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 involved in the pedagogical process. Any education system fails if it is not tailored to meet the needs of those for whom it was designed initially. In this research, it was observed that the existing National Curriculum for the English Language (2006) does not fulfil the language related needs of the Pakistani learners. The intermediate level is the terminal level for students who either discontinue their education and get a job or continue learning in various fields. The existing theoretical curriculum is inadequate in terms of the practical application of English in real-life situations. Paulo Freire’s theory of problem-posing education supports the current study. Data was collected through teacher and student questionnaires filled by the intermediate students of both public and private sectors. CIPP model of Stufflebeam was used for the analysis of the collected data. For computational analysis, MS Excel was used. The results showed that the learners’ creative writing skills and verbal skills are not improving satisfactorily and a gap was also found in the methodologies currently used for teaching English. The current study is beneficial for pinpointing the ground realities and the practical needs of the teachers and students in the teaching-learning process. It is also helpful for stakeholders in the designing of 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). Retrieved from https://journals.umt.edu.pk/index.php/jcct/article/view/998


Amir, A. (2008).Chronicles of the English Language in Pakistan: A discourse analysis of milestones in the language policy of Pakistan.

Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience. Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Ave., New York, NY 10027.

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.

Kelly, A. V. (2004). Curriculum as process and development. Curriculum: Theory and Practice.

Kelly, A. V. (2004). The curriculum: Theory and practice. Sage.

Njeng’ere, D. (2014). The role of curriculum in fostering national cohesion and integration: Opportunities and challenges. UNESCO-IBE.

Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2004). Curriculum-Foundatıons, Prıncıples and Issues.

Özsoy, 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. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3).

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.

Wheeler, D. K. (1967). Curriculum Process [Hodder and Stoaghton].

Worthen, B. R., & Sanders, J. R. (1987). Educational evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines.