The Bridge: Linking CMD & Assessment
Curriculum cannot stand alone without assessment, and assessment frameworks shape how curriculum is designed. Here’s how they connect:
Richards’ curriculum design (objectives, outcomes) aligns with Bachman’s validity and communicative competence frameworks.
2. Nunan (1988, 2004)↔ Hughes (2003)
Task-based curriculum (Nunan) needs practical classroom assessment methods (Hughes) to measure real communication.
3. Tomlinson (1998, 2011) ↔ Fulcher (2003, 2015)
Materials development (Tomlinson) must ensure tasks lead to authentic language use, which Fulcher emphasizes in performance-based assessment.
4. Ellis (2003) ↔ Alderson (1995)
Ellis’ SLA-informed curriculum links with Alderson’s diagnostic testing to refine learner progress tracking.
5. Yalden (1987)↔ Weir (2005)
Yalden’s communicative syllabus connects with Weir’s validation frameworks for large-scale exams (e.g., IELTS, CEFR-based syllabi).
6. Douglas (2000) ↔ ESP Curriculum
Douglas’ ESP assessment directly complements curriculum design ini vocational/occupational English (a key area in Indonesia’s vocational schools
This connection shows that CMD experts shape teaching content & process, while Assessment experts shape measurement & outcomes. Together, they form a cycle:
Needs Analysis → Curriculum Design → Materials Development → Teaching → Assessment → Feedback → Curriculum Improvement.