SYLLABUS

“One starts with the end – the desired results – and then derives curriculum from the evidence of
learning.”
– Wiggins & McTighe, 2000

As “evidence of teaching effectiveness,” search committees will often ask for sample syllabi of
courses that you have designed. For this course, we will ask you to write a syllabus for a course that
you plan to teach in the future, preferably combining your research field and the teaching of language
and culture.

You will be asked to write a syllabus for a course that showcases the research-based curricular
framework described in your review of literature. This syllabus should present a course that you hope
to teach in the future (at the level of your choice).

Your syllabus should follow the tenets of effective curriculum design including alignment of goals,
assessment and learning tasks.

1. Syllabus (draft 1)

Following the tenets of backward design, the first draft of the syllabus should address stage 1
(identify goals) and stage 2 (assessment) of curriculum design.

The first draft of your syllabus should include:

- Targeted level (beginning, intermediate, or advanced level)

- Basic information (Title of the course, instructor’s name, contact information, and office
hours)
- Course overview, themes, and rationale
- Clearly articulated course goals (what will students be able to do/understand at the end of this
course?)
- Course assignments or required work (closely aligned with course goals)

Preliminary Reflection Questions (adapted from Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning):

1. Who are your students?

What do they know already, as they enter the course? How will you know what they know?
What levels of sophistication and knowledge of language and content can you expect? How
much can you expect them to do? What courses have they taken? How much do they need to
know at this level?

2. What is your purpose in this course?

What do you hope to teach the students? What is the single most important thing you hope
they will leave the course knowing or being able to do? Why are you teaching it? (This is not
about what facts you want them to know at the end, but about what your larger/deeper
objectives are for the course. What are their essential understandings?)
 3. How are you going to tie the course together?

What is the story line for this course? What are the larger sub-topics? Does the course
overview clearly identify the theme of the course, or pose questions that draw students in?
Does it challenge or inspire your students? Does it introduce relevant vocabulary without
being confusing?

4. How are you going to assess students?

How will you creatively evaluate your students that align with the goals and purpose of the
course? Does your evaluation assess both language and content-oriented goals? How will you
know what they have learned?

Due: Monday, April 19th

2. Syllabus (final version)

Following the tenets of backward design, the final draft of the syllabus should address stage 1
(identify desired results), stage 2 (determine acceptable evidence), and *stage 3* (plan learning
experiences and instruction) of curriculum design.

The final syllabus should include:

- Basic information (Title of the course, instructor’s name, contact information, and office
hours)
- Revised course overview, themes, and rationale
- Revised course goals (i.e., Students will be able to…)
- Revised assignments or required work
- *Course policies (grading policy, attendance, late and missed assignments, honor code, etc.)
- *Course schedule (calendar of assignments, daily themes/topics, etc.)

The calendar of assignments and course schedule should directly align with the course goals
(stage 1) and assignments (stage 2). As you are drafting the course schedule, reflect on the
following questions (from the Bok Center for Teaching and Learning):

1. Does the course schedule have a logic, an order of argument, or a storyline?

2. Is the logic or story best told in vignettes (one per week or month)? Or is it better divided into
3 or 4 Acts – and if so, are they manageable chunks?
3. Does the order and logic align with your course rationale and goals?
4. Are the sections or elements linked to one another, or steps that follow one another logically?
5. Is the pacing reasonable?
6. Is the sequencing of assignments laid out clearly with an eye to developing necessary
skills/knowledge/understanding?
7. Are there built in moments of review (if applicable)?
8. Does the course schedule build the appropriate skills or competencies or understandings?

From the perspective of hiring committees for tenure-track positions in language, culture and
literature (Virginie Greene):
The central piece of your dossier is the writing sample demonstrating your scholarly style,
interests, and promises (whether it is a dissertation chapter or a published or to be published
article). Syllabi used to be treated as ancillary and even optional materials. Today, many
committees look closely at syllabi, and many ask for a class demo besides the job talk. Creating
well thought and well-presented syllabi is not perfunctory.

Your syllabi for advanced literature/culture courses should demonstrate that you will be ready to
start teaching day one, without much supervision, besides being introduced to the specificities of
the program and school. It should show that you have initiative, creativeness and independence,
at the same time that you are able to fit in a new program and school, and work in team with your
colleagues.

The challenge is to use the current pedagogical frame (mostly provided by language teaching
pedagogy) while showcasing your own scholarly resources and expertise. Your syllabi should
look a lot like any other, and they should read different from any other. No syllabus should look
like a dissertation cut into class sessions. Some of the questions and materials used in your
dissertation should be manifest in your syllabi. It should be clear that your teaching range extends
beyond your field of specialty. How far beyond? Be bold but remember that you will need to be
always a little bit ahead of your students, at least conceptually. It is OK to teach texts you have
not studied before teaching them. It is prudent to have read them (I confess I have not always
been prudent).

Due: Friday, May 7th

SYLLABUS DESIGN RUBRIC:

Description Integration of language and Assessment Professional Theory meets practice

content presentation (clarity,
mechanics, format and
length)
Excellent Makes a complete and Clear and effective integration Assessments are clear, Consistently professional Strong personal reflection
(9-10 points) detailed description of of language and content- concise and reflect course presentation (clarity, on, and/or application of,
the target course oriented goals goals. mechanics, format, and ideas presented in the
including its goals and length are all accurate/ course (SLA theories,
required work (first appropriate) research, etc.).
draft) and grading
policy, course policies,
learning resources, and
overall schedule (second
draft).

Good Makes a detailed Some effective integration of Assessments are clear, Mostly professional A moderate amount of
(8 points) description of most of language and content-oriented concise and cover most of presentation (a few personal reflection on,
the target course goals the course goals. problems with clarity, and /or application of,
elements mechanics, format, and ideas presented in the
length) course (SLA theories,
research, etc.)
Fair Makes a detailed Partial integration of language Assessments are clear and Somewhat professional Somewhat limited
(7 points) description of some of and content oriented goals. concise but cover just a presentation (noticeable personal reflection on,
the target course few course goals. problems with clarity, and /or application of
elements. mechanics, format, and ideas presented in the
length) course (SLA theories,
research, etc.)

Poor Makes a sketchy Minimal integration of Assessments are vague and Lacking professional Sketchy personal
(6 points) description of a few of language and content oriented reflect only some of the presentation (significant reflection on, and /or
the target course goals. course goals. problems with clarity, application of, ideas
elements. mechanics, format, and presented in the course
length) (SLA theories, research,
etc.)

Unsatisfactory Makes target course No connections to your research Assessments are vague and Unprofessional No personal reflection on,
(0-5 points) descriptions that are field and current pedagogical not consistent with the presentation (lack of and /or application of,
neither detailed nor practices as evidenced by clear course objectives. concern for clarity, ideas presented in the
complete. references to, and discussion of mechanics, format, and course (SLA theories,
SLA theories and research length) research, etc.).
studies.