 2007; Graves, 2000; Smagor-
insky, 2008). Explicit, measurable objectives help teachers to unify the components
of their lessons, allowing them to determine what students already know and can
already do. Effective planners then decide how to engage students in tasks that lead
to intermediate and terminal objectives, visualizing lessons “as clusters or sequences
of activity” and blending content with activity (Shrum & Glisan, 2010, p. 98). Think-
ing carefully about how to lead students from their current level of skill toward es-
tablished standards also enables teachers to make their aims explicit and transparent
to students, who can then understand the purposes underlying classroom activities
and assignments, as well as how these activities lead to achieving course goals.

Sequencing and Organizing a Lesson Plan

A lesson plan can take many forms, depending on the time constraints and per-
sonal style of the individual teacher. Regardless of what it looks like, a lesson plan
should provide the teacher with a sequential outline for presenting materials,
delivering information, interacting with students, and leading students through
structured and unstructured activities. Much more than a mere step-by-step chro-
nology of classroom events, however, a lesson plan is a practical, tangible, and
potentially dynamic tool for meeting student needs as operationalized in course
objectives. It serves as a vital link between curricular goals and the learning that
we wish to bring about among our students (Brown, 2007; Cruickshank, Jenkins, &
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Metcalf, 2011; Glanz, 2009; Purgason, 2014). In this sense, the lesson is where the
known (instructional objectives, texts, and so on) meets the unknown (the novice
writers in our writing courses). At the same time, the aim of systematic lesson
planning “is not to write a script, but to try to anticipate how classes will go from
day to day” (Smagorinsky, 2008, p. 184).
Hillocks (1995) pointed out that mapping out instruction is initially an explor-
atory endeavor, as we need time to get acquainted with our students: “We cannot
begin planning, except with general outlines, until we know what students do as
writers” (p. 132). Because we cannot possibly anticipate every aspect of what hap-
pens in our classrooms, we can think of lessons as opportunities for experimenta-
tion. Not all lessons or activities will succeed. We can be prepared for this outcome,
however, by expecting the unexpected (e.g., a technology failure, a large number of
absences, finishing early, running late, and so on). It makes sense to build contin-
gency plans into a lesson outline. We can also improve our teaching effectiveness by

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
174 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

reflecting on what works well and what does not work so successfully with the stu-
dents in our own classes (Bailey, Curtis, & Nunan, 2001; Cruickshank et al., 2011;
Falk, 2012; Glanz, 2009; Murphy, 2014; Richards & Farrell, 2005). Hillocks (1995)
offered sound planning advice in noting that “the thoughtful teacher, in searching for
ways to help students learn more effectively, will plan real trials (what researchers call
quasi-experiments), determine what effect they have, even as the trial goes forward,
and consider new options as a result” (p. 125). Most teachers, even those seasoned and
self-assured enough to conduct entire lessons with no written notes, are aware of the
benefits of advance planning, which can lead to a willingness to abandon their plans
when necessary (Smagorinsky, 2008). A prepared lesson plan, whether a general list of
activities or a meticulously detailed sequence of procedures, facilitates processes such
as post-lesson evaluation, problem diagnosis, and skills enhancement.

The Mechanics of Lesson Planning

In purely mechanical terms, a lesson plan can take any number of forms: Some
teachers write their lesson outlines by hand; others may word process and print
them, whereas still others may prepare them in digital form for use on laptops
and tablets in the classroom. Teachers working in wired environments can prepare
their class plans using interactive software such as PowerPoint, Keynote, or Prezi,
enabling them to project outlines and materials onto a screen or array of monitors
(Christel & Sullivan, 2010). In contrast, a low-tech lesson plan can easily be printed
out on notecards. For some teachers, it is enough to write out lesson notes before
class to put the content and sequencing into their heads; in this way, they don’t
need a written plan during the lesson. Whatever form a lesson plan takes, it should
be readable, convenient to refer to in class when needed, and usable as a future
record of what took place. Rather than proposing a rigid or prescriptive model for
planning L2 literacy instruction, we would like to offer a few general guidelines for
ensuring efficient planning and effective delivery. We believe that successful lessons:
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

j Involve learners in worthwhile, authentic literacy tasks and activities;

j Reflect variety in terms of types of activity and modality;
j Demonstrate differentiation or individualization to accommodate
divergent learning styles and expectations;
j Exhibit careful and appropriate pacing;
j Exhibit smooth transitions;
j Include phases with medial and final summaries;
j Include opportunities to monitor student engagement and learning; and
j Conclude with work that will facilitate natural follow-up in subsequent
lessons.

(Sources: Cruickshank et al., 2011; Glanz, 2009; Purgason, 2014; Schellekens, 2007)

The checklist in Figure 5.9 includes practical and procedural aspects of the plan-
ning process that methodologists and educators consider essential in constructing
a lesson. Appendix 5.3 contains an example of an authentic lesson plan that aims
to reflect these principles, procedures, and formatting options. Figure 5.9 focuses
principally on logistical elements, whereas Figure 5.10 focuses on pedagogical
moves and instructional procedures.
Although most of the items in Figure 5.9 are self-explanatory, a few are wor-
thy of elaboration. In addition to reviewing the lesson’s objectives, making a note
about the work that students did during the previous class and have done for
homework can give us a realistic feeling for what kinds of reading, writing, discus-
sion, and problem-solving tasks students are ready for next. This review process is
invaluable in managing time effectively. Preparing a list of equipment (e.g., laptop,
flash drive, speakers), materials, page numbers, and so on before class can prevent
the need to spend valuable class time getting organized. Having a prepared check-
list of student work to return and collect can likewise save time, as can dispensing
with announcements efficiently. Some teachers routinely write these on the board
or on a slide for students to read on their own; others prefer to make announce-
ments at the end of class, when they won’t have to be repeated for latecomers. On

i C ourse and Lesson Objectives

\ J Summary Or list of lesson objectives
| Work Previous!/ Completed
\ □ Account of reading, writing, discussion, and feedback completed in previous
j class session
! Materials
j 3 Textbooks and reading selections (print, digital, or both)
j J Instructional materials (e.g , digital resources such as text files and software;
i print resources such as handouts, worksheets, feedback guides, and so on)
\ □ Technological resources (a.g., laptops, tablets, smart phones, projection unit,
I and so forth}
; Class Management
I J Assignments to be given and collected
i j Housekeeping and class business {announcements, reminders, deadlines, and
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

j so forth)
| Lesson Sequence (see Figure 5.10)
j □ Time allocation tor lasks and activities
j J Variety of activity types (reading, drafting discussion, collaborative tasks, lecture,
i and so on)
I 3 Transitions between lesson phases and integration of activities
; j Coherence and aotrvily flow
! j Clear, explicit procedures for setting up collaborative and independent tasks
] Contingency Plans
■j Idoas for alternative lasks or activities in ease the lesson ends early or a lesson
\ component has to be abandoned
] P osf-Lesson Reflection and Solf-Evaluation
\ i Observations to keep in mind before planning Ihe next lesson
| □ Notations on successful tasks, procedures, and techniques
: j Comments on tasks, procedures, and techniques to modify

FIGURE 5.9 Lesson plan checklist.

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
176 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

an increasing number of campuses, instructors can also post informational mes-

sages on course websites and electronic bulletin boards.
The core lesson elements in Figure 5.9 refer to techniques for successfully ex-
ecuting the steps outlined in Figure 5.10. The first of these elements is time man-
agement—perhaps the most pervasive challenge for teachers in carrying out their
lesson plans. For this reason, a useful practice is to anticipate the time that each
activity in a lesson will take, adding a few extra minutes to that total or specifying a
range (e.g., 10–15 minutes) rather than an absolute time frame. This strategy gives
teachers a way of estimating what can reasonably be accomplished in a class period
(Glanz, 2009; Purgason, 2014). A general rule is that open-ended activities such as
unstructured discussions of texts, collaborative tasks, peer response workshops,
and student conferences frequently take much longer than teachers predict, partly

L e sso n P hase T e a c h e r A c tio n s S tu d e n t A c tio n s

1. A c tiv a tio n o f P rio r - Hetps students recall w hat tfiey *■ Repod on prior learning
L e a rn in g have learned ar practiced in
previous tesson(s)
» Auks studenls to deriwnstralje * Demonstrate new knowledge iiru
new knowledge and skiJIs skills tfirough recall and practice
2. Preview/Warm-up » Previews new tesson, connects • Respond to preview
new material lo prior learning
* Checks students' understanding
» Captures studenls' intcfesl and * Respond tc leader's prompts
simulates anticipation of lesson
content and Lyuks
3. L a s s o n C o re : * P re se n ts n e w m aterial, w ritin g » R esp o n d tD te a c h e r's
in s tr u c tio n , task, or actMly presentation (e.g., by taking
P ro c e d u re s , * M a y co nve y lesso n aim s nates, askin g q u e s tio n s )
Participation ■ Models task Dr activity, guiding * Observe modeli ng, ask questwnE
studenls lo engage wiin new
concepts and practice relevant
s tills * U n d e rta k e (tie ta s k Or activity
* Instructs students Ed complete individually or in groups
task or activity Individually or In
groups - Complete the task or activity
* Provides opportunities for independently
students lo practice using ne>v * Elicit teacher's assistance to
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Knowledge and skins complete me task, as needed

independently
* Encourages student involvement,
participation, and interaction
- Checks students' understanding
of material and concepts at hand
A. Closure « Prom pts students to reflecJ Dn * Discuss Dr describe what they
what they have practiced and have teamed or practiced
learned
» Links new learning to prior and *■ Discuss relationship of new
future learning learning to prior and future
leading
5. Follow-up and * Presents additional tasks or * Complete additional tasks Of
Preparation for activities to practice same activities
Nest Lesson concepts
* Prepares for future tasks and • Take nde to prepare forfurftier
learning objectives teaming

FIGURE 5.10 Conceptual framework for lesson sequencing.

because of the numerous unexpected—yet often productive—questions that can

emerge and partly because managing such activities requires added time. The
same can often be said of untested classroom tasks.
Related to the issue of time management is the principle that lessons should in-
volve variety in terms of task type and interactional styles (Glanz, 2009; Glenn et al.,
2007; Purgason, 2014; Shrum & Glisan, 2010). In an L2 composition course, it is
entirely appropriate for a significant amount of class time to be dedicated to the
practice of writing, to the discussion of writing processes, and to effective text con-
struction strategies. The classroom should serve not only as a workshop environ-
ment in which students produce and experiment with writing, but also as a setting
for meaningful, socioliterate activity that draws on teacher expertise and peer in-
teraction (Kroll, 2001; Smagorinsky, 2008; Smagorinsky et al., 2010; Weigle, 2014).
Similarly, because many composition courses are not only writing courses but
also reading courses (see Chapter 4), it is reasonable to dedicate a substantial por-
tion of class time to responding to, analyzing, discussing, and writing about the
required texts and genres featured in the syllabus (Hirvela, 2004; Hyland, 2004a;
Johns, 1997, 2003; Williams, 2003). Class meetings should likewise reflect a careful
balance between teacher talk and student talk, small group activities, class discus-
sion, and lecture (Schellekens, 2007). Classroom activities should also be linked
explicitly to one another and to the instructional objectives so that students can
see that lessons are internally coherent and connected to both institutional goals
and their own literacy goals (Glanz, 2009; Hyland, 2004a). Of course, implement-
ing transitions to link lesson components and establish coherence requires skill,
but transitions are a crucial part of the teaching process. Making explicit links is
easier when classroom tasks have a discernible purpose and are introduced with
transparent, easy-to-understand directions and procedures (see Chapter 4).
Whenever practical, lesson plans should involve careful thought about how
classroom activities will be set into motion by the teacher and students. It is also
sometimes necessary to have a contingency plan at the ready if the lesson con-
cludes earlier than planned (Cruickshank et al., 2011; Glanz, 2009; Smagorinsky,
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

2008). This alternate task or activity does not necessarily require elaborate ad-
vance preparation. Indeed, an alternate task could involve something as simple as
inviting students to freewrite on an aspect of a recent reading assignment, update
a course blog or wiki, or begin the next reading assignment. The point here is that,
even though these are straightforward solutions to the problem of underplanning,
they may not seem so straightforward when we reach the end of a class period with
10 or 15 minutes to spare. When armed with a practical contingency plan, teach-
ers can implement it seamlessly while engaging student writers in a valuable and
productive literacy task that accomplishes much more than filling an unexpected
time gap.
Post-lesson reflection should not be seen as an addendum. On the contrary,
we should view postinstructional evaluation as an integral part of meeting course
objectives and of promoting our own professional development (Bailey et al.,
2001; Murphy, 2014). Teachers can take simple yet productive steps to evaluate

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
178 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

a lesson outline at the end of a class session. For example, an instructor might de-
cide whether to repeat the same procedures if given a chance to reteach the lesson
or make changes. As Glanz (2009) advised, “it is always wise to evaluate a lesson
plan. . . . It’s especially important if the lesson fell short of your expectations the
first time around” (p. 94). In addition to recording a lesson’s successes and failures,
we might note how long each activity took. Many teachers use their post-lesson
observations and assessment as starting points for planning the next class period.
This cyclical practice provides the teacher and his or her students with a sense of
continuity from one meeting to the next, facilitating the process of tracking the
class’s progress through the syllabus. We recommend maintaining a “Notes for
Next Time” file for keeping track of macro-level observations (e.g., “Assignment 2
was too rushed”) and micro-level reminders (e.g., “Replace narrative reading as-
signment,” “Peer response session ran too long”).
We now turn to the central pedagogical task of lesson planning: laying out the
procedures involved in teaching a group of students in a meaningful literacy event
such as writing and providing them with substantive writing practice in the course
of a class period. The framework in Figure 5.10 presents a general outline for a
lesson sequence (i.e., that part of the class period focused not on classroom man-
agement but on teaching, learning, interaction, and literate activity—including
the production of written discourse). After whatever preliminary business pre-
cedes the actual lesson (see Figure 5.9 and the explanation that follows it), the
sequence ideally begins with a procedure in which students recall what they have
learned or practiced previously. This phase does not necessarily require an elabo-
rate, comprehensive review; it might involve a five-minute task in which students
write a quick summary of the preceding day’s discussion of a reading selection,
compose a three-sentence reaction to the instructor’s feedback on their last writ-
ing assignment, or complete a simple quiz on the text to be discussed in groups
that day. These straightforward techniques should reactivate students’ knowledge
and awareness to facilitate the introduction of new knowledge and to promote the
practice of new skills.
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

The preview phase is sometimes indistinguishable from the activation phase,

although previewing tends to direct students’ attention to what lies ahead. During
the preview, the teacher might briefly reveal his or her objectives before getting
into the heart of the lesson, although stating aims is not always necessary and may
sometimes be undesirable. The instructor should have identified achievable aims
for a lesson, but it is often preferable not to announce these aims, leading students
through an inductive sequence in which they explore texts, observe patterns, and
formulate inferences about text structure, composing strategies, and written lan-
guage on their own initiative (Brinton, 2014; Larsen-Freeman, 2003; Nassaji &
Fotos, 2011; Purgason, 2014). Glanz (2009) further recommended letting students
“derive the aim, rather than having the teacher state it at the outset” in order to
encourage them to “identify with the lesson and make it their own” (p. 85).
As the lesson gets underway, activities that might follow the summary task de-
scribed above would include a read-aloud of students’ summaries in small groups

or a discussion of the next writing assignment’s literacy goals. A follow-up to stu-

dents’ three-sentence responses to comments on their draft texts might serve as an
introduction to strategies for incorporating teacher feedback into a revised assign-
ment; a review of reading quiz answers would be a good way to use that exercise to
initiate a more detailed analysis of a text. Depending on students’ understanding
of the material, this portion of the lesson could last from five to fifteen minutes be-
fore giving way to the lesson core, where new material is to be introduced and new
skills are to be practiced. In the case of the discussion summaries and subsequent
read-aloud activity, the teacher might initiate students on a writing assignment
draft focused on the text that sparked the original discussion. One option would
entail brainstorming writing topics; another would involve instructing students to
begin writing based on a choice of focused prompts or initiating a collaborative
web search. To use students’ three-sentence reactions to essay feedback and the
subsequent introduction to incorporation strategies, the teacher might instruct
the class to begin working on revised drafts. Meanwhile, the teacher could discuss
revision plans with students in mini-conferences. Following a correction of the
reading quiz and a discussion of the solutions, the teacher might scaffold a class
or group activity in which students perform a detailed analysis of the text. In all
of these hypothetical situations, students become actively involved in tasks that
require them not only to recycle familiar knowledge, but also to practice new skills
and acquire new knowledge (Glenn et al., 2007; Hirvela, 2004; Hyland, 2004a;
Smagorinsky, 2008; also see Chapter 4).
Like the activation and preview segments, the closure phase may require very
little time. Closure is nonetheless an important process leading naturally and logi-
cally to the follow-up. In each case, closure might involve prompting students to
identify what they have practiced and why, and clarifying for them the purposes
that their work will serve. For the students who began composing initial assign-
ment drafts in class, a natural extension of this task would be to complete the
drafts and elicit peer responses to them at the next class meeting. Students who
were given instruction on incorporating feedback and who conferenced with the
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

instructor might be asked to complete their revisions and reflect on the value of
the feedback process. In the case of the students who practiced with text analysis,
the teacher might assign a brief, structured written analysis for the next class (see
Chapter 4). Alternatively, the teacher might ask writers to apply the same analytic
techniques to a different but related text in preparation for a class discussion. In all
of these scenarios, the conclusion of each lesson requires the application of previ-
ously introduced skills and knowledge, and the laying of groundwork for future
learning (Glanz, 2009; Smagorinsky, 2008).
At this juncture, it is worth reiterating several related points made earlier in this
chapter. The first is that, as with designing course outlines and unit plans, con-
structing lesson plans and putting them into action requires flexibility if the teacher
is to achieve instructional aims, satisfy student needs, and avoid persistent frus-
tration. The second point concerns the planning framework described in the pre-
ceding section, schematized in Figures 5.9 and 5.10, and exemplified in Appendix

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
180 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

5.3: The lesson design scheme we have sketched is intended to provide a general
heuristic for developing lessons and making them successful—it should not be ap-
plied zealously or rigidly. We nonetheless firmly believe that structure is necessary
in planning and teaching writing courses and that structure should be adjusted to
accommodate learners’ needs and the unexpected events that are inevitable in any
classroom. To paraphrase Hillocks’s (1995) notion of lesson planning, the most ef-
fective teacher of writing is the one who designs lessons as “trials,” expects lessons
to produce unanticipated results, and applies those results in subsequent teaching.
It is through this process that we discover “new options” (p. 125).

Chapter Summary
Course design and implementation constitute complex tasks for many composition
teachers. To make these tasks more manageable, this chapter has explored principles
and procedures for constructing syllabi, course outlines, unit plans, and lessons as
a direct function of identifiable student and institutional needs. We present the fol-
lowing summary statements as a general synthesis of the principles we have covered:

j A clear understanding of learners’ backgrounds, needs, expectations,

styles, and strategies, as well as institutional requirements (as identified
in systematic and ongoing needs analysis), is crucial to the formulation
of achievable course goals and instructional objectives.
j The most effective syllabi, course outlines, and lesson plans are those
that accommodate multiple, recursive writing processes by allowing
adequate time for reading and exploring genres, composing and revis-
ing drafts, giving and using feedback, and encountering new content.
j Maintaining a clear sense of instructional objectives in constructing
daily lesson plans enables the teacher to effect coherent instruction by
connecting tasks within lessons and by linking each lesson to past and
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

future lessons.
j Flexibility is essential in all aspects of instructional planning.

j Curriculum, syllabus, unit, and materials design: Brett and González-Lloret

(2011); Brown, J. D. (1995, 2012); Bruce (2005); Gottlieb et al. (2008); Graves
(2000); Harwood (2010); Jordan (2012); Markee (1997); Nation and Macali-
ster (2010); Pennington and Burton (2011); Richards (2001); Robinson
(2011); Smagorinsky (2008); Smagorinsky et al. (2010); Tomlinson (2010);
Warnock (2009); Waters (2011); Wilbur (2010)
j Lesson planning and instructional practice: Brinton (2014); Brown (2007);
Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Snow (2014); Christel and Sullivan (2010); Cruick-
shank et al. (2011); Glenn et al. (2007); Glanz (2009); Kirby, Kirby, and Liner
(2004); Pennington and Burton (2011); Purgason (2014); Roen et al. (2002);
Schellekens (2007); Shrum and Glisan (2010); Wyse, Andrews, and Hoffman
(2010)
j Standards, writing curricula, and instructional design: ACTFL (2012); Calkins
et al. (2012); Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010); Joint Task Force
on Assessment of the IRA and NCTE (2009); National Writing Project (2006,
2010); Vause and Amberg (2013)
ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines: http://actflproficiencyguidelines2012.org
Common Core State Standards Initiative: http://www.corestandards.org
Council of Writing Program Administrators: http://wpacouncil.org; http://
wpacouncil.org/positions/outcomes.html; http://wpacouncil.org/framework
National Assessment of Educational Progress (U.S. Department of Education):
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
National Council of Teachers of English, Standards for the Assessment of
Reading and Writing: http://www.ncte.org/standards/assessmentstandards
National TESOL Standards: http://www2.gisd.k12.nm.us/standards/esl/index
.html
National Writing Project: http://www.nwp.org
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Reflection and Review

1. In what ways can student background variables (e.g., primary languages,
prior education, educational and career goals, immigration status, motiva-
tional profile, and so forth) affect their potential performance in ESL and
non-ESL literacy courses? How can a systematic characterization of students’
backgrounds inform writing instruction?
2. Identify the distinctions among necessities, lacks, and wants in needs assess-
ment. Why are the differences important?
3. Describe the roles played by goals and objectives in the planning of syllabi,
course outlines, and lesson plans. Identify the advantages of linking goals and
objectives to course content and classroom tasks.

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
182 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

4. In what ways can a syllabus, course outline, or unit plan assist the teacher in
planning literacy instruction and writing practice? How can these tools assist
students in their literacy skill development?
5. What are the principal components of a writing lesson?
6. Explain specific methods for operationalizing reading, prewriting, compos-
ing, feedback, and revision tasks into a syllabus or lesson plan.

Application Activities
Application Activity 5.1
L2 Writer Profile
Using Figures 5.1–5.3 and Appendix 5.1 as starting points, devise a questionnaire
that you could administer to a prospective group of writers at an institution with
which you are familiar. Add or modify items that pertain to the population and
institution (see Chapter 2). Your purpose is to develop an instrument to use and
adapt in your own classroom teaching and action research. Solicit feedback on
your survey from your instructor, colleagues, classmates, and administrators. Fol-
lowing your revisions, administer the questionnaire to a class that includes L2
writers, compile the frequency data, and compose a profile of the sample. In your
report, suggest an instructional approach that would be appropriate and effective
for that group of writers.

Application Activity 5.2

Using the syllabus development checklist in Figure 5.4, compare the sample syl-
labus in Appendix 5.2 with a syllabus and course outline for a writing course at
a local school or college. Based on the criteria outlined in this chapter (including
Figures 5.6–5.8), prepare a written or oral assessment of the strengths and weak-
nesses of the sample syllabi in light of what you know about the institution, the
curriculum, and the learner population. In addition to the checklists, the follow-
ing questions may help to scaffold your comparative analysis:

1. What are the stated course goals and instructional objectives?

2. How well do course content and organization coincide with goals and objectives?
3. If you were to teach one of the courses, what changes would you make to the
syllabus? Why?

Application Activity 5.3

Assessing Lesson Plans
Compare the lesson planning tools presented in Figures 5.9 and 5.10 to the sam-
ple lesson plan in Appendix 5.3. Alternatively, compare these to one of your own
lesson plans, or to a lesson outline prepared by a colleague for an actual literacy
course. Based on the criteria presented in this chapter, assess the strengths and
weaknesses of the lesson plan in light of what you know about the course and
the students. To what extent does the lesson plan address instructional objectives?
What changes would you make to the lesson plan, and why?

Application Activity 5.4

Working With Lesson Plans
1. Referring to the lesson plan formats suggested in Figures 5.9 and 5.10 and
exemplified in Appendix 5.3, outline a simple lesson for a literacy course in
which you have conducted observations or worked as a practice teacher or tu-
tor. Alternatively, prepare a lesson outline for one of the following hypotheti-
cal situations:
a. An introductory session for a novice-level L2 literacy course in a second-
ary setting on writing brief (250 to 300 word) blog posts responding to a
literary text
b. An advanced-level IEP course on summarizing and paraphrasing sources
(e.g., textbook chapters, scholarly articles, web pages, and so forth) in
bibliographic essays (see Chapter 4 and Figure 5.6)
c. A community college remedial literacy course requiring students to para-
phrase and quote from academic sources (see Chapter 4)
d. A university composition course serving L1 and L2 writers who need help
supporting arguments with evidence in persuasive genres (see Chapter 4).
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

2. After writing (and, if possible, teaching) a lesson using the suggested format,
explain the revisions that you would make to the structure. What changes in
the format would make the plan easier to use?

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
184 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

Appendix 5.1
Writing Skills, Styles, and Preferences Questionnaire
Advanced Academic Writing for Multilingual Writers

A. S tude nt b a ckg ro u n d in fo rm a tio n .

Name:
f& Z z . / Home country:
4/ J Home lan^uage(s):

B. C la ssro o m w o rk styles.
DJ RECTI ON S: This portion of the survey will help your instructor understand tht
ways in which you prefer to complete class assignments. Think about your mos
recent experiences in college or university courses. For each statement, check the
numeric value that best descnbes your habits and preferences. Please be honest
Candid responses will give your instructor valuable information.
1 * Strongly agree 3 - Somewhat agree 5 = Disagree
2 = Agree 4 = Somewhat disagree 6 = Strongly disagree
1 5 3 4 5 6
t. In my home country, I had many opportunities to
work wilti fellow classmates on projects and
assignments
2. Outside my home country, ! have had
opportunities (o work with fellow classmates or>
projects and assignments.
3. Fn general, Fenjoy working with other students in
planning and completing academic assignments.
4- When l wort with a partner or a small group, I
usually produce better work than I do when
working alone.
5. When I work with a partner ora small group, I
often learn new things from others.
6. Iam comfortable working wrth partners who are
also nonnative speakers of English.
7 Iprefer working with a partner or with a group
when the teacher assigns specific rotes to group
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

members.
a. Ihope we will do a lot of pair and group work In
this course.
9. When I work with a partner or small group, I prefer
to work face-lo*face, rather than collaborating
online (e.g., via e-mail, chat, blog, wiki, etc.).
10. Iam comfortable sharing my writing online in
blogs and wikis

academic wriler In m academic wriler In m

DIRECTIONS: This porUon of the survey Is designed to help you and your instructor
understand how you prefer to plan and com plete writing assignm ents in English,
Think about your most recent experiences in classes where you wrote academic
papers. For each sJatement, check the numeric value that best describes your habits
academic wriler In m
academic wriler In m
11= Strongly agree 3 = Somewhat agree 5 = Disagree
2 = Agree 4 = Samewhai disagree 6 = Strongly disagree

1 I think I am a successful academic wriler In my

1 academic wriler In m
2. I think I am a Successful writer OF academic
2. academic
I think I amwriler In m
a Successful writer OF academic
3. In my writing assignments, I effectively use source
material
3. In (e.g.,assignments,
my writing print and digital! boolts. articles.
I effectively use source
academicacademic
wriler Inwriler
m In m
4 Oro of my strengths as a writer of Er^ltsh *
4 academic
academic
wriler wriler
In m In m
5 I am skilled at organizing ideas and expressing
5 academic
academic
wriler
wriler
In mIn m
6- I have learned how to write academic texts mostly
6- academic wrilerhow
I have learned In mto write academic texts mostly
7. When I work on an assignment, Jwork almost
7 academic wriler In m
8 I use good word-processing and Internet skills
8 I use good word-processing and Internet skills
9 I rearrange my *deas a lot when i plan a writing
9 academic wriler In m
10. When I revise a paper or d r a li I often make a lot
10. When I revise a paper or d r a li I often make a lot
11. As I revise an assignment, I like to add new
11. As I revise an assignment, I like to add new
12 When I plan, write, and revise an assignment I
think carefully
12 When aboutand
I plan, write, what my reader
revise expects from
an assignment I
academic wriler In m
academic
13. Before wrileranInassignment.
i revise m I ask someone to
13. Before i revise an assignment. I ask someone to
14. M y academic assignments usually open with a
14. academic wriler academic
In m wriler In m
15. In my academic assignments, I try to include
examples
15. In and sources
my academic 1o support
assignments, I trymy points.
to include
16 - I try to connect paragraphs to my mam ideas or
16 - I try to connect paragraphs to my mam ideas or
17 When H um In assignments. Iheyconlaen tew
17 When H um In assignments. Iheyconlaen tew
IB My assignments si-iow that I have a slrong
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

IB My assignments si-iow that I have a slrong

19. My assignments usually contain minor spelling
19. My assignments usually contain minor spelling
20. I am confident about using references, quotations,
20. I am confident about using references, quotations,
21 I know hew to organize and format a bibliography
21 I know hew to organize and format a bibliography
22. I learn a lot from ihe comments and corrections
22. that my instructors write on my assignments.
23. I enjoy sharing my writing with other students and
23. I enjoy sharing my writing with other students and
24. After getting instructor Feedback on my writing. I
leam getting
24. After things thal I can apply
instructor 1o future
Feedback on mywriting Vaska.
writing. I
25. I prefer to interact with my instructor and get
feedback cHgUaiy, rather than on paper
25. I prefer to interact with my instructor and get or In

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
186 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

1. My greatest strengths as
DIRECTIONS: Please complete the statements below with at least three points. Be
1. My greatest strengths as
1. My greatest strengths as a writer o f English include:
186
186
186
2. Aspects of my writing that I would like most to improve in this course include:
186
186
186
3. The things Lhat will help m e to improve m ost as a w rile r o f English include:
186
186
186
1. Mystrengths
1. My greatest greatest as
strengths as

Appendix 5.2
Sample Syllabus and Course Outline

ENGLISH 2210 — Writing for Academic and

Professional Purposes
Syllabus and Course
C ourse Outline

Fall Semester 2015 Metropolitan College

’ Cjassmmri: CH ^ JclV 5 ^ 9 2 2 8
O fficc: DCS 442 :_______e-m ail: alanj’f e mc.cdu

Course Description and Goals

ENGL 2210 is an academic and professional literacy course for nonnative speakers
of English who have placed at intermediate level or higher on the College Lan-
guage and Critical Skills Test or who have completed ENGL 2205. Literacy goals
for ENGL 2210 encompass cultivating core print and digital literacies necessary
for success in university-level courses and the workplace, with a particular fo-
cus on reading, thinking, research, and writing skills. By successfully completing
ENGL 2210, you should be able to:

■ Use top-down, bn(iom-up, and interactive reading, strategics selectively in encounters

Mi w ith diverse prim and d igita l genres
T3 ■ Comprehend, analyze, and interpret other people’ s w ritin g hy reading llu c n tly and
(C
0* accurately
a£
* [nterrcM'ate and critique text content, rhetorical structure, and authors’ jjurposcs
Mi * Demonstrate genre and audience awareness by understanding w ritin g tasks,
T3 investigating reader expectations, and id c n tily in g w riters' purposes
■i(C
0* P * Gather valid, reliable, and usefuli inlbrm alion fa t w ritin g by conducting systematic
a£ research o f prin t and online sources and bv usine. effective web navigation skills
* Summarize, paraphrase, and quote effectively fro m prin t and online soun.es
* Demonstrate efficie nt idea generation, rhetorical planning, drafting, revision* and
editing strategies fur producing diverse academic, professional, arwl popular genres
* Reproduce academic, professional, and popular print and digital genres (e.g., high-
Mi
sir register forms such as n o nfiction narrative,. inform ational texts* analytical and
T3 persuasive tests: inform al text types such as blog enlrics. videos* etc.)
(C
0* + Demonslrate fluent, creative self-expression via print and digital media while
a£
avoiding plagiarism
* S olicit, produce, and use peer feedback on w ritin g (e.g.. by providing thoughtful oral
and digital commentary un peers’ drafts and using peer feedback e ffectively in the
revision process)
* LV iduate^pur skjj] as a reader w riter. m d user o f prim and djj£itulatexts.

Students will practice and refine these skills by completing reading selections, dis-
cussing their interpretations in class and online, posting and responding to com-
ments on our course blog, sharing their work with peers (in person and online),
and producing formal and informal writing assignments featuring functions such
as description, narration, exposition, summary, analysis, and comparison.

The Composing Process

Becoming a skilled, efficient writer requires more than merely completing assign-
ments and turning them in on time, although these goals are essential. Writing
about a topic or issue is an excellent way to measure our reading and sharpen our
thinking skills. By writing and thinking about our writing, we discover new ideas,
as well. When we write for a genuine audience, we also broaden our perspectives
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

and learn language conventions that make our ideas comprehensible to others. You
should view ENGL 2210 as an opportunity not only to improve the quality of your
writing, but also to strengthen the reading and thinking skills that will help you
succeed academically and professionally. Keep in mind that writing is not always a
tidy, linear process for all writers. Sometimes, a successful piece of writing such as
an application essay or research paper doesn’t start out with an outline or follow
a clear sequence of development. Unlike the process of building a house, writing
sometimes requires us to take apart what we’ve started and build an entirely new
structure. In fact, not all writing has to end up in a nice, clean, grammatically ac-
curate package: Some writing tasks can be very messy but very useful for the writer
him- or herself. For most of us, writing for an audience is an ongoing process
that requires a lot of rethinking and revision. Writing also forces us to struggle

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
188 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

with language, an activity that challenges nonnative and native speakers of English
alike. As a result, we may sometimes need the help of others (e.g., a classmate,
an instructor, a tutor, or a friend) who can respond to our work and offer a new
perspective. And even though we may think of writing as a solitary activity, we
can often make our writing more meaningful when we share it with somebody
else, as we do when writing an assignment for school or work, sending a text or
email message, or even updating our Facebook walls. We can also learn about the
strengths and weaknesses of our own written expression by reading what our peers
write. Because so much writing is public, I would like to encourage you to use our
class activities and assignments as means of becoming better readers and writers.
Much of our time in this course will therefore focus on reading texts, discussing
and writing about them, and working with your classmates’ drafts.

Required Course Materials and Resources

For this course, you will need the following materials and tools:

j Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. New
York, NY: Norton. [Paper or e-book]
j Greene, S., & Lidinsky, A. (2012). From inquiry to academic writing: A text and
reader. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s. [Paper or e-book]
j Regular access to the Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL): http://owl.english.
purdue.edu/owl.
j An active MCIntranet account for access to the Web, our Moodle course
(including blogs and wikis), and the library’s online catalogue and data-
bases
j An advanced word-processing application such as Pages or Microsoft Word
(If you do not have a recent version of MS Office, consider downloading Open
Office software, http://www.openoffice.org)
j A tablet (e.g., an iPad, Surface, or KindleFire) or a laptop computer, which you
should bring to class for easy access to reading selections, our Moodle course,
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

and other Internet resources. Also highly recommended are apps for annotat-
ing .pdf files, organizing research materials, storing documents in the Cloud,
and so on: AudioNote; Bump; Documents to Go; Dropbox; EverNote; OnLive
Desktop; Penultimate; QuickOffice
j A flash drive for file back up
j A student ID card with a library bar code
j Notebook paper and pencil or pen (Bring to class every day.)

College Writing Center

Because writing is a complex skill that requires time, practice, and multiple types
of guidance, the College Writing Center (CWC) provides assistance with reading,
writing, and technology skills to all students, free of charge. Drop-in hours are
available throughout the week (8:00am to 9:00pm) and on Saturdays (10:00am to

3:00pm); you are encouraged to arrange 30– or 45-minute appointments on the

CWC website (http://www.mc.edu/writingcenter).

Requirements and Student Responsibilities

From the Student Handbook (http://www.mc.edu/engcomm/studenthandbook):

1. Attendance is mandatory. Except for excused absences, students will attend all
class sessions (real and virtual). An excess of three hours of unexcused absence
will result in automatic exclusion from the course. Two late arrivals count as a
one-hour absence.
2. Late work is acceptable only under extenuating circumstances (i.e., illness,
personal and family emergencies, and so forth, as defined in the Student
Handbook). If you have trouble submitting your work on Moodle, contact me
via e-mail, attaching your assignment.
3. Participation in class discussion, feedback sessions, and online interactions
(via blog, wiki, or chat) is expected of all students and will be considered in the
course grade. See Participation Guidelines, available on our Moodle course.
4. Word processing is required for all graded writing assignments and for as-
signments included in the ENGL 2210 Portfolio. All ENGL 2210 students
must complete the College Computer Literacy Workshop. (Your registration
card describes this policy.) At the instructor’s discretion, students may submit
draft materials in hard copy form.

Assessment and Grading Policies

Your course grade will be determined on the basis of the following weighted scale:

c. One timed writing of your choice (10%)

d. Two written peer responses (10%)
2. Selected weekly blog posts and comments, peer response tasks not 20%
included in your E-Portfolio, and class participation
3. Reading and grammar quizzes 10%

1. E-Portfolio: The Department of English and Communication Studies re-

quires ENGL 2210 students to compile and submit an Electronic Portfolio
(E-Portfolio) for assessment. The ENGL 2210 Portfolio Guidelines explain
options and requirements. Follow the link on our Moodle course to the
Matrix portal, where you will find models.
a) Your self-assessment summary will consist of a thoughtful, 750-word com-
mentary (cover letter) reflecting on your progress over the semester and
your goals for your future academic writing (in particular, ENGL 2215).

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
190 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

You will have a chance to work on your self-assessment in class before

finalizing it. Follow the Self-Assessment link in our Moodle space for sug-
gestions and samples.
b) Revised writing assignments will count for graded credit when you submit
your final version to me. The first two assignments will consist of three
drafts (a first, second, and final version). For each assignment, you will be
given a choice of genres (e.g., a personal writer history, critical or reflec-
tive essay, editorial, book review), topics, and reading selections, along
with guidelines and sample texts. Your initial drafts will be qualitatively
assessed; you will receive a percentage grade only on the final version
(unless you request a provisional grade on early drafts). The quality of
writing assignments will be assessed according to the scoring rubric in
the ENGL 2210 E-Portfolio Guidelines, which we will review in class so
that you can use the criteria to improve your writing. Assignments are
assessed not only for their quality, but also on the basis of the writer’s use
of peer and instructor feedback in revising.
c) Timed writings will be administered three or four times during the se-
mester to give you practice writing essay exams and workplace texts that
involve time constraints. We will practice techniques for writing under
speeded conditions; topics, sources, and criteria will be given in advance
of each timed writing, one of which you may revise.
d) Written peer responses (delivered via Moodle, wiki, or Google Docs) will
be required at least four times during the semester. We will practice and
evaluate peer review techniques periodically, and you will be given in-
structor feedback to help you become an effective peer reader. Follow the
Peer Response link in our Moodle space.

As the ENGL 2210 Portfolio Guidelines explain, you will maintain and present
your E-Portfolio in a folder using Moodle, though you may also use Dropbox.
Your E-Portfolio is an ongoing activity; keep it in good order! If you maintain your
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

E-Portfolio throughout the semester, assembling and sharing your work at the end
of the semester will be simple.

2. Blog posts will consist of weekly, 400- to 600-word entries. You may post to
your own blog, to a group blog, or to the course blog (all available on our
Moodle course). You will also post at least one 40– to 100-word comment per
week on any of your peers’ blogs or on the course blog. Follow the Blog link
in our Moodle space for some simple guidelines.
3. Reading and grammar quizzes will cover selections from The Shallows and
assigned chapters in From Inquiry to Academic Writing. Unless otherwise an-
nounced, quizzes will be available on Quia.

Details about how student work is assessed are described in the ENGL2210
Assessment Scale (follow the link in our Moodle space). Generally, assignments
are assessed on the basis of how successfully the text:

j satisfies assignment and reader expectations;

j achieves its explicit and implicit purposes;
j reflects the writer’s use of resources and skill in reproducing genre conven-
tions; and
j demonstrates the writer’s control of the stylistic, grammatical, lexical, and
mechanical conventions of Modern English.

Letter grades are assigned on the basis of the following numeric scale:

A = 95-100% B- = £7-90% B-=80-S2% C= 73-76% D+= 67-69% D- = 60-62%

A- =90 <34% B- S3 86% C+ = 77 79% C- = 7fl 72% I) = 63 66% F = 0-60%

Course Outline
The course outline on next page lists readings on the writing process and genres
in From Inquiry to Academic Writing (FIAW) to get us started. We will decide on
reading selections from FIAW as a class before we determine a plan for reading
The Shallows. Therefore, our outline is partly a work in progress. Nevertheless, I
have included topics, tasks, and assignment deadlines to keep us on track with the
course objectives and E-Portfolio requirements for the first five weeks. We will use
the calendar in our Moodle course to map out our plan for the remaining 10 weeks
of the semester. Where topics and assignments are listed, you will be expected to
come to class with the relevant work completed. Keep track of reading and writing
assignments by checking Moodle regularly; Mac users can sync these deadlines
with iCal. Midterm Portfolios will be due at the beginning of Week 8; Final Port-
folios will be due on Monday of Finals Week (Week 16).
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
192 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

FNGI-1SH 2210, Section F

[fee#; Da\ : Toj:it '.t arid ActiI'itics \ .itfigi tmenIs Due
1 : M i introduction to th e w riU nj p r x w *
r G roup te sts: R eading and w ritin g strategies I
■C o u rw introduction :
w Preview Ass gnmenl 1; W riter Autobiography [ Read FI AW Ch. I
>lnquir>': Habits o f itie mind ■
i RcBidLng atmuji l*aejs .
F I R cadbig £ id w ritin g............
tc*ia j 5 * a d Rodriguez (FIA W pp. L W L)
r W riting as conversation j Btog E n tr} ' 1
2: M : Reading like a w riter [ Read R A W Ch. 2
[fc]KK!!!M ............ »...................................................
W [ Practice prewriiiiig lechniques \ Reid Hirsdi and Provenzo (F IA W
l Group practice: Brainstorming and planning \ pp_ 13—40)
j Begin drafth^ Assignment I j Blog entry 2
p \ Draft Assignment I in class j Read sample writer autobiography
■ ; Writine conferences : jon MoodleJ
3j M \ Quiz 1: FIAW Chs. 1-2 j Read W riting as a P artnenhip (on
j The peer review process? Practice j Moodle)
........................ ............ ............ ............ L ..,
j j m . 1 L ............ .1.?*?.
W : Finding and evaluating sources : Read FI A W Ch. 6
; Group a ctivity; Web navigation strategies i Blog m tr y 3
I Introduce and discuss Assignment 2: Rhetorical 5
: analysis nr sjnLfoesis \
p «Group follow-up: Web navigation ■ Review FI AW Ch. 6
:Understanding and draining timed w riting f Assignment liD r a ft 2)
r__ •.assjgAiiKflds^|gfvie^-_ Timed. Wriijn& \ m ........ ................... ........... ..................
4I M : Return Assignment 1 (D raft explore revision j Read F IA W Ch. 3, Rojslacaer and
\ strategies I Primask
| Discussion and exercise: Exploring academic j
I genres^and argume-nts_ _

\y ; 'linked W ritin g 1 (45 minutes J ■ Read Deresiewicz(F IA W Ch. 4)

I <irammar and style workshop (topics to be ■ Blog unt n 4
f announced) :
1? j Peer review: Assignment 2 (D raft I ) j Assignment 2 (Draft 1)
. ..L .„ .J..K rp.sal* ............
? l i 3ftr i .J,... ......i * „ ................................................
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

5 1 M ! Reading, and w riting summaries, paraphrases, : Read FIAW Ch. 7

: ; and quotations ■ Assignment I (Draft 3)
\ Group exercise: Comparing summaries and f
. .. . .
............ :
............ JSHJfSi...
............ .........1...
W \ Q uiz 2: FIA W Chs. 3, fi- 7 j Locate and posi a published editorial
■PlagLonsm: Wrhat is it? How do we avoid it? ■ on u ■ss,'ue
............
. .. „ . . !.SiSlBLfJ?f.l2".?....
F £Exploring, editorial genres [ Read two o f your peers’ published
Group exercise: Analysis o f selected editorials j editorials
« : Assignment 2 (Draft 2 )

Appendix 5.3
Sample Lesson Plan
Background
This introductory writing course for multilingual college freshman writers focuses
on developing print and digital literacies for university-level study and profes-
sional communication. Its chief goals include enhancing students’ reading, re-
search, and writing skills, as well as their genre knowledge. This 90-minute lesson
outline is designed for the second class day of the first week of a new semester.

Lesson Outline
Week 1, Day 2

Work Previously Completed

Students have been introduced to the syllabus and course requirements; they have
completed a six-page reading passage, “Inquiry: Habits of the Mind,” from one of
the required textbooks. The passage describes how the act of writing promotes the
thinking process.

Learning Objectives
Students will be able to:

j Read, understand, and ask questions about a writing task

j Recognize and practice prewriting strategies (listing, webbing, freewriting,
and classification)
j Participate productively with peers during assigned collaborative activities
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

Materials Needed
j PowerPoint presentation (PreWriting.pptx)
j Inspiration (v. 9) software application for laptop or tablet
j From Inquiry to Academic Writing Chapter 1
j Handouts: (1) Writer Autobiography Assignment Description; (2) Under-
standing Writing Assignments

Ferris, Dana R., and John Hedgcock. Teaching L2 Composition : Purpose, Process, and Practice, Routledge, 2013.
ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/asulib-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1434037.
Created from asulib-ebooks on 2019-08-14 17:20:03.
194 Course Design and Instructional Planning for the L2 Writing Course

Procedural Outline

w ith your pee w ith wyour

ith your
pee pee w ith your pee
w ith your pee
w ith yourwpee
ith your pee w ith your pee
« w
Verify thatpeers.
ith your siudems haveto(heir
Prepare issctboob
share and Laptops
your group's or and
thoughts tablets.
w ith your pee w ith
w ith
your
your
peepee
20-15 Review
w ith your pee and Discussion Divide class into triad gwiiips.
mith
w ill. your
"‘Inquiry:
pee Habits o f the « Instruct groups to select a recorder to report results to class.
MiiwT passage • wproject
ith your fc‘lnquiiyr ofshare
Habits to
peers. Prepare (lie Myour
ind" group's
review and discussion
thoughts and
(Materials: ’In q u iry : prumpls Oti screen (Or wnte on board):
Habits o f the M ind” I . Offer a definition or example o f * “ habit o f the mind." and
w ith your pee w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
2. Thew ith tex.t
yourdescribes w ritingtoas
peers. Prepare a conversation.
share your group'sWhat does and
thoughts the
author
w ith yourmean, andPrepare
peers. who participates an there
to share your conversations?
group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
wwith
ithyour
yourpeers.
peers.Prepare
Preparetotoshare
shareyour
yourgroup's
group'sthoughts
thoughtsand
and
wwith
ithyour
yourpeers.
peers.Prepare
Preparetotoshare
shareyour
yourgroup's
group'sthoughts
thoughtsand
and
w ith your pee
wwithithyour
your peers.Prepare
peers. Preparetoto share
share your
your group'sthoughts
group's thoughtsand
and
w ith your
w ith pee
your pee
* Instruct students to share their responses to prompts with their
gm tip mates; the recorder takes brief notes. Lim it discussion
lime 10 15 rniii, As students work together* listen for examples
and themes that might he useful during Demonstration (below).
* A llo w 10 mm. tor class-wide discussion o f groups' responses to
prompts. As recorders report orally, lake notes (in a W ord 11le
w ith your pee w ith your pee w ith your pee w ith your pee

; 15-20 ;Introduce W riter * Transition: Continuing from above, inform students that their
: min. j Autobiography j first multi-draft w riting assignment w ill require ihem to inquire ;
| Assignment j imo "hubiiLs o f the m ind" by composing a history o f their own
w ithwyour pee pee
ith your w ith your pee w ith yourw ith pee
your pee
; Autobiography • Distribute W riter Autobiography Assignment handouts,
w ith your pee w ith your pee w ith w your
ith your
pee pee
* After asking students lo remain in their peer groups, instruct j
; them to appoint a member to read the assignment text aloud to j

the
w ithleiroup
your (someone otherto
peers. Prepare than theyour
share reporter fromthoughts
group's Lhe previous
and !

w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and

w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
2, Sliare your thoughts ami questions about the assignmeni j
w ithyour
w ith yourpeers.
peers.Prepare
Preparetotoshare
shareyour
yourgroup's
group'sthoughts
thoughtsand
and j
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
w ith your peers. Prepare to share your group's thoughts and
assignment; i nvite
w ith your peers. students
Prepare lo share
to share w riting
your experiences;
group's note
thoughts and
w ith your
w ith
pee your pee

10-15 Demonstration. * Before introducing PowerPoint presentation, in form students

m ill. Pnewritimg Strategies that they w ill learn about and practice prewriting strategics for
(Mifttcrials: Pre- their W riter Autobiography Assignments.
W riting.pfrtx; Inspiration • Present P ttw riliflg Strategies slides. Conclude presentation by
software) inviting students to share iheir own strategies.
■ Introduce Inept ration soft wart;.
« Refer to the “ habits o f 11k mind' 1 Mss from ilw first segment;
fte w w '■II ;i I'- i'l li i I I I mnppi i l g ; i lid * L h i I i i :j : 11 11r-. ;-.i i ;i I io r.
15-20 Practice: Prewritmg ■ Instruct students to lake out laptops or tablets; direct them lo
rain. Strategies Inspiration weblink,
(Materials: Inspiration * A fte r inviting each group to select an idea from the '“habits o f
software) m ind" discussion or a w riting experience., ask students to
develop a mind-map or weh using Inspiration,
* Monitor each group’ s progress; note problems lo focus on
___ during next class. _
5 mini, Wrap-up * Confirm students'understanding o l'W riter Autobiography
criteria.
* Assign homework lo r next cLass:
1. Use Inspiration lo create a mind-map, web, or list to get
started on W riter Autobiography:
2. Follow up w ith a free-write 1o begin planning first draft;
2; Read Rodriguez essay (textbook); post response lo b log .___

Notes
1. A number of sources on learner differences (learning styles, strategies, preferences, pre-
dispositions, and so on) introduce tools for eliciting these variables from learners. A
partial list of such sources includes: Brown (1995); Dörnyei (2005, 2006, 2007); Ellis
(2009); Graves (2000); Hurd and Lewis (2008); Jordan (1997); Reid (1995).
2. Such instruments can be found in Allwright (1988), Borich (2010), and Wajnryb (1992),
among others.
3. For a complete, categorized list of traits, actions, and learning outcomes for 21st century
literacies, see Bedard and Fuhrken (2013) and National Writing Project (2010, pp. 100–
102). These categories include: creativity and originality; collaboration; management
and leadership; evaluation and decision making; diversity; articulation; critical thinking
and problem solving; observation and inquiry; communication in rhetorical contexts;
Copyright © 2013. Routledge. All rights reserved.

knowledge making; information literacy; personal habits of mind; remix culture; tech-
nology knowledge; and digital citizenship.

AW Guide Critical Analysis Explained
No ratings yet
AW Guide Critical Analysis Explained
6 pages
Communicative Competence (1) .Pps
No ratings yet
Communicative Competence (1) .Pps
12 pages
Your Marathon Training Plan
No ratings yet
Your Marathon Training Plan
16 pages
Proverbs and Psalms
100% (1)
Proverbs and Psalms
3 pages
Bicomplex Holomorphic Functions - The Algebra, Geometry and Analysis of Bicomplex Numbers (PDFDrive)
100% (1)
Bicomplex Holomorphic Functions - The Algebra, Geometry and Analysis of Bicomplex Numbers (PDFDrive)
231 pages
Ferris and Hedgcock Ch04
No ratings yet
Ferris and Hedgcock Ch04
53 pages
Section 13: Teachig Writing
No ratings yet
Section 13: Teachig Writing
26 pages
ESP - Ch7 - Assessment and Testing in ESP
No ratings yet
ESP - Ch7 - Assessment and Testing in ESP
30 pages
Ghafouri Et Al (2024) From Virtual Assistant To Writing Mentor Exploring The Impact of A Chatgpt Based Writing
No ratings yet
Ghafouri Et Al (2024) From Virtual Assistant To Writing Mentor Exploring The Impact of A Chatgpt Based Writing
23 pages
Theory Into Practice: Click For Updates
No ratings yet
Theory Into Practice: Click For Updates
12 pages
A Comparison Between Deductive and Inductive Appro
No ratings yet
A Comparison Between Deductive and Inductive Appro
13 pages
Ethical Guidelines For Educational Research 5th Edition
No ratings yet
Ethical Guidelines For Educational Research 5th Edition
40 pages
Paper of How To Teach Writing
100% (1)
Paper of How To Teach Writing
29 pages
Previewpdf
No ratings yet
Previewpdf
25 pages
AI and Formative Assessments
No ratings yet
AI and Formative Assessments
9 pages
Ellis Rod
100% (1)
Ellis Rod
15 pages
Employability Judging and Communicating
No ratings yet
Employability Judging and Communicating
24 pages
Developing Learners' Employability Skills: Application Guide
No ratings yet
Developing Learners' Employability Skills: Application Guide
28 pages
Previewpdf
No ratings yet
Previewpdf
116 pages
LT 42.2
100% (1)
LT 42.2
144 pages
Teachers' Viewpoint: Translanguaging in English-Instructed Classes
No ratings yet
Teachers' Viewpoint: Translanguaging in English-Instructed Classes
6 pages
Teaching Language in Context Chapter 2 - Parte 1
100% (2)
Teaching Language in Context Chapter 2 - Parte 1
17 pages
Sandipa English Thesis 2079-11-14
0% (1)
Sandipa English Thesis 2079-11-14
88 pages
Eng 102 Syllabus Fall 23-24
No ratings yet
Eng 102 Syllabus Fall 23-24
7 pages
H G Widdowson Article Review
100% (1)
H G Widdowson Article Review
2 pages
Grammar Teaching-Practice or Consciousness-Raising - Ellis - Sem Comentários...
No ratings yet
Grammar Teaching-Practice or Consciousness-Raising - Ellis - Sem Comentários...
5 pages
Grabe 1991
No ratings yet
Grabe 1991
32 pages
Teaching Writing Through Genre Analysis
No ratings yet
Teaching Writing Through Genre Analysis
8 pages
The Role of Repetition in CLIL Teacher Discoursce
No ratings yet
The Role of Repetition in CLIL Teacher Discoursce
10 pages
English As A Medium of Instruction - Intro
No ratings yet
English As A Medium of Instruction - Intro
34 pages
Task Based Learning
No ratings yet
Task Based Learning
13 pages
Writings of H.E. Palmer
100% (1)
Writings of H.E. Palmer
228 pages
Academic Writing Micro
No ratings yet
Academic Writing Micro
14 pages
Creating Contexts: Writing Introductions Across Genres: Online Commentary To
No ratings yet
Creating Contexts: Writing Introductions Across Genres: Online Commentary To
92 pages
Review of From Rules To Reasons by Danny Norrington-Davies (Pavilion 2016)
No ratings yet
Review of From Rules To Reasons by Danny Norrington-Davies (Pavilion 2016)
3 pages
Reading Writing and Learning in Esl
0% (4)
Reading Writing and Learning in Esl
11 pages
Constructing A Language Assessment Knowledge Base
100% (1)
Constructing A Language Assessment Knowledge Base
19 pages
English As Medium of Instruction (EMI) Setting: Challenges and Coping Strategies of English Major Learners
100% (1)
English As Medium of Instruction (EMI) Setting: Challenges and Coping Strategies of English Major Learners
10 pages
Program Book NileTESOL 2018 Final Jan-3
No ratings yet
Program Book NileTESOL 2018 Final Jan-3
68 pages
Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing
No ratings yet
Treatment of Error in Second Language Student Writing
1 page
Inductive and Deductive Approach in TESOL
100% (2)
Inductive and Deductive Approach in TESOL
5 pages
Characteristics of Chinese Students' Learning Styles
No ratings yet
Characteristics of Chinese Students' Learning Styles
4 pages
Evaluating English For Intermediate Level's Coursebook Using Cunningsworth's Checklist
No ratings yet
Evaluating English For Intermediate Level's Coursebook Using Cunningsworth's Checklist
19 pages
(Review) William Grabe - Insights Into Second Language Reading by Keiko Koda
No ratings yet
(Review) William Grabe - Insights Into Second Language Reading by Keiko Koda
6 pages
The Process Approach To Writing PDF
100% (1)
The Process Approach To Writing PDF
4 pages
Technology Integration and Student Learning Motivation
No ratings yet
Technology Integration and Student Learning Motivation
32 pages
The Functional Approach To Second Langua PDF
No ratings yet
The Functional Approach To Second Langua PDF
14 pages
Curriculum Design (EAP: Academic Writing)
50% (2)
Curriculum Design (EAP: Academic Writing)
49 pages
Curriculum in English PDF
No ratings yet
Curriculum in English PDF
264 pages
Reading Comprenhension Strategies Scrivener
No ratings yet
Reading Comprenhension Strategies Scrivener
65 pages
Teaching English As Second Language Theory, Techniques and Technology (Aarati R. Mujumdar) (Z-Library)
100% (2)
Teaching English As Second Language Theory, Techniques and Technology (Aarati R. Mujumdar) (Z-Library)
331 pages
Customised Suggestion
100% (1)
Customised Suggestion
7 pages
Ericsson Think Aloud Method
No ratings yet
Ericsson Think Aloud Method
9 pages
Dornyei Muir 2019 Creatingamotivatingclassroomenvironment
No ratings yet
Dornyei Muir 2019 Creatingamotivatingclassroomenvironment
19 pages
Narrow Reading 2.0 Outline
No ratings yet
Narrow Reading 2.0 Outline
2 pages
Brian - Paltridge Publications
No ratings yet
Brian - Paltridge Publications
3 pages
Ipsative Assessment Publicity Leaflet
No ratings yet
Ipsative Assessment Publicity Leaflet
1 page
Contrastive Analysis
No ratings yet
Contrastive Analysis
15 pages
Being The Teacher' - Identity and Classroom Conversation
No ratings yet
Being The Teacher' - Identity and Classroom Conversation
27 pages
Prodromou - English As Cultural Action
0% (1)
Prodromou - English As Cultural Action
11 pages
Writing Majors: Eighteen Program Profiles
From Everand
Writing Majors: Eighteen Program Profiles
Greg Giberson
No ratings yet
English Language, Literature and Creative Writing: A Practical Guide for Students
From Everand
English Language, Literature and Creative Writing: A Practical Guide for Students
Sarah Dobbs
No ratings yet
Developing Critical Languaculture Pedagogies in Higher Education: Theory and Practice
From Everand
Developing Critical Languaculture Pedagogies in Higher Education: Theory and Practice
Adriana Raquel Díaz
No ratings yet
Deteksi Thorium Pada Kaos Lampu Petromaks Menggunakan Spektrometer Beta Dengan Detektor Sintilasi Dari Bahan Organik Naftalen
No ratings yet
Deteksi Thorium Pada Kaos Lampu Petromaks Menggunakan Spektrometer Beta Dengan Detektor Sintilasi Dari Bahan Organik Naftalen
6 pages
United States v. Peter Lagatta Billy Caroleo Michael Bitz Dennis Merckling Alex Sharogordsky Joseph Campo and Joe Lnu, Steven B. Zackson, 50 F.3d 125, 2d Cir. (1995)
No ratings yet
United States v. Peter Lagatta Billy Caroleo Michael Bitz Dennis Merckling Alex Sharogordsky Joseph Campo and Joe Lnu, Steven B. Zackson, 50 F.3d 125, 2d Cir. (1995)
6 pages
Exam 1 KeyFinance
No ratings yet
Exam 1 KeyFinance
7 pages
OB - Puerperal Complications
No ratings yet
OB - Puerperal Complications
5 pages
Medical Sociology PPT III Year W.S
No ratings yet
Medical Sociology PPT III Year W.S
97 pages
Persephone's Quest - Entheogens - R. Gordon Wasson PDF
100% (2)
Persephone's Quest - Entheogens - R. Gordon Wasson PDF
367 pages
Great Britain
No ratings yet
Great Britain
2 pages
PERSPECTIVES On EARLY MEDIEVAL
No ratings yet
PERSPECTIVES On EARLY MEDIEVAL
2 pages
Statement of HPCL Upaid 2nd Interim Dividend 2016-17 As of 30-04-2017
No ratings yet
Statement of HPCL Upaid 2nd Interim Dividend 2016-17 As of 30-04-2017
424 pages
Exercise Science Section 2: The Skeletal System: An Introduction To Health and Physical Education
No ratings yet
Exercise Science Section 2: The Skeletal System: An Introduction To Health and Physical Education
32 pages
The Hymns On Faith Ephrem The Syrian Jeffrey Wickes Download
No ratings yet
The Hymns On Faith Ephrem The Syrian Jeffrey Wickes Download
79 pages
Fundamental Analysis and Stock Returns: An Indian Evidence: Full Length Research Paper
No ratings yet
Fundamental Analysis and Stock Returns: An Indian Evidence: Full Length Research Paper
7 pages
2007 IscTheory Repeat
No ratings yet
2007 IscTheory Repeat
7 pages
Keynote3 Unit 5 Grammar Summary
No ratings yet
Keynote3 Unit 5 Grammar Summary
1 page
Relevant Coursework For Physical Therapy
100% (2)
Relevant Coursework For Physical Therapy
4 pages
Cor 001 Sas-2
No ratings yet
Cor 001 Sas-2
8 pages
Brainstorming and Outlining
No ratings yet
Brainstorming and Outlining
7 pages
University of Indonesia / Jakarta: Special Topics in Cell Biology and Cell Culture
No ratings yet
University of Indonesia / Jakarta: Special Topics in Cell Biology and Cell Culture
102 pages
Chapter I - The Self From The Various Perspectives-1
No ratings yet
Chapter I - The Self From The Various Perspectives-1
19 pages
MCQ Hematology
No ratings yet
MCQ Hematology
12 pages
Pintars Bahasa Inggeris Zon Keramat: English Language SPM 2020
No ratings yet
Pintars Bahasa Inggeris Zon Keramat: English Language SPM 2020
14 pages
Taxguru - In-Exemption Under Section 54 54EC Amp 54F - FAQs Amp Case Laws
No ratings yet
Taxguru - In-Exemption Under Section 54 54EC Amp 54F - FAQs Amp Case Laws
9 pages
FC 407-Human Behavior in The Organization: Types of Environmental Change
No ratings yet
FC 407-Human Behavior in The Organization: Types of Environmental Change
6 pages
9 Enneagram Types Overview PDF
100% (1)
9 Enneagram Types Overview PDF
2 pages
Iess301 3 13 2 11
No ratings yet
Iess301 3 13 2 11
10 pages
Neal Frisby's Scroll Number 13
No ratings yet
Neal Frisby's Scroll Number 13
3 pages
TheBaroquePeriod PDF
No ratings yet
TheBaroquePeriod PDF
39 pages

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.

Ferris and Hedgcock CH05

Uploaded by

Ferris and Hedgcock CH05

Uploaded by

Chapter 5

Questions for Reflection

3. What features of a literacy or composition course necessitate some-

In Chapters 1–3, we introduced theoretical foundations of L1 and L2 writing in-

one would be hard pressed to identify foundational concepts that have

[F]ew, if any, combinations of techniques or theoretical models have been

Of course, L2 writing professionals are deeply engaged in instructional design,

Curriculum Development Essentials

1. What purposes does the institution, program, or teacher wish to fulfill?

To address Tyler’s questions in a recursive, cyclical manner, Taba (1962) intro-

Needs Assessment: Mapping Learner Needs

FIGURE 5.15.1 Tools for

j listening to academic lectures and taking notes;

we can penetrate concerns about writing proficiency by reviewing the quality of

Needs Assessment Instruments

FIGURE 5.2 Checklist of demographic, educational, motivational, and aspira-

tional variables to consider in the NA cycle. Based on Chapter 2 and adapted

teaching style. To exemplify, the sample questionnaire in Appendix 5.1 provides a

An equally rich source of qualitative data that is usually readily accessible to

interactions can contribute meaningfully to the NA process.2 For example, obser-

Setting Targets for Learning and Teaching:

listing of textbook exercises” or a sequence of instructional procedures (Shrum &

To illustrate the interdependent relationship between objectives and goals,

Students will be able to:

magnitude and scope of instructional aims, specific performance characteristics

Text Types and Purposes*

tion, organization, and analysis of content.

Production and Distribution of Writing

Research to Build and Present Knowledge

(Source: Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010, p. 41)

teaching, and assessment, particularly when standards are comprehensive, specific,

j Though goals and objectives should be articulated clearly and concretely,

From Goals and Objectives to Syllabus

syllabus serves as a contract between instructor and students, summarizing expec-

5. tn struction al P rocesscs a nd P roced ures

FIGURE 5.4 Syllabus checklist.

Nuts and Bolts: Prioritizing, Sequencing, and Planning

before moving on to abstract ideas and symbols, shifting from a personal to an

targeted at students’ presumed levels, teachers who follow this principle

Informed by sound developmental principles and reliable NA information,

Dom ain: Everyday ■+ Applied > Theoretical > Critical

FIGURE 5.5 Experiential content domains. Based on Macken-Horarik (1996).

Text Family Prototypical Feature(s) Sample Written Genres

1. Length. Source material should be sufficient (and sufficiently extensive),

(e.g., in a workplace setting) or compiling a professional webfolio

To plan a course or unit, teachers frequently create an outline or a calendar; in

through publishing are not mechanical, autonomous steps to be trivialized or slav-

To operationalize an iterative, recursive unit or course plan, we must first and

Task/Skilt 1 Lesson 1 Lesson 2 Lesson 3 Lesson 4

FIGURE 5.8 Sample of a matrix-based unit or course outline. Adapted from

Second, it is crucial to understand how our planning decisions (materials selection,

Lesson Planning: Practices and Procedures

Identifying Lesson Objectives

The anticipated outcome is described in terms of an observable, measurable

Sequencing and Organizing a Lesson Plan

The Mechanics of Lesson Planning

j Involve learners in worthwhile, authentic literacy tasks and activities;

i C ourse and Lesson Objectives

FIGURE 5.9 Lesson plan checklist.

an increasing number of campuses, instructors can also post informational mes-

L e sso n P hase T e a c h e r A c tio n s S tu d e n t A c tio n s

Knowledge and skins complete me task, as needed

FIGURE 5.10 Conceptual framework for lesson sequencing.

because of the numerous unexpected—yet often productive—questions that can

The preview phase is sometimes indistinguishable from the activation phase,

or a discussion of the next writing assignment’s literacy goals. A follow-up to stu-

j A clear understanding of learners’ backgrounds, needs, expectations,

Further Reading and Resources

j Curriculum, syllabus, unit, and materials design: Brett and González-Lloret

Reflection and Review

Application Activity 5.2

1. What are the stated course goals and instructional objectives?

Application Activity 5.3

Application Activity 5.4

A. S tude nt b a ckg ro u n d in fo rm a tio n .

academic wriler In m academic wriler In m