Remembering (Eslab qolish)
Structural syllabus nimaga asoslanadi?
Grammatik strukturalar ro‘yxatiga.
Lexical syllabusning asosiy tarkibi nima?
So‘zlar, frazalar va kollokatsiyalar.
Situational syllabus qaysi asosga tayanadi?
Haqiqiy hayotdagi vaziyatlarga.
Content-based syllabus asosan qaysi yondashuv bilan bog‘liq?
CLIL — Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Task-based syllabusning asosi nima?
Kommunikativ vazifalar (tasks).
Structural syllabusning asosiy tanqidi nimada?
Juda ko‘p grammatikaga e’tibor berib, kommunikatsiyani cheklashi.
Lexical syllabusda “lemmas” va “word families” o‘rtasidagi farq nimada?
Lemma — so‘zning asosiy shakli; word family — bir ildizdan chiqqan barcha shakllar.
Functional-notional syllabusda “function” va “notion” o‘rtasidagi farq nima?
Function — til orqali bajariladigan maqsad (so‘rash, rad qilish);
Notion — tushuncha (vaqt, joy, rang).
Topic-based syllabus qaysi kurslarga juda mos?
ESP — English for Specific Purposes (turizm, biznes va h.k.).
Task-based syllabusda qaysi ikki turdagi task mavjud?
Pedagogical va real-life tasks.
Lexical syllabus nima uchun zamonaviy metodikada muhim deb hisoblanadi?
Chunki u tabiiy so‘z birikmalarini, collocationlarni va real leksik birliklarni o‘rgatadi.
Functional-notional syllabus kommunikativ yondashuvga qaysi jihati bilan mos keladi?
Til shakliga emas, ma’noga va tilning vazifalariga e’tibor qaratadi.
Situational syllabus qanday qilib o‘quvchilarga real hayotga tayyorlanishga yordam beradi?
U o‘quvchini “airport”, “restaurant”, “school” kabi real vaziyatlarga asoslangan dialoglar bilan tanishtiradi.
Content-based syllabusning afzalligi nimada?
Til o‘rganish va ilmiy kontentni bir vaqtning o‘zida o‘rgatadi.
Mixed/multi-strand syllabus nega eng ko‘p tarqalgan?
Chunki u grammatik, leksik, funksional va task-based elementlarni birlashtirib, to‘liq o‘quv jarayonini ta’minlaydi.
Why is the structural syllabus often considered insufficient on its own?
Because it focuses mostly on grammar rules and accurate forms, which may lead to limited communicative ability. Learners may know structures but struggle to use language naturally in real-life situations. It often ignores meaning, fluency, and communicative needs of learners.
What potential limitations can a lexical syllabus have in real classroom practice?
A lexical syllabus may introduce too many vocabulary items at once, making it difficult for learners to remember and use them effectively. It may also fail to provide enough explicit grammar instruction, which some students still need. Teachers may struggle to organize lessons if vocabulary lists are too long or abstract.
What challenges may arise in a task-based syllabus when explicit grammar instruction is not emphasized?
Students may focus only on completing the task without paying attention to grammatical accuracy. As a result, errors can fossilize because they are not corrected. Some learners may feel insecure or confused without clear grammar explanations, especially in academic environments.
Why might a content-based syllabus be difficult for lower-level learners?
Because they must process both subject content and English language at the same time. This increases cognitive load and can cause frustration. Lower-level learners may lack the vocabulary and structures needed to understand subject topics (e.g., science, history), which makes learning slow and challenging.
What difficulties might teachers face when implementing a mixed or multi-strand syllabus?
Teachers must balance several components (grammar, vocabulary, functions, skills, tasks) within a single unit, which requires careful planning. Assessment becomes difficult because different strands must be evaluated simultaneously. It also takes more time and expertise to design coherent lessons that integrate all elements smoothly.
In your opinion, which type of syllabus is most effective for university students today? Provide reasons and practical examples.
A mixed (multi-strand) syllabus is the most effective for university students because it integrates grammar, vocabulary, communicative functions, skills, and tasks. Modern learners need accuracy, fluency, and real-life communication at the same time.
How does a functional-notional syllabus contribute to communicative competence more effectively than a structural syllabus?
A functional-notional syllabus focuses on what learners want to do with language (requesting, apologizing, suggesting) rather than on grammatical rules. This promotes real-life communication, meaning negotiation, and pragmatic competence. Unlike structural syllabi, it reflects authentic language use and prepares learners for actual interactions.
Why does content-based instruction (CBI) naturally integrate all language skills better than other syllabus types?
Content-based instruction uses meaningful academic content as the basis for language learning. To understand subject matter (science, history, etc.), learners must use reading, listening, speaking, and writing simultaneously. This natural integration mirrors real academic study, where skills overlap. Therefore, CBI promotes holistic language development.
What is the major theoretical strength of a task-based syllabus according to communicative language teaching principles?
Its major strength is that it prioritizes meaning-focused communication and creates real communicative pressure. Students must use language to achieve an outcome (e.g., solve a problem). This mirrors natural acquisition: learners use language for genuine purposes rather than practicing isolated forms. It increases fluency, motivation, and authentic use.
Why is the lexical syllabus particularly important in developing natural and native-like language use?
Because natural speech heavily depends on lexical chunks, collocations, and formulaic expressions (e.g., take a break, heavy traffic). A lexical syllabus teaches these multi-word units directly, enabling learners to produce more fluent, idiomatic language. Grammar becomes easier because many expressions follow predictable patterns. This leads to more native-like competence.