"We ain't as good as we think: English use and needs in Norwegian business

and government"

Associate Professor Glenn Ole Hellekjær, Department of Teacher

Education and School Research, UiO

Aim for my paperUse empirical data to argue that:•Colleges and universities must ensure that students in professions studies get EAP/ESP English courses to prepare them for working life•That continuing to rely on upper secondary EFL instruction is irresponsibleI suggest:•Language centres offering, compulsory, tailored EAP/ESP and GE courses for all students•Integrated with select English-Medium courses

English for occupational purposes

• What levels of English proficiency• What “kinds” of English • do university and college students need to function

in future professional settings– Should we expect researchers, businessmen, engineers,

economists, politicians, the Prime Minister to speak proper English?

– I would argue that Norwegian higher education is not effectively preparing their students for working life with regard to English

The need for needs-analyses

• We need empirical data about the level of language proficiency and knowledge needed in different domains:

• Common European Framework distinguishes between the private, public, educational, and occupational domains

• To be an empirical basis for curriculum and course design at all levels

Three needs analyses

• First national survey of language use and needs in Norwegian businesses

• 1032 (64%) of 1600 respondents

• CEOs and other managers• 302 exporters• 362 importers• Reasonable external validity

(generalizability) 2007

A look at the public domain

• 1551 respondents from Norwegian ministries

• 856 (56%) replied• 94 (11%) use Norwegian

only• 744 (64%) use English

regularly• 214 (25%) use another

foreign language along with English 2010

A qualititative follow-up

• Interviews with 13 staff in three Norwegian directorates

• Their use of English• The contexts and

situations it is used in• Success and problems- a

richer picture of actual language use

2011

Languages used in business

Heavy reliance on English in business (overuse)

English

Quality issues- ESP and GE

The main findings

• English skills are vital in business• Most staff use English, but not necessarily well• Too few can manage demanding communication

situations: negotiations, sales, press conferences etc.• The staff in question are well educated professionals -

engineers, biologists, lawyers, economists, marketers• But lack the advanced English needed for

occupational purposes• Why?

A look at another domain: Language use in government ministries: August 2009

• 1551 respondents • 846 (55%) reply rate

• 94 only Norwegian (depends on the job)

• 744 use English• 214 of the 744 use a

foreign language as well

The tasks for which English is used

For which tasks is good English essential?

Had they experienced difficulties?• The number of reported difficulties/communication breakdowns

seemed low• But was contradicted by answers to open questions:

– Too many spoke English poorly- or overestimated their proficiency (often the leaders embarrassed their subordinates)

– Unreadable written documentation/letters– No system for quality control of written documents– Translators often produced poor and inaccurate (terminologically)

translations– Many seemed embarrassed and/or frustrated about the use of bad

English• But - a permanent secretary phoned me – politely disagreeing with my

interpretation of the data with regard to the difficulties encountered

My main finding-highly educated staff

General education n=846 Numbers In percent

Upper secondary school 30 3%

College/university 1-4 years 116 14%

College/university- more than 4 years 683 81%

In-service courses 17 2%

Total 846 100%

Job advertisements: lawyers, biologists, statisticians, administrators, economistsWho need good spoken and written English

Language backgrounds

81% have upper secondary school English only- but many also had longer stays abroad and various courses

A qualitative follow-up• 13 respondents• Same types and levels of

education as in the ministries- also with regard to English

• Most felt that upper secondary school English was utterly inadequate as preparation for their studies as well as for work

What did they say?

On the one hand-• At the outset they said/felt

they managed fairly well with regard to English

• They helped each other with proofreading

• Emphasized the importance of knowing the special terminology of their area

On the other• The more they talked- the

more difficult experiences were mentioned

• Poor vocabulary1. Reluctance to speak or ask

questions2. Linguistic “steamrolling” by

native speakers of English

Some quotes 1

• “There are a lot of people at management level who should probably never take part in international meetings.”

• Fairway: Norwegian directorate representatives encounter cultural as well as linguistic barriers which, they claim, sometimes stand in the way of Norway’s interests. It seems as it is the native speakers of English who “hold the best cards”, so to speak.

Quotes 2- Linguistic domination• You do notice that the English-speaking

representatives win just about every discussion. There are often a lot of Americans you have to discuss with and they have a vocabulary that is out-of-this-world. American lawyers are dreadful, since they deliberately use the most difficult words they can come up with, and use the language as a means of domination, in order to make sure that half of the room has not understood what they said. Very few participants dare ask questions, they are afraid to lose face (Frank).

Quotes 3- good English is much appreciated

I had a management position in another company a few years ago, and they found it such a relief –'Oh, God, can you do this! Great!' There are hardly any jobs at the level I have been working where my English skills have not been useful to me. It is something positive you can bring into almost any job where you have external contacts. Mastering English is very useful (Elisabeth).

I think the criterion of success is knowing the language so well that you can listen and respond. This has given me a special position in the directorate, the fact that I master it so well (Elisabeth).

Summary and discussion

• Trouble in two domains clearly indicates that “we ain’t as good as we think”

• Highly educated professionals in business and governance need advanced English proficiency as part of their job

• But must most often rely on upper secondary school English when doing so

• This harms Norwegian interests

I would argue that my data shows that:

• Colleges and universities must ensure that students in professions studies need EAP/ESP English courses to prepare them for working life

• That continuing to rely on upper secondary EFL instruction is irresponsible

I suggest:• Language centres offering, compulsory, tailored

EAP/ESP and GE courses for all students• Integrated with select English-Medium courses

Implications?

• What do you think?

My conclusion- a sin of omission• It is time to stop blaming/trusting

upper secondary school EFL instruction

• Institutions of higher education need to make sure that their students learn occupationally relevant English- GE, relevant terminology, as well as the mastery of relevant communication situations

• At present they are failing to prepare their students for the “hereafter”. I consider it “a sin of omission”.