Pusat Program Luar/FBMKUNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

Program Bersemuka 2Semester I 2008/2009

Kursus: BBI 3211(English for Specific Purposes)

Tarikh: 21 September 2008Tempat: BKP 001 UPMPensyarah: PM Dr. Mohd Faiz

Abdullah

BBI 3211 (ESP): Review of Course Objectives and Assessment Scheme

Lecturer: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mohd Faiz Abdullah

Learning Objectives

By the end of this course, students are able to:1. identify the differences between

teaching/learning ESP and General English;2. describe the different approaches to needs

analysis;3. list and describe the possible constraints on

the process of analysing needs and designing ESP courses;

4. identify the various approaches to ESP course design;

Learning Objectives (cont’d)

5. determine how special language can be analysed and described;

6. describe the role of the ESP practitioner and appropriate methodology in ESP;

7. identify the features of sound ESP materials; and

8. describe the functions of evaluation and apply techniques of assessment in ESP.

Assessment

• Individual Task 10%

• Mini-project I 15%

• Mini-project II 15%

• Mid-semester Test 20%

• Final Examination 40%

• TOTAL MARKS100%

Final Examination

• assessment of your knowledge of the course content

• will comprise 40 multiple-choice questions and two (2) essay questions

• You must attempt all the multiple-choice items (30% of course marks) and choose one essay question (10% of course marks).

BBI 3211 (ESP): REVIEW OF UNITS 5 – 7

Lecturer: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mohd Faiz Abdullah

Unit 5: ESP MATERIALS

Unit ObjectivesAt the end of this unit, you will be able to:• describe ways in which knowledge of special

language can be used in the development of ESP materials,

• identify authentic texts for use in ESP classes,• distinguish between language-focused and authentic

activity-focused use of text,• assess the relative merits and demerits of using

textbooks and in-house materials, respectively, and• select appropriate techniques of ESP materials

design and apply these to their own practice.

Link between Language and Content

1. Language descriptions - the link between NA, CD and Materials.

2. Methodology in ESP - two angles, i.e. ‘methodology’ as:• the approach to problem-solving that is practised

in a particular discipline and/or area of study/work, and

• the sum total of teaching/learning activities in a course of instruction.

3. Current approaches to ESP are based on:– notions of ‘genre’ and ‘register’ in relation to

language use in work/study context– Topics and learning tasks in course design

Link between Language and Content (cont’d…)

4. Descriptions of special language link NA to the language content of the course via:– description carried out at NA stage of course design

– basis for the development of materials

– important first stage in the selection of content

– basis of ESP materials esp. areas of materials that are language-focused E.g. exercises on word formation, collocations (i.e. words that tend to occur together), abbreviations, and the linguistic forms associated with the expression of rhetorical functions and discourse moves or stages

Link between Language and Content (cont’d…)

5. Language descriptions are not explicit in communicative activities:

• part of “language focus” stage, not “content focus” stage

• knowledge of typical genres is useful for the teacher or materials-writer as a basis for structuring communicative activities

• Units of materials structured according to Topics and Tasks

Link between Language and Content (cont’d…)

6. Structure of a unit of materials (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987): Starter Input Language Focus and Content Focus

(alternating) Tasks (pedagogic tasks leading to

‘real world tasks) Projects (optional)

Text and Tasks

7. Authentic tasks are devised, based on authentic texts:

• Authentic tasks resemble the actions learners need to do in real life situations

• Authentic texts are those which are similar to actual texts found in those situations

• Authenticity of text and task is therefore a key consideration in ESP materials

Using Authentic Texts

1. Properties of authenticity with regard to ESP materials include the following:

• the texts were not produced for language teaching/training purposes

• the texts are relevant for the target context of language use

• the texts should be what the learners would do in their specific area of study/work activity

Authentic Texts (cont’d…)

2. If authentic texts are linguistically too difficult for the learners, simple or simplified texts can be used.

• ‘simple’ = specially written for the language class

• ‘simplified’ = the original text is modified to make it simpler

3. In simplified accounts, two features that are usually changed are:

• lexis, or vocabulary• syntax

Authentic Texts (cont’d…)

4. Two textual features that one should be careful to preserve unchanged in simplified accounts are:

• rhetorical structure• information structure5. Two other ways of making difficult texts more

accessible to the learner are:• grading by information density (i.e. controlling

focus on content from less to more)• grading by task complexity (i.e. arranging tasks

from easy to more difficult)

Language-focused and Authentic Activities

1. TALO (Text as Linguistic Object) - texts that focus on language

2. TAVI (Text as Vehicle of Information) - texts that are used to stimulate authentic activities

3. Procedure for application of concepts:• Selection of text i.e. principles whereby the

text is chosen – what the teacher looks for• Working with text• Classroom interaction i.e. teacher and

learners – who is talking, and to whom?• Follow-up activities i.e. in class or as

homework

Using Textbooks

Advantages• good quality, from expert

authors and editors

• good appearance

• convenient to have a book

• the book provides a syllabus and a course shape

• accountability, control and co-ordination in a large-scale course with several student groups taught by different teachers

Disadvantages• irrelevance of topics for group

• wrong language level for group

• wrong level of subject knowledge for group

• not suitable for learning style(s) of group

• not meeting their particular language difficulties

• students may have used the book before

• book may be culturally inappropriate

• not enough copies for students

Using In-house Materials

Advantages• relevance and appropriacy

for particular group of learners, with regard to:

– topic– level of subject – knowledge– language level– language difficulties– learning style– cultural acceptability

• flexibility – responding to needs as they arise, or keeping up-to-date with topical subjects

• materials writing is professionally prestigious

Disadvantages• very time-consuming to

produce

• variable quality

• difficult to coordinate across teachers – they tend to want to use their own only

• lots of bits of paper inconvenient for students, and also teachers

• a syllabus and course plan must also be drawn up

• difficulty in finding suitable source material, especially fro listening

UNIT 6: METHODOLOGY FOR ESP

Sub-topics:

• ESP Methodology and EGP Methodology

• Activities in ESP

• Using Students’ Knowledge of the Specialism

• Problem Solving Tasks

• Review

ESP/EGP Methodology

Differences between ESP/EGP teaching/learning:

• teacher roles in the ESP classroom, • teacher and student knowledge of

the specialism, • the relationship between the

specialism and ESP methodology, and

• tasks for the ESP classroom

ESP/EGP Methodology…

Dudley-Evans and St John (1998, p. 187): “We [suggest] that ESP teaching can be

very different to EFL [EGP] teaching …mainly from two factors associated with the learners:

• the specialist knowledge that they bring – both conscious and latent;

• the cognitive and learning processes that they bring with them from their experience of learning and working within their specialist field.”

Roles of the ESP teacher/instructor

• Empathiser• Consultant• Course designer and administrator• Diplomat/Negotiator• Analyst• Materials writer• Evaluator and tester• Report writer• Collaborator with content specialists• Classroom researcher

Activities in ESP

– Role Plays – Simulations– Case studies – Project work– Oral presentation– Information transfer– Information gap– Jigsaw listening/reading

Using Students’ Knowledge of their Specialism

Appropriating students’ knowledge of:

• the world,

• their mother tongue, and other languages

To carry out:

• Problem Solving Tasks

• Using a ‘deep-end’ strategy

UNIT 7: EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT IN ESP

Sub-topics• Assessment vs. Evaluation• The Design of Evaluations• Guidelines on Evaluation• Evaluation Methods: Data Gathering• Evaluation of Process and Product• Programme-Fair Evaluation• Evaluation Criteria• The Evaluation of Projects• The Realities of Evaluation• Evaluation in ESP• Testing in ESP

Main differences between assessment and evaluation Assessment

• Assessment = measuring or judging the progress, achievement, or proficiency of students

• The focus is on student learning, the outcomes of instruction

Evaluation

• Evaluation is a broader concept than assessment – value-adding process

• Assessment may be one part of an evaluation. But evaluation may focus on many other aspects of a course apart from student learning; e.g. quality of the teaching or the materials, the appropriateness of the objectives, the classroom climate and so on.

Evaluation

• “The process of determining to what extent the objectives are actually being realised.”

• “Evaluation is the systematic collection and analysis of all relevant information necessary to promote the improvement of a curriculum and assess its effectiveness and efficiency, as well as the participants attitudes within the context of the particular institutions involved

A practical perspective on evaluation

Collecting educational information about:

• the achievement of learners

• the teachers

• the materials

• the teaching methodology

• the syllabus, etc.

Design of Evaluations

• Why evaluate?

• Who evaluates?

• For whom

Formative evaluation vs. summative evaluationFormative• Gathers information

about an on-going program

• Periodic – aims to check on progress and suggest improvements to program. Focus on improvement

• Usually internal agents of evaluation

Summative• Appraisal of a completed

program

• Asks if objectives have been met

• Serves the accountability function. Informs decisions on renewal or abandonment of the program

• Usually external evaluator

Evaluation Methods: Data-Gathering

• questionnaires

• interviews

• classroom observation

• study of documents

• tests

• ratings

Testing Purpose and Test Types

• Achievement test.

• Proficiency Test

• Placement test

• Diagnostic test

• Progress test.

The Interpretation of Test Scores

• Norm-Referenced testing

• Criterion-referenced testing

Scoring Tests

• Objective scoring.

• Subjective scoring

Test Validation• Reliability issues• Validity issues

Test Methods• Direct tests• Indirect tests• Performance tests• Competence tests

Thank you for listening…

Best of luck with your studies!PM Dr. Faiz Abdullah

E-Mail: mfaiz@fbmk.upm.edu.myH/Phone: 012-9789764FBMK Room No. 212

(2nd Floor, Language Studies Block, Faculty of Modern

Languages and Communication UPM)