Evaluation of the Practical Implications of the ESL Curriculum at Intermediate Level


Muhammad Rizwan Ilyas
Rehana Yasmin Anjum
Sadia Azam
Ayesha Munir


Curriculum is the basic tool used in the pedagogical process. Every education system fails if it is not developed to meet the needs of those for whom it is designed. In this research, it has been observed that the existing National Curriculum for the English Language (2006) is not fulfilling the language-based needs of the Pakistani learners. The intermediate level is the terminal level for students to discontinue education and get a job or continue learning in various advanced fields. The existing theoretical curriculum is different in terms of the practical application of English in a real-life situation. Paulo Freire’s theory of problem-posing education supports the present study. Data was collected through teacher and student questionnaires filled by intermediate students of both the public and private sectors and for the analysis of collected data CIPP model of Stufflebeam was used. For computational analysis, MS Excel was used. The results showed that learners’ creative writing skills and verbal skills are not improving satisfactorily and a gap was also found in teaching methodologies that are being currently used for teaching English. The present study is beneficial for providing the ground realities and practical needs of teachers and students in teaching and learning process. It would be helpful also for the stakeholders while designing the curriculum and syllabus.


How to Cite
Ilyas, M. R., Yasmin Anjum, R., Azam, S., & Munir, A. (2020). Evaluation of the Practical Implications of the ESL Curriculum at Intermediate Level. Journal of Communication and Cultural Trends, 2(2), 39-53. https://doi.org/10.32350/jcct.22.03


Amir, A. (2008). Chronicles of the English Language in Pakistan: A discourse analysis of milestones in the language policy of Pakistan. Linköping University, Department of Culture and Communication. Beauchamp, G. A. (1969). Curriculum Process by DK Wheeler. London: University of London Press Ltd. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience. Teachers College Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED295928 Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1968. Trans. Myra Bergman Ramos. New York: Herder.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. Jossey-Bass. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education. Islamabad. (2006). National Curriculum for English Language (Grades I – XII). https://bisep.edu.pk/downloads/curriculum/GradesIXII/pk_al_eng_2006_eng.pdf Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: Theory and practice. Sage. Lodhi, M. A., Farman, H., Ullah, I., Gul, A., Tahira, F., & Saleem, S. (2019). Evaluation of English Textbook of Intermediate Class from Students' Perspectives. English Language Teaching, 12(3), 26-36. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1203576
National Curriculum for ENGLISH LANGUAGE Grades I –XII 2006. Government of Pakistan Ministry Of Education Islamabad. https://bisep.edu.pk/downloads/curriculum/GradesIXII/pk_al_eng_2006_eng.pdf Njeng’ere, D. (2014). The role of curriculum in fostering national cohesion and integration: Opportunities and challenges. UNESCO-IBE. http://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/ handle/20.500.12799/2451 Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2004). Curriculum-Foundatıons, Prıncıples and Issues. https://lib.hpu.edu.vn/handle/123456789/29248 Ozsoy, N., & Yildiz, N. (2004). The Effect of Learning Together Technique of Cooperative Learning Method on Student Achievement in Mathematics Teaching 7th Class of Primary School. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 3(3), 49-54. Stufflebeam, D. L. (1983). The CIPP model for program evaluation. In Evaluation models (pp. 117-141). Springer, Dordrecht. Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. N. (1975). Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice. New York: Mac Millan. Tunc, F. (2010). Evaluation of an English language teaching program at a public university using CIPP model. Unpublished master’s thesis.
Yildiz, A., Tomishige, M., Vale, R. D., & Selvin, P. R. (2004). Kinesin walks hand-over-hand. Science, 303(5658), 676-678. Worthen, B. R., & Sanders, J. R. (1987). Educational evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Longman