Abstract

This quasi-experimental research aimed to describe the syllabus design process using the backward design model and its features to determine the teacher candidates’ perceptions of its application in the English Skills Development course. To achieve these objectives, the syllabus based on the BDM was designed before starting the course; after that, it was applied to sixteen students enrolled in a teacher preparation program at a Hungarian university in Budapest. At the end of the course, the participants developed sixteen final projects related to the main topic of the course, teaching English as a Foreign Language in Hungary and following the Goal, Role, Audience, Situation, Product, Standard (GRASPS) framework to conduct authentic performance tasks. This research method involves collecting data through written reflections, focus-group interviews and content analysis of the conducted performance tasks. The results show that BDM and authentic performance tasks can be used as a coherent, organized, and flexible syllabus design that supports EFL students by providing differentiated instruction to foster their English skills, creativity, problem-solving and critical thinking skills, long life and autonomous learning, and digital competencies. Furthermore, the results of the study make an essential contribution to the context of EFL by suggesting that planning the syllabus based on the BDM creates strong connections between course objectives, assessment, content, teaching strategies, and technology, thereby offering a practical framework for educators to enhance their teaching practices in the digital age.  

Keywords

References

• Abramczyk, A., & Jurkowski, S. (2020). Cooperative learning as an evidence-based teaching strategy: What teachers know, believe, and how they use it. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1733402
• Anderson, G., & Arsenault, N. (1998). Fundamentals of educational research. Psychology Press.
• Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019
• Childre, A., Sands, J. R., & Pope, S. T. (2009). Backward design: Targeting depth of understanding for all learners. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41(5), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990904100501
• Dari, W., Hidayat, S., & Wulandari, E. (2024). The understanding by design strategy in 21st-century Education. Biosfer: Jurnal Tadris Biologi, 14(2), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.24042/biosfer.v14i2.15818
• Daugherty, K. K. (2006). Backward course design: Making the end the beginning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70(6). http://doi.org/10.5688/aj7006135
• Di Masi, D., & Milani, P. (2016). Backward design in-service training blended curriculum to practitioners in social work as coach in the P.I.P.P.I. program. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 12(3), 31–40. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/173472/
• Drake, S. M., & Reid, J. L. (2018). Integrated curriculum as an effective way to teach 21st-century capabilities. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 11, 31–50. https://doi.org/10.30777/apjer.2018.1.1.03
• El Ghany, M. A. O., Salem, M. Z. M., Amin, M., & Yousif, A. (2019). Using performance assessment tasks for developing EFL listening comprehension skills among preparatory stage pupils. Journal of College Education, 30(118), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.12816/JFEB.2019.61557
• Erdat, Y., Ceren, R. E. S., Ozdemir, L., Uslu-Sahan, F., & Bilgin, A. (2023). Influence of technical, cognitive and socio-emotional factors on digital literacy in nursing students assessed using structural equation modeling. Nurse Education Today, 130, 105937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105937
• Fansury, A. H., Januarty, R., & Rahman, S. (2020). Digital content for millennial generations: Teaching the English foreign language learner on COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 55(3), 1–10. 10.35741/issn.0258-2724.55.3.40
• Forehand, M. (2010). Bloom's taxonomy. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology, 41(4), 47–56.
• Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). What is scaffolding? Teachers' voices, 8(5), 8–16.
• Hartshorn, K. J., & McMurry, B. L. (2020). The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on ESL learners and TESOL practitioners in the United States. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 2(2), 140–157. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijts.2020.09.11
• Hodaeian, M., & Biria, R. (2015). The effect of backward design on intermediate EFL learners' L2 reading comprehension: Focusing on learners' attitudes. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(7), 80–93.
• Hosseini, H., Chalak, A., & Biria, R. (2019). Impact of backward design on improving Iranian advanced learners' writing ability: Teachers' practices and beliefs. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.1223a
• Jasper, M. A. (2005). Using reflective writing within research. Journal of research in nursing, 10(3), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/174498710501000303
• Kantorski, B., Sanford-Dolly, C. W., Commisso, D. R., & Pollock, J. A. (2019). Backward design as a mobile application development strategy. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 711–731. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09662-7
• Maciejewski, M. L. (2020). Quasi-experimental design. Biostatistics & Epidemiology, 4(1), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/24709360.2018.1477468
• McTighe, J., & Willis, J. (2019). Upgrade your teaching: Understanding by design meets neuroscience. ASCD.
• Misnawati, M. (2023). Instructional strategy for comprehensible meaning-focused input: Backward learning instruction. Utamax: Journal of Ultimate Research and Trends in Education, 5(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.31849/utamax.v5i1.11416
• Mosteanu, N. R. (2022). Improving the quality of online teaching finance and business management using artificial intelligence and backward design. Quality-Access to Success, 23(187), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/23.187.01
• Newell, A. D., Foldes, C. A., Haddock, A. J., Ismail, N., & Moreno, N. P. (2024). Twelve tips for using the Understanding by Design curriculum planning framework. Medical Teacher, 46(1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2224498
• Richards, J. C. (2013). Curriculum approaches in language teaching: Forward, central, and backward design. RELC Journal, 44(1), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212473293
• Rumanti, E. D. (2019). A transformation of a backwards design model to designing a curriculum. Diligentia: Journal of Theology and Christian Education, 2(2), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.19166/dil.v2i2.2059
• Slavych, B. K. (2020). Designing courses in communication sciences and disorders using backward design. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 5(6), 1530–1541. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_PERSP-20-00053
• Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction & understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Tung, N., & Minh, H. (2020). A case study of curriculum development: Backward or forward/central design? Journal of Social Sciences, 10(1), 18–28. 10.46223/hcmcoujs.soci.en.10.1.546.2020
• Uluçınar, U., & Dinç, E. (2021). Effectiveness of authentic performance tasks: The case of a special education course. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(2), 152–171. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2021270069
• Uzun, S., Meydan, A., Devrilmez, E., & Uzun, A. (2023). The relationship between teachers' attitudes towards distance education and their digital literacy levels. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(5), 111-121.
• Whitehouse, M. (2014). Using a Backward Design approach to embed assessment in teaching. Perspectives in the Science Curriculum, 95(352), 99–104. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ej1032466
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The Understanding by Design guide to creating high quality units. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2012). The Understanding by Design guide to advanced concepts in creating and reviewing units. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Yurtseven, N., & Altun, S. (2016). Understanding by Design (UbD) in EFL teaching: The investigation of students’ foreign language learning motivation and views. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(3), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i3.1204
• Yurtseven, N., & Altun, S. (2017). Understanding by Design (UbD) in EFL teaching: Teachers' professional development and students' achievement. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(2), 437-461. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.2.0226

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.