Developing a Proficiency-Oriented Curriculum at the Secondary Level

Charlotte Cole and Floy Miller Walpole High School

ABSTRACT Given the many real constraints im- posed on secondary teachersand the feelings of some that they lackmfficient background to become highly involved in curriculum development, teachers, who are key to curricularsuccess or failure, often do not assume active roles in the curriculum development process. A recent experience in a small Massachusetts community demonstrates that this need not be the case.

Introduction September 1982 is one date that two French

teachers from Walpole High School in Massachusetts will never forget. It was shortly after our return from a pleasant summer vacaton that a recently appointed superintendent issued a mandate that all disciplines were to begin curriculum revision. The reason for our panic was simple: We could not revise a French cur- riculum that was non-existent!

Since the late seventies the two of us, who were largely responsible for the French program in the high school of this 18,000middle-class suburb of Boston, had been devoting all our efforts to attempting to give a more functional approach to our curriculum. A course outline that had been devised in the late sixties reflected no changes since its inception, so to say that no formal French curriculum existed was a most ac- curate statement.

The shift from a program that had put heavy em- phasis on literature to one that stressed the develop- ment of functional skills had resulted from a crisis in

Charlorre Cole (M.A., Middlebury College) is a teacher of French at Walpole High School, Walpole, MA. Floy Miller (M.A., Middlebury College) is a teacher of French at Walpole High School, Walpole, MA.

the mid-seventies. More specifically, in 1974-75, we had begun to notice serious declines in the upper levels of French and by 1976-77 the situation had become acute. In dialogue with parents and students, the over- whelming community sentiment was that Walpole students would use a modern foreign language in travel or work in foreign cultures. Consequently, they would prefer, as they staled, “a more relevant approach. ”

The reality was clear. If we wanted to maintain enrollments in French 111, IV and V, we would have to make changes.

Background For a period of five years, we attempted a variety

of activities using very much an eclectic approach in order to give a more functional focus to the French program. At all levels and in all courses class periods provided students the opportunity to operate totally in the target language in a non-intimidating at- mosphere. Every possible materials source was used to aid students in listening and speaking skills development.

How did we deal with the skills of reading and writing on which we had placed great emphasis prior to this change in focus? We did not ignore them, as can happen very easily when one changes direction to the extent we did. Instead, we made an attempt to treat both skills in a manner in which students could actively use them in a more relevant way. In reading, emphasis was put on information that is a vital part of modern life: advertisements, train schedules, menus, etc. Writing activities were directed to com- posing messages, formal and informal letters, sum- maries, and the like.

Foreign Language Annals, 18, No. 6 , 1985 463

464 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS

Having begun in 1976-77 what was a different ap- proach to the teaching of a foreign language at Walpole, we devoted the next five years to attempting to make our curriculum more representative of our focus. Materials were devised to focus on functional use of all four skills. In 1980 an exchange program was established to afford upper level students the chance to live for several weeks with a French-speaking fami- ly. As a result, we found that by 1982-83 our zero Level V enrollment of 1976-77 had jumped to 34, with similar increases in Levels IV and 111. There was no doubt that both students and parents felt that the need for relevance which they had noted in earlier years was being met.

Charged with the administration’s mandate for curriculum revision, we faced two very vivid realities: first, the acknowledgement that neither of us had any experience whatsoever in curriculum development, but second, the realization that no one is better able to determine curriculum than those individuals most closely associated with the population for whom the program is to be designed.

At that point we attended a 3-week proficiency workshop organized and staffed by ACTFL person- nel and funded by an NEH grant. At the ACTFL In- stitute in Haverford, PA, in the summer of 1983, we began the articulation of a proficiency-oriented secon- dary French curriculum and proved to ourselves within a short time that we could devise a program tailored to our student population. Curriculum

ing steps: The curriculum was developed through the follow-

I . Building a Foundation 11. Constructing a Curriculum

A. Setting goals B. Devising implementing units C. Adapting and creating materials D. Examining techniques E. Assuring evaluation

From the outset we had two firm intentions: ( I ) to create a sound document and ( 2 ) to devise a cur- riculum that we would use actively and not retire to a shelf. Thus, we wanted, first of all, to establish a firm foundation from which our curriculum would evolve and a secure point of reference for subsequent evaluation.

To build this foundation we examined two sets of goals-those of Walpole High School and thoseof the WHS Foreign Language Department. From the seven school goals, we selected those we felt had pertinence to the teaching of foreign language. We found three.

Secondly, we took the seven departmental goals and grouped them under the school goals. The result was as follows:

SCHOOL GOAL: To provide students with a curriculum which will assist them in acquiring competencies necessary for in- telligent reading, logical thinking and ef- fective expression. DEPARTMENTAL GOALS a. To understand the language at normal

speed in everyday situations without reference to English.

b. To speak the language in a manner com- prehensible to native speakers in every- day situations without reference to English.

c. To read newspapers, magazines, graded readers, and literary works without con- scious translation into English.

d. To write the language in authentic pat- terns of the foreign tongue without reference to English.

SCHOOL GOAL: To encourage students to be aware of local, national and global issues; to develop concern for human en- vironment, and to develop a willingness to live and work with others in a spirit of pro- ductive cooperation. DEPARTMENAL GOALS a. To develop an awareness of the relation-

ship between one’s language and civili- zation and those of another country.

b. To understand, appreciate, and respect another people’s way of life, literature and civilization.

SCHOOL GOAL: T o encourage in students a respect for themselves and others as well as a sense of integrity and self-worth. a. DEPARTMENTAL GOAL: To better

understand, appreciate, and respect one- self and one’s own culture.

For us, then, this was the foundation on which we planned to construct our French curriculum.

At this point, we were ready to initiate the impor- tant step of establishing proficiency goals. The first vital decision was whether to write goals for each of our five levels or for each of the nine courses includ- ed in these five levels. (We have a single course at Level I and two courses, a regular track and an honors, at Levels IV-V.) The decision was easy: knowing that our administration demanded a justification for each

DECEMBER 1985 465

course in the curriculum, we would be obliged to ar- ticulate goals for each of the nine courses. In setting these goals, we were guided by the listening, speaking, reading and writing sections in French of the ACTFL proficiency guidelines. As a format, we chose that of

the functional trisection that states the function to be accomplished and the content to be used to realize the task. Below is an example of the goals for our single course at Level I. The goals for the eight other courses are similarly presented.

Curriculum Guidelines: Level I

Function SPEAKING Able to express basic courtesy

Able to make short statements. Able to enumerate in short phrases.

LISTENING Able to comprehend basic courtesy formulae.

Able to comprehend basic vocabu- lary and memorized material.

Able to comprehend utterances in highly contextualized situations.

Able to read basic vocabulary and short phrases.

Able to read instructional and di- rectional material.

Able to read mastered material or recombinations of mastered material.

formulae.

READING

WRITING Able to copy isolated words and

Able to transcribe memorized

Able to write memorized words,

short phrases.

words and phrases.

lists, and phrases.

Few would dispute that this initial step in cur- riculum development is most important. After mak- ing the decision as to whether to articulate goals by level or by course, one must depend on one’s knowledge of the particular student population to dic- tate realistic goals of proficiency in the different skill areas. Perhaps one word of caution might be useful. Often on initial contact with the ACTFL Guidelines, one expects that students will reach Novice High in all skills by the end of Level I, Intermediate Low by the completion of Level 11, and so forth. How nice this would be! However, student learners are complicated and one soon observes that in most cases, they pro- gress at very different rates in the different skills. The key to setting realistic goals is, as one can easily see,

Content Immediate needs such as greetings, basic objects,

days, months, colors, weather, etc.

Immediate needs such as greetings, basic objects,

Immediate needs such as in a restaurant, store, months, days, color, weather, etc.

train, bus, etc.

Immediate needs such as names, addresses, signs indicating names of streets and avenues, building names, and short informative signs.

Immediate needs such as items on menus, sched- ules, timetables, maps, and social codes (DC- fense de fumer, etc.)

Basic survival needs such as messages, greetings, and social amenities in dialogues and specially prepared texts.

Immediate needs such as name, address, dates, numbers, days, months, and common objects.

Courtesy formulae such as expression in greetings and leave-takings.

a thorough acquaintance with the student population for whom the curriculum is being devised.

One will note that the goals of Level I for the four different skills range from Novice Mid to In- termediate Low, with those for listening, speaking, and writing confined to the Novice level and those for reading peaking into Intermediate.

Having completed the first step, that of setting goals and having checked them carefully against our foundation of school-departmental goals, we began our second phase of curriculum development- creating implementing units for each of our nine courses. In so doing we were really performing two tasks simultaneously-( 1) identifying course objec- tives and (2) determining course content. Below is a sample of the format used for all courses.

466 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS

LEVEL I Unit 1 Student task: To become familiar with basic courtesy formulae

Content Theme Introduction

Dialogue

Language Exploration A. Finding out information B. Answering inquiries C. Indicating what you have D. Talking about where you are

Communicative Activities A. Expanding aspects of the unit B. Personalizing aspects of the unit

From this example, one notes that every unit has three aspects: ( I ) a theme introduction, (2) language ex- ploration and (3) communicative activities.

How then did we determine the objectives and course content in these so-called implementing units? We had been working with a text for several years and knew that budgeting constraints would not allow the adoption of another for 5-IO years. Thus we took the text already in place and, knowing about how much material we were able to reasonably cover in various courses, we designated the number of chapters for each course. Taking then the chapters allotted for each course, we determined objectives and content by asking ourselves what the text suggested directly and what we must add as a result of what the text suggested indirectly.

One area in the creation of the implementing units that required particular attention was that of language exploration. Here it was necessary to decide what would be taught for reception and what should be taught for production. In addition, provisions had to be made to cycle materials accordingly. Having worked with a very limited time frame, we now realize that this is one aspect of thecurriculum that needs ma- jor surgery.

Approach Theme Introduction

1. View filmstrip while listening to taped dia-

2. Study for oral mastery and comprehension. 3. Do orally “student-to-student” questionnaire

4. Complete written exercise.

A, B, c

logue.

on comprehension of dialogue.

Language Exploration

1. Master mechanically new structures. 2. Do varied meaningful and communicative

exercises on structural aspects. D

1. Examine and master the thematic group. 2. Do “student-to-student” oral exercise for

comprehension and application. Communicative Activities

A 1. Study for oral mastery and comprehension. 2. In pairs, simulate dialogues in parallel situ-

ation. B

Present short self-portrait.

Thus, in completing phase two of curriculum development, one has to decide how one will identify course objectives and determine course content. A much more rational attack here would have been to devise these units progressively, perhaps over several years, rather than attempt them simultaneously as we did. However, since we had a deadline and no current articulated curriculum to allow us to operate at a more reasonable pace, this luxury was not available.

With phases one and two completed, we were ready to begin to implement the program in September 1984, and to devote our attention to materials. Even before we had begun to design this curriculum, we had discovered that our text had serious deficiencies for our particular student population. It was clear that this series could be used for dialogues, readings, and occasional exercises; however, for our goals, the text simply did not go far enough.

Accepting this reality, we decided that we would develop packets for each unit in each course. In this development we would attempt, insofar as it was possible, to use a progression of exercises: manipula- tive, meaningful, and communicative.

By following this progression, students first manipulate material in a very structured way, then the

DECEMBER 1985 467

attempt is made to have them personalize the new ac- quisitions, and finally, once students have worked on a manipulative and meaningful level, they are asked to take this material and to communicate with it. This same progression adapts itself readily to grammatical points or to vocabulary.

Creation of one’s own materials does not necessari- ly have to be the overwhelming task that it is sometimes perceived to be. Many effective activities can be created relatively quickly and, most important- ly, may assure that materials are tailored to the par- ticular student populations.

Following our attention to the adaptation and crea- tion of materials, we felt it imperative to direct some attention to technique. While adhering to no one method, we did establish what we regarded as guiding principles in a proficiency-oriented classroom: (1) to assure maximum student involvement and (2) to in- corporate maximum variety of activities in a class period. To put these two principles into practice, we have tried, within each of our class periods, to include highly varied student work in pairs or small groups.

Finally, of no less importance than the other cur- ricular phases, attention was devoted to the subject of evaluation. We were intent on assuring that we had a means for evaluating the curriculum as well as the students involved in various courses. As a result, we found ourselves using two types of tests: achievement and proficiency.

Achievement tests were used to evaluate student progress in all four skills. Oral performance was assessed via teacher-student conversations on the criteria of accuracy, amount of language, comprehen- sibility, creativity, and fluency.

In June 1984, the first year of full operation of this particular proficiency-oriented curriculum, we ex- perimented with a radical departure from achievement-oriented testing when we administered the final exam, a mandatory two-hour exam at the end of the year. Using the proficiency goals for each of the nine courses, we attempted to devise proficiency- oriented exams f w each course in order to assess how our student population was fulfilling the goals of a particular course. Throughout the year, we had tried to impress on students the importance of progressive learning in a proficiency-oriented program and the futility of cramming for tests and exams.

In order to administer this special exam, we receiv- ed permission from our administration to give the listening comprehension, reading, and writing com- ponents the final day of classes. The two-hour period designated for final exams was then used to administer the 10- to 15-minute oral components.

The results of this somewhat radical experiment were interesting. Many students, especially those who traditionally did well on achievement-oriented tests, were frightened by the reality that there was nothing concrete to study at this point since their performance now depended on their cumulative efforts. Such fears were dispelled when these conscientious students per- formed well on the proficiency-oriented exam and had the further satisfaction of knowing that this type of an exam was a testimony to their overall proficiency rather than just their mastery of a limited body of material. In addition to stimulating student oral proficiency, the results of this test were by far our best measure of the feasibility of our new cur- riculum. We learned that our original course goals were much too lofty and needed considerable scaling down for our student population. Thus, our basic conclusion was that this type of a test at the end of an academic year was a most appropriate way to assess overall growth of the students as well as the ap- propriateness of a curriculum for a student popula- tion. Consequently, we plan to continue its use.

In addition to the testing just described, we have us- ed the oral interview in a number of different ways. First of all, we administer it to a random sample of in- coming freshmen to establish the oral skills level of students coming to the secondary level. Secondly, as described previously, we use the oral interview as a part of an overall proficiency test to assess the profi- ciency goals of the diverse courses. Thirdly, we use the oral interview as a tool for placement of students transferring into our system. In June 1985, the two of us, who had just received certification as Oral Profi- ciency Testers, administered the interview to all seniors exiting French courses, giving them the option of having the rating included on their high school transcript. Finally, as of the 1985-86 school year, we would like to employ the oral interview in our ex- change program. testing students prior to and follow- ing their month’s stay with a French family.

When incorporating testing as a vital part of cur- riculum, it is essential to have means not only for assessing the progress of students but also for evaluating the effectiveness of curriculum. At the same time important decisions have to be made as to how to test the various linguistic skills and what weight to assign to the different components. Finally, in a proficiency-oriented curriculum, one must give thought as to the need, appropriateness, and frequen- cy of proficiency-oriented testing.

Conclusion Our experience in Walpole, MA, is proof that

468 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS

classroom teachers, in spite of their demanding schedule, can become actively involved in curriculum development and implementation. In fact, such in- volvement is inherent in the job. Yet the role we have had over the past several years has given us a much deeper understanding not only of the complexities of

designing and implementing an instrument to foster and direct learning, but of the diversity of learning rates and styles of the learners themselves. Moreover, this experience has provided new dimensions to our thought and rewarded us with both professional and personal satisfaction.

I nternational S irnulation A nd G aminy A ssociation

17 th Annual International Conference

Theme Simulation 81 Communication

University of Toulon, French Riviera

Main Conference : 1 ~ 4 July 1 9 8 6 Conference theme to be interpreted as broadly as possible, e g

decision & policy making. management communication. medta. mformatton technology social ~nteraction. intergroup relatjons. language learning. intercultural communica1,on. neqot la l~on

Session types include keynote presentations. buzz groups. debdtes p a r l ~ c ~ p a l ~ o n workshops

Pre-conference workshop : 2 8 - 3 0 June 1 9 8 6 participation session in a special version of NSIST

la world wide. mulf i ~n~f i tu t ion . international relations. computer asslsted s imdat lon i

Post-conference summer school : from 7 July courses in French as a foreign language Ireducloons for conference goersi

For more information, please contact : Crookall I ISAGA 8 6 Universite de Toulon, Ave de I Universite

8 3 1 3 0 LA GARDE France Home tel 194) 7 5 48 3 8

Plra5r mention Forergn Lunguage Annals when writing to advertisers