Soada Idris Khan


The current study aims to critically analyze the contents of the Technical Report Writing syllabus as well as identify whether the syllabus meets course objectives or not. The study also suggests some remedies to improve the contents of the syllabus. As part of the study, twenty EFL teachers from Preparatory Year Program were selected for this study. A quantitative questionnaire containing 10 statements was administered to gather data from the participants. In addition, an interview session with a set of 5 questions based on the key elements on the current syllabus was also conducted with the teachers to have their expert opinion and suggestions. The analysis of data revealed that textbook is appropriate for the students and needs not be replaced. However, syllabus should include some more activities that may address to the needs of weak students. The study also suggests teachers to exploit other resources (from internet or library) in order to give an extra push to the learners.

Keywords: course objectives; syllabus analysis; technical report writing.

Full Text:



Alderson, J. C. (1980). A process approach to reading at the University of Mexico: Projects in materials design. London: The British Council.

Altman, H. B., & Cashin, W. E. (2003). Writing a syllabus. Retrieved from ources/upload/AltmanSyllabus.pdf.

Ariffin, S. R., & Salbiah, M. (1996). Pemikiran guru cemerlang: Kesan teradap prestasi pengajaran. Kertas kerja seminar isu-isu pendidikan Negara. Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi.

Berwick, R. (1989). Needs assessment in language programming: From theory to practice. In R. K. Johnson (Eds.), The second language curriculum. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Brindley, C. (1989). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL programme design. In R. K. Johnson (Eds.), The second language curriculum. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Crocker, T. (1981). Scenes of endless science: ESP and education. London: The British Council

Davis, B. G. (1993). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Eberly, M. B., Newton, S. E., & Wiggins, R. (2001). The syllabus as a tool for student-centered learning. Journal of General Education, 50(1), 56-74.

Grunert, J. (1997). The course syllabus: A learning-centered approach. Bolton, MA: Anker.

Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London: Longman.

Hawkey, R. (1980). Syllabus design for specific purposes: Projects in materials design. London: The British Council.

Ismagilova, L. R., & Polyakova, L. R. (2015). The role of course evaluation and needs analyses for syllabus design: An application to “English Language” course for master-degree students in economics. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1S3), 346–351.

Jung, T., Osterwalder, H., & Wipf, D. (2000). Teaching and assessing middle-year students’ speaking and listening skill: Teaching and learning research exchange. Retrieved from:

McDonough, J. (1984). ESP in perspective: A practical guide. London: Jo McDonough.

McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh.

Parkes, J., & Harris, M. B. (2002). The purposes of a syllabus. College Teaching, 50 (2), 55-61.

Reed, V. (1989). Adolescent language disorders: General strategies for teaching language comprehension/listening. Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications.

Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. New York: Oxford University Press.

Woolcock, M. J. V. (2003). Preparing a syllabus: Practical exercises. The Harriet W. Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning Brown University. Retrieved from

Yalden, J. (1987). Principles of course design for language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 English Review: Journal of English Education