Stephanie VanDyke

Assignment #1:
1. When tasked with designing such a unit I would consider the following factors: the
wide range of proficiency in the classroom, provoking a deep interest in the unit for
all students, and a writing unit aimed at increasing the fluency with which the
learners can use the language. The first factor, the wide range of proficiency, is very
important for a teacher to take note of when designing a unit for it allows the teacher
to know how to create a lesson that will benefit everyone despite the varying levels.
With this knowledge the teacher can easily create tasks and provide information in a
way that will reach everyone or at least have accommodations to aid those who
might need a bit more help. The second factor, keeping interest, is wildly important
because without in an interest in the material we as teachers have nothing but a
class full of disinterested students and when one is disinterested nothing is
accomplished in the learning. Lastly, fluency activities, these types of activities not
only allow the students to put in motion what they have already learned but also
allows the teacher to assess what has been comprehended and what has not.
These three factors make for a fun and efficient unit.
2. Three concerns that I might have initially about the learning needs of my students
could not be said better than by Nation in chapter one: What knowledge my students

need to effectively function in my classroom, What my student already knows or

what they did not know, and What my learners think they need in order to succeed.
3. One of the first major similarities that I noted between Nation and Macalister (2010)
and Richards (2012) was that they both stated that the development process is
subject to change depending on the needs of the students. Richards (2012) states,
The assumption underlying this paper is that there is no best approach to
curriculum design, and that forward design, central design and backward design
might each work well but in different circumstances, and Nation and Macalister
(2010) similarly state, One of the values in using a principle-based approach to
language teaching is that developments in theory and research can be easily
accommodated by altering, expanding, removing, or adding a principle without
having to discard all the other principles. The second similarity found within both
pieces was their dedication to receiving Output. The three different designs
displayed in Richards paper all offer a way for the teachers to take the students
through a academic journey in which output is received at the end which is, what
learners are able to do as the result of a period of instruction. Nation and Macalister
also do this by making it an essential principle (number five) in the Format of a
lesson because, there are strong arguments for making sure that learners are given
the chance to produce language. Its no random chance that this similarity runs in

both texts because without seeing some results (or output) from their learning
students can become discouraged. The third similarity I found between both texts
was the importance of Input. Nation and Macalister (2010) state that, Input is
undoubtably very important and should precede output, they arent alone in that
thought process for input is the primary step in every design presented in Richards
(2012) and without it a student would not receive the new information and would be
unable to gain knowledge.