Syllabus negotiation, learner autonomy and languaging within strict legislative regulations at the tertiary education levelmaking the most of restrictions

Abstract

This paper describes a specific teaching and learning experience as a basis to test the limits and possibilities of some current ELT pedagogies, thus responding, in line with Nguyen's contribution (2011), to calls for studies assessing the applicability of theoretical debates. A meaningful theoretical framework is first created, beginning with Rogers' notion of learning as a life-long process (in Brown 2000), discussing then the emergence of the concept of "communicative competence" and, as a result, of communicative language teaching. A development of the latter, "learner-centered" pedagogies are considered next, paying particular attention to the distinction between "weak" and "strong" forms of negotiation (Breen and Littlejohn 2000), and to the advantages of this methodology (e. g. , its contribution to learner autonomy [Breen and Candlin 200]}), as well as its potential pitfalls (Slembrouck, 2000). Then, the literature on Task Based Language Teaching is briefly reviewed. Finally, the paper discusses, among others, Swain's notion of "languaging" (2006) as a more operative term than "language output", as well as her emphasis on the role of the "agent" in the production of meaning, when discussing advanced language learning-an approach that proves particularly useful in this study, as the specific teaching and learning experience described here hinges on the verbalisation of each student 's assessment and verbalisation of herself or himself in a given professional context. After this theoretical context is created, the paper goes on to discuss how it was applied over four years at an English for Professional Purposes master's level course which was subject to educational policy decisions made by authorities at the faculty, university and government levels which had a very direct impact on syllabus design and daily classroom activities even though they were often made months before the class started. A priori, this situation seemed to collide with the principles of the student needs analysis which precedes syllabus negotiation. This experience demonstrated, however, that even taking into account the dictates imposed at different levels on curricular design, there was still room for adapting the contents of the course to the specific needs of each student each time this class was taught, namely room to create tasks which simulated the communicative events of the learners' current or chosen career paths (Markee 1994; 1997). In fact, it was this adaptability that contributed to the success of the class.