Synthetic Syllabus

A synthetic syllabus segments the target language into discrete linguistic items and teaches them one at a time, on the assumption that the learner will eventually reassemble the parts into usable language. Wilkins coined the term in Notional Syllabuses (1976), defining a synthetic language-teaching strategy as one in which "different parts of the language are taught separately and step by step so that acquisition is a process of gradual accumulation of the parts until the whole structure of the language has been built up" (Wilkins 1976: 2). The contrast is with the analytic syllabus, where the learner encounters language whole and does the analysis in the course of using it. The categories are poles on a continuum rather than a strict dichotomy; most real syllabuses lean one way.

What counts as synthetic

Long and Crookes (1992) updated Wilkins's classification, treating any syllabus whose organising units are pre-segmented linguistic forms as synthetic, including notional-functional syllabi that Wilkins himself had filed as analytic. On their account the synthetic family includes:

• Structural syllabuses: grammatical items sequenced by perceived difficulty.
• Notional-functional syllabuses: communicative notions and functions treated as teachable discrete units.
• Lexical syllabuses: high-frequency words and chunks, sequenced by frequency and range.

All three are synthetic because they pre-segment the language for incremental mastery. The methodology typically paired with synthetic syllabuses is a Presentation-Practice-Production cycle.

Claims in its favour

• Visible structure and progression for teachers, learners, publishers, and ministries.
• Tractable assessment: if the unit taught was the past perfect, the test item is the past perfect.
• Alignment with coursebook economics: synthetic syllabuses are straightforward to package into a sequenced, examinable product.
• For lower-proficiency learners, a clear incremental path can reduce cognitive load.

The standard critiques

• Linear-ordering fiction. Learners do not acquire structures in the clean order that syllabuses imply. Pienemann's Processability Theory and the morpheme-order studies before it show developmental sequences largely independent of teaching order.
• The synthesis problem. The assumption that learners will combine isolated items into fluent use is the weak link: the classic accuracy-fluency gap. Mastery in controlled exercises does not predict deployment in communication.
• Decontextualisation. Items taught as pre-selected units are stripped of the collocational, pragmatic, and discoursal information that makes them usable.
• Misalignment with use. Needs-analysis traditions (ESP, forward design) show that what learners need rarely matches the canonical sequence of a structural syllabus.

Prabhu's Bangalore Project (1987) and later task-based work grew out of explicit rejection of the synthetic paradigm, arguing that meaning-focused activity produces the kind of processing a synthetic sequence cannot.

Where it survives

Despite decades of critique, synthetic syllabuses remain the dominant organising logic of published coursebooks and of most large-scale public-sector ELT curricula. Exam specifications (CEFR can-do statements notwithstanding) are in practice operationalised through synthetic grammatical and lexical inventories. Hybrid syllabuses with a synthetic backbone and analytic tasks layered on are the pragmatic mainstream.

References

• Long, M. H. & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27–56.
• Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus Design. Oxford University Press.
• Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford University Press.
• White, R. V. (1988). The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation and Management. Blackwell.
• Wilkins, D. A. (1976). Notional Syllabuses. Oxford University Press.