English and Asia

1

Patterns of Spelling Errors in Language Learners' Language: An Investigation on Persian Learners of English

AKBAR SOLATI, AZIMAH SAZALIE & SALASIAH CHE LAH

Universiti Sains Malaysia

Abstract

English spelling is without a doubt a complicated matter in which many interrelated skills are involved and learners around the world have trouble getting the letters right. It is a fact that English spelling is more complex than Persian. This is expected to pose several spelling difficulties for Persian students particularly in the early stages of spelling development. Due to the limited body of research in the acquisition of the spelling skill and spelling errors produced by Persian learners of English who are learning English as a foreign language, this study tries to determine patterns of spelling errors in the language of Persian learners of English. To find out patterns of spelling errors in language learners' language especially at the beginning levels, a 90-word dictation was administered to 32 Persian high school first graders. A total of five patterns for spelling errors were found.

Key Terms: writing, spelling skills, spelling errors, Persian language learners, dictation Introduction The English language plays an essential role as an international language of commerce,

industry, politics and education to the extent that it has become an agreed-upon fact in the

academic world of today. So it is important to be able to express oneself properly and to

communicate with other people in English, not only orally, but in writing as well.

Writing is a crucial act in the process of learning any foreign language, but more

so in English since it is today the language of global communication. The ability to write

clearly is essential to effective communication and critical to employment and production

in the contemporary world (Abdul Rashid Mohamed et al., 2004). One important factor to

take into account when discussing writing is spelling. In the worst case, one single

misspelled letter can change a word and alter the whole meaning of a text. In the popular

view, correct spelling is a sign of education. Conversely, bad spelling simply looks ill

(Fagerberg, 2006).

Cook (1997) also says that effective spelling is important for users of a second

language because of its social overtones, if for no other reason. Yet the amount of

attention given to it in research is minimal.

English and Asia

2

Croft (1983) pointed out that the only possible justification for learning to spell is

that accurate spelling is necessary for effective writing. As the focus of attention in this

study is on English spelling, Fagerberg (2006) states English spelling is undoubtedly a

difficult matter, and learners around the world have trouble getting the letters right.

Purpose of the Study

Ironical as it is, the bulk of students in Iran are found to have inadequate competence in

English spelling not only in high school but also at university levels (YarMohammadi,

2005; Khodaverdilou, 1997 and Miremadi, 1990).

In this regard, YarMohammadi (2005) states students enter the university with six

years of secondary English studies behind them, yet many of them have a hard time

constructing well-sounding English sentences. They come to the university with errors in

many areas of grammar (e.g. wrong V-form after auxiliaries: He would worked.), and

spelling (wach………..watch).

Mohammadi (1992) analyzed the spelling errors collected from the final

examinations Persian learners of English took in junior high and high schools and found

that spelling errors are the most common type of errors among Persian learners of English

(e.g. homophone: it…..eat, by….buy/ double consonant: diner…dinner/ spelling rules:

biger…bigger). He also stated that the acquisition of spelling has been considered a great

ambition of Persian English language learners at different stages of learning.

Due to the limited body of research in this area, the present study aims at

examining patterns of spelling errors among Persian learners of English.

Subjects

Participants in this study were 32 native speakers of Persian in grade one of secondary

education cycle in the second semester of the academic year 2007-2008. Their ages

ranged from 14-16. They had been learning English for two years in junior high school

and had received four hours per week. Their exposure to the English language was

limited to the classroom. Given the discussion above, it can be concluded that the

subjects are homogeneous in the terms of language exposure and their linguistic and

educational backgrounds.

English and Asia

3

Material Kibbel and Miles (1994) state that words selected for dictation should all be familiar to

the learners. Feez (2001) in this regard says that the selected words for dictation should

match the level of language of the course of study. Most standardized and criterion-

reference measures use 25–50 words to assess students’ spelling skills. Although there

are no data to suggest the optimal sample size, a corpus of 50-100 words would appear to

be an appropriate amount to capture patterns of spelling (Masterson and Apel, 2000).

Following Kibbel and Miles (1994), Randall (1997, 2005) and Masterson and

Apel (2000), this study used 90 selected individual words given in dictation taken from

English text book of Persian learners of English in grade one.

Procedures According to Randall (1997) and Kibbel and Miles (1994), 90 selected words will be read

to the students followed by context and then by a second reading of the selected words.

There will be a three-second pause between the first reading of the selected word and the

context and between the context and the second reading of the selected word. The Persian

English learners are asked to write down the word which they heard.

Results

Upon analyzing the word dictation, the spelling errors of addition, deletion, substitution,

and transposition were detected in the written product of the students:

Addition: eschool……school, berown….brown. Deletion: of-en……often, acro-s.……across. Substitution: dey….they, mosk….mosque. Transposition: recieve….receive, feild…field. Finally, five patterns were detected in the students' word dictation. 1. Written Yet Unpronounced Letters in English Orthography

The following errors were found within this pattern:

Kettle-weigh-little-could-climb-leave-bicycle-who-people-foreign-while-often-know-walk-autumn-high-wrong-brightly- -kitchen-whose-hour-place. 2. Homophone confusion

English and Asia

4

In English, two words may have the same pronunciation, but they may not be spelt in the

same way. The students are already well familiar with both forms of the words. It seems

that unawareness of the lexicogrammatical functioning of the words results in their

occurrence. The following errors were found within this pattern:

Their for there – it for eat – write for right – to for too – too for two – our for hour – sea for see – so for saw – hi for high- knows for nose – whose for who's – here for hear. 3. Letters in English Conveying Different Sound(s)

The following errors were found within this pattern: Batl….bottle – noize….noise – enouf….enough – akros…across – akcident….accident – samer…summer – wizer….wiser – pik…pick – wimen….women – meny…..many – mask….mosque. In spite of all claims to consistency in English spelling, it seems that these errors

(patterns 1, 2, 3) are the result of inconsistency in English spelling. It means that there is

no one to one correspondence between sound to spelling and spelling to sound in the

English spelling system.

4. Sounds Present in L2, but Absent in L1 The sound /w/, /θ/ and / ð / are the major stumbling blocks for Persian English learners.

In these cases, the learners replace L1 sounds and patterns for L2 sounds and patterns

(Substitution of Persian /s/, /t/ and /d/ for English [th] and /v/ for [w]).

tree….for...three - sing…for...thing - flover…for...flower - sink/tink….think - day….they – vei….weigh – vak…walk. 5. Sound Distinctions Present in L2, but not in L1 In English such sound distinctions are evident in the sounds / I / and / I: /. Such sound

distinctions are absent in Persian.

it……eat –bit…beat– live….leave – fit…feet – sit…..seat – hit…heat – slip….sleep – rid….read – ship…sheep.

It seems that in patterns 4 and 5, the difference between the sound system of

English and Persian is the cause of the errors.

English and Asia

5

Findings and Discussion A glance at the figures offered in Tables 1.1, 1.2 and Chart 1.1 reveal the fact that

27.98% of errors were attributed to letters written in English orthography but not

pronounced, 20.18% of errors attributed to letters in English conveying different

sound(s), 17.89% of errors related to homophones, 17.20% of errors attributed to sounds

present in L2, but absent in L1 and 16.74% of errors attributed to the existence of the

sound distinctions in L2, but not in L1 so the number of errors in pattern one is far

beyond the other patterns. It implies that the subjects in this study did not have a fixed

idea of English sound system and unfamiliarity with the English spelling rules is one of

the factors that affects subjects’ spelling error. This may be attributed to the lack of

correct semantic, phonological and orthographic associations between the spoken sounds

and the printed symbols. This is probably due to lack of spelling instruction.

Another factor that affects spelling error is the inability to realize the differences

between the L1 and L2 sound systems. The learners' inability in hearing and identifying

all the sounds of the words they can hear seems to be effective in spelling errors. This is

probably related to a student's proficiency level in English. Lack of exposure to the

spoken language as a part of the ESL instruction seems to be the cause of errors.

According to figures offered in Tables 1.1 and 1.2, homophone confusion is

another factor that affects spelling ability in Persian English learners. It is the result of

failure to make distinctions between two existing lexical items that sound the same but

not spelt the same.

The student's mispronunciation is the other factor affecting spelling ability. It is

due to the absence of some sounds in Persian, but available in English. The student's

mispronunciation is probably caused by insufficient instruction, practice, and feedback

received in the ESL listening and speaking courses taken by the students.

The findings in this study highlight spelling patterns that impact Persian English

language learners' spelling errors. To help EFL students in improving English spelling,

the students should receive more listening practice and should be more exposed to

English language. It is hoped that the findings in this study will be useful for teachers

preparing materials, specialists and test designers engaged in teaching English.

To prevent spelling difficulties, several practices and activities were suggested by

Glenn and Hurley (1993). Those include: fostering use of full cues in reading,

encouraging visualization of words and syllables, providing a print-rich environment,

English and Asia

6

providing computers for spell-checkers and materials for word banks, and teaching

spelling patterns and etymology. Ample time to read, write and use words in meaningful

connected text are crucial in developing good spelling ability.

Bibliography Glenn, P. & Hurley, S. (1993). Preventing spelling disabilities. Child Language Teaching

and Therapy, 8(3); 1-12.

Fagerberg, I. (2006). English spelling in Swedish secondary schoolz:. Students’ attitudes and performance. Karlstads University Press.

Masterson, J. J., & Apel, K. (2000). Spelling assessment: Charting a path to optimal

intervention. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(3), 50–65.

Randall, M. (1997). Orthographic knowledge, phonological awareness and the teaching of English: An analysis of word dictation errors in English of Malaysian secondary school pupils. RELC Journal, 28(2), 1-21.

Kibbel & Miles. (1994). Phonological errors in the spelling of taught dyslexic children. In

C. Hulme. & M. Snoling (Eds.), Reading development and dyslexia, London Whurr Publications.

Cook, V. J. (1997). L2 user and English spelling. Journal of Multilingual and

Multicultural Development, 18(6). Croft, C. (1983). Teacher's manual for spell-write. Wellington, New Zealand: New

Zealand Council for Educational Research. Mohammadi, M. (1992). English spelling rules and spelling errors analysis. Tehran.

Navid Publications. Keivani, R. (1999). Inability in learning English spelling. Roshd, Foreign Language

Teaching Journal, 5. Safarpur, A. (2004). How to learn English spelling. Roshd, Foreign Language Teaching

Journal, 22. Brown, J.D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher'

guide to statistics and research design. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Feez, S. (2001). The role of dictation in teaching and learning English. Retrieved from

http://www.telenex.hku.hk/

English and Asia

7

Appendix

Table 1.1: Frequency of errors in each pattern for each student Student Number

Patterns of Errors One Two Three Four Five

1 3 4 5 2 1 2 5 4 4 3 2 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 2 1 2 2 5 4 3 4 1 1 6 3 1 3 1 7 2 2 2 2 8 4 1 2 3 4 9 5 4 3 3 4

10 3 3 2 2 3 11 5 4 4 3 2 12 3 1 3 3 1 13 3 4 2 2 2 14 4 4 4 1 15 5 2 3 1 2 16 2 2 1 3 3 17 5 1 1 2 1 18 4 1 2 3 1 19 3 1 3 2 2 20 2 3 3 2 3 21 5 2 4 4 2 22 5 2 1 2 3 23 4 2 1 2 4 24 5 5 3 3 2 25 6 2 3 2 2 26 4 2 1 1 3 27 2 5 3 2 2 28 4 3 4 3 4 29 5 2 4 3 1 30 5 2 2 2 1 31 2 2 2 32 4 3 4 2 3

Table 1.2 The average of error frequency in each pattern and the percentage of

occurrences of each pattern in proportion to the total patterns

Patterns Average Percentage % Pattern

1 3.81 27.98%

Pattern 2 2.44 17.89%

English and Asia

8

Pattern 3 2.75 20.18%

Pattern 4 2.34 17.20%

Pattern 5 2.28 16.74%

Chart 1.1 The percentage of occurrences of each pattern in proportion to the total patterns

Word Dictation Kettle- The fire made the water in the kettle very hot. Succeed- If you want to succeed, you must study hard. Weigh- How much does your father weigh? Address- I will give you my address. Little- Her little brother goes to kindergarten. Pretty- Students should have books with pretty pictures. See- I see Ali every day. Heavier- My bag is heavier than your bag. Dinner- The man had dinner at home. Could- He could swim last year. Difficult- He was working on a very difficult problem. Climb- Many animals can climb trees. Carefully- He reads the newspaper carefully every day. Correctly- Ali answered the questions correctly. Many - There are many countries all over the world. Three - There are three students in the classroom. Cloud- There is a beautiful cloud in the sky. Eat- I eat the breakfast at 6:30. Saw - We saw a funny film on TV. Field- The cows are eating grass in the field. Read- I read my book every day. Raise- Farmers raise plants and vegetables. Outside- He went outside to wait for the bus. Ticket- He had a ticket for a bullfight.

27.97%

17.90%20.18%

17.17%

16.73%pattern 1

pattern 2

pattern 3

pattern 4

pattern 5

English and Asia

9

Visit- They will visit us tomorrow. Leave- Please, leave the books on the desk. Mosque- That mosque looks very old. Bicycle- His bicycle doesn't work. Pocket- I usually put my pen in my pocket. Who- Who came late yesterday? Hour - She returned almost an hour later. Borrow- Can I borrow your dictionary? Friend- I have a good friend in Tehran. People- People learned about new school. There- Have you been to Shiraz? I 'm going there next week. Than-Abadan is hotter than Tehran in summer. Foreign- He visits many foreign countries. While- The guests arrived while we were having dinner. Often- She often has to walk if the bus is late. Watch- I watch TV before I go to bed. Seat- Please, take a seat. Breakfast- Ali has eaten his breakfast. Necessary- Food and water are necessary for life. Women- Few men or women live like Newton. Summer- Summer is the hottest season of the year. Monkey- The monkey picked all the coconuts. Hear- I can't hear you. Receive- I will receive a letter today. Think- Do you think Ali will come today? Accident- Ten people were killed in the accident. Across- He guided the old man across the street. Believe- We believe in God. Brown- The brown coconut is ripe. Place - He made school a happier place for children. Feet- I have been walking all day and my feet hurt. Prophet- The holy prophet left Mecca with his followers and went to Medina. Guest- The man passed the food to the guest. Enough- I am going to buy a bicycle when I get enough money. Fatter- Ali is fatter than Reza. Arrive- When did he arrive here? Two- Two students are absent today. Thing- What's that red thing? Pick- It is hard to pick coconuts. Write- I want to write a letter. Sitting - Reza was sitting near the fireplace. Noise- Babies make a lot of noise when they cry. Cities-We have a lot of snow in many of our cities during the winter. Bottle- He drinks a bottle of milk every day. Know- I know the man but I can't remember his name. Walk- I walk to school everyday. Autumn- Birds fly south in autumn. Money- We can't pay much money for the car. Yellow- The yellow moon shines brightly in the sky. Wise- Ahmad is a wise boy.

English and Asia

10

Many-There are many students in my class. Too- The taxi driver doesn't drive too fast. Night- Did you sleep well last night? High- Some birds fly high in the sky. Wrong- I think you are wrong. Finally- He finally ordered a sandwich. Clock- There is a clock on the table. School-They go to school by bus. Brightly- At night the yellow moon shines brightly in the sky. Practice- We must practice English more now. Kitchen- She has cleaned the kitchen. Studies- He studies the lesson carefully at home. Guess- I guess birds find their way back. Whose- Whose car is this? Heat-We heat milk in a saucepan. They- They are very kind.

English and Asia

11

On the Study of English as a World Lingua Franca: Some Implications for Training in EFL Contexts

AL-SADIG YAHYA ABDALLA Al-Majma'ah Community College, King Saud University, KSA

Abstract

This paper tries to shed light on the general belief that effective English language training can only take place in English-speaking countries. As a result, it is generally felt that those who were locally trained have always been put at disadvantage by academic institutions in matters pertaining to appointment. Thus, in an attempt to redress the balance, this paper has explored and refuted this belief in the light of the present status of English as a world lingua franca. The paper starts with a detailed explanation of two related concepts that are currently used in the literature: English as a world lingua franca (henceforth ELF) and English as an international language (henceforth EIL) as distinct from the traditional concepts of English as a second language (henceforth ESL) and English as a foreign language (henceforth EFL). It then proceeds to discuss issues pertaining to training in EFL contexts.

Key Terms: lingua franca, training, ELF, EFL, EIL Introduction

There is a general belief amongst EFL teachers and learners that effective study and post-

graduate research in English can only take place in English speaking countries. There

seems to be two reasons to support this claim. First, many colleges and universities

stipulate that applicants for academic vacancies should be trained in English-speaking

countries. Thus, those who were trained locally would end up teaching at ESP sections or

community colleges; English departments always remained elusive to them. Second,

perhaps due to their awareness of the general attitude towards training in English-

speaking countries, most teaching assistants and demonstrators at EFL English

departments would prefer to have their training in these countries despite the availability

of the relevant programmes in many local academic institutions. Needless to say, such

training would enable them to evade academic discrimination upon starting their

career.

English and Asia

12

English as a world lingua franca

This section reports on the defining features of ELF as distinct from the dominant

ESL/EFL approaches. To begin with, ELF and EIL have emerged to refer to the study

and use of English as a means of international communication. It is the growing need for

English worldwide that has given impetus to the emergence of such an approach to

English language education and research. It is important, therefore, to report the defining

features of the new approach and show the rationale for proposing it as an addition and/or

alternative to the existing ESL/EFL models before considering its relevance to the local

practice and training issues.

This paper chooses to use the term ELF because it seems more appropriate in

diagnosing the status of English worldwide. Compared to EIL, ELF clearly shows that

English is used for communication by speakers with different language backgrounds.

According to A GLOSSARY OF LINGUA FRANCA, the term “lingua franca is a

pidgin, trade language used by numerous language communities around the

Mediterranean, to communicate with others whose language they did not speak”. By

contrast, EIL can be used by nations who did not develop a single national language as it

is the case of many African countries, e.g. Nigeria, Kenya, Southern Sudan, etc. These

countries chose English basically because of the influence of the British colonialism and

their recognition of the status of English as a means of international communication.

According to Seindlhofer (2005), the use of English as ELF means that “for the

majority of its users, English is a foreign language, and the vast majority of verbal

exchanges in English do not involve any native speakers of the language at all.” This

reality in the use of English language worldwide might have persuaded Crystal (1988), as

quoted in Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, to argue that “we may, in due course, all

need to be in control of two standard Englishes: the one which gives us our national and

local identity, and the other which puts us in touch with the rest of the human race". This

is particularly true in the case of spoken English. In different parts of the world, English

is spoken with different speech sounds and different accents to the extent that it is hardly

intelligible. A case in point is the educational scene in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and

perhaps in other gulf countries as well where there are many Asian and African teachers

(Arab and non-Arab). In many interactions between teachers, the most frequent

communicative function is "asking for repetition" owing to the pronunciation differences.

English and Asia

13

What remains the same across the globe is the written text. While it is true that advocates

of the contrastive rhetoric hypothesis contend that culture shapes writing in the same

language (cf. Kaplan, 1980; 1983), literatures produced in different corners of the world

could easily be read and understood. Thus, compared to the aural-oral skills, the paper

skills tend to be more universal and freer of the linguistic and cultural complications that

might hinder communication.

However, both EFL and EIL can be used interchangeably to refer to the use of

English as a means of communication inside and outside of the major English-speaking

countries regardless of the presence of other national languages. Talebineazhad and

Aliakbar (2001) report nine assumptions that underlie the use of EIL. A brief summary of

each will be given below:

i. EIL is descriptive. This assumption approves of “learners’ equal rights” to use

this tool of international communication in the variety that suits them.

ii. EIL is reformative, that is, EIL is conceived to replace the traditional

ESL/EFL models. Justification for such a replacement arises from the global

nature of EIL, which is claimed to be lacking in ESL/EFL models.

iii. EIL is inter-varietal. This assumption extremely revolutionizes the study and

use of English worldwide in that it challenges the concept of standard English.

That is, “… no speaker is realized as extreme… received pronunciation may

no longer be considered the ultimate model, the acquisition of native-like

accent is no longer the ultimate objective of the majority of learners…”

iv. EIL is functional. From the perspective of this assumption, learners shall not

have to be competent in all the formal and functional aspects of English

language. All they need is a certain amount of English to use in a

communicative event, i.e. talking to a doctor, a banker, an airport official, etc.

This assumption lies at the heart of the definition of the term “international

English” by Wikipedia encyclopedia. This especially has to do with “English

words and phrases generally understood throughout the English-speaking

world as opposed to localisms”. Thus, it is these words and phrases that

English users need to use in different communicative events worldwide.

Wikipedia goes so far as to restrict “international English” to “academic and

scientific communities, where formal English usage is prevalent, and creative

use of the language is at a minimum”. Indeed, among all the forms of English

English and Asia

14

language use, it is the academic and scientific discourse that remains the most

intelligible variety to those involved in academic and scientific activities.

v. EIL is non-artificial. Of course, it is a natural language since it is conceived to

stem from English language.

vi. EIL is inter-cultural and cross-cultural. As a means of international

communication, EIL is expected to accommodate all the cultural backgrounds

of its users. Smith (1983), as quoted in Talebineazhad and Aliakbar (2001),

conceives of EIL as “a value free or cosmopolitan English that is quite

independent of any cultural background but able to represent, describe, and

illustrate all cultures with equal vigour”.

vii. EIL is multi-cultural. This assumption centres upon the interaction between

cultures, which, in turn, arises from the communicative events where people

with different cultural backgrounds communicate in English.

viii. EIL is universal. This assumption is axiomatic in nature, and is taken for

granted.

Arguments about Local Training The claim made in (1) above seems to rest on the assumption that being amid native

speakers, learners can always avail themselves of natural situations to practice their

English. Indeed, it is practice that transforms learners’ passive language input into active

language output. But should practice be necessarily done in countries where English is

spoken natively? Yet, assuming that most learners need English for utilitarian purposes

(cf. Al-Busairi, 1991), which English-speaking country could provide the best practice?

What about the other countries where English has an official status?

Traditionally, English language is associated with two countries: Britain and

USA. This view is reinforced by two facts. First, sociolinguistic resources (cf. Trudgill,

1973) differentiate between two major English varieties corresponding to these two

countries. Second, most advanced learner’s dictionaries label all types of lexical

information included therein as either British or American.

Thus, most teachers would recommend Britain and/or the USA for better learning

opportunities. However, this tendency can be argued to be less convincing in the light of

the present day English status across the globe. Other things being equal, Britain and the

United States of America no longer hold the copyright on the use of English as for a

number of reasons. First, Kachru and Nelson (1996: 74-75) mark the Australian,

English and Asia

15

Canadian and New Zealand English dialects as “commonly accepted” English varieties

alongside the British and American ones. They also list about forty African, European,

and Asian countries where English has an official status.

In an attempt to classify the type of English users worldwide, Kachru and Nelson

propose three “concentric circles” on the basis of the English function in each country;

these circles are the “Inner Circle”, “the Outer Circle” and the “Expanding Circle”. As to

the first circle, it includes the five countries mentioned above; namely, Great Britain, the

USA, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The Outer circle is conceived to consist of

countries where English has roles in “education, governance, literary creativity and

popular culture”. The countries associated with this type of use are India, Nigeria,

Pakistan, South Africa, etc. Finally, the countries belonging to the Expanding Circle use

English “for more specific purposes” than those of the Outer Circle. That is, they use

English for “technical and scientific purposes”. This category includes Iran, China, Japan,

Korea, etc. (p. 77-78).

Second, even when accepting the view that training and practice can only be done

in Britain and the United States of America, there still remains a question about the

amount of time needed to achieve satisfactory performance. Implicit in this view is the

assumption that learners should stay in an English-speaking indefinitely for effective

practice to take place. Indeed, since language is an open-ended phenomenon, learners

would always stay for more language updates.

Third, the present world is often referred to as a “global village” owing to the

communication revolution. Events that occur in different corners of the globe can be

readily known to people almost at the time of their occurrence through a variety of

media: satellite channels, the Internet, radio stations and cell phones, to mention but

some. Access to teaching and research materials has also been tremendously facilitated in

all forms: hard and soft materials (written and audio-visual).

Needless to say, English is the major medium of communication for most events

and resources. On the basis of statistics, McCrum et al (1987: 1) state that toward the end

of the twentieth century, English “is more widely scattered, more widely spoken and

written than any language has ever been”. The fact that this is so, they report, stems from

two statistical realities: about one billion people across the globe speak English, with half

of them speaking it natively. Also, compared to the German and French lexical repertoire

(i.e. 185,000 and 100,000 words respectively at the time the book was published),

English had about 500,000 words. Thus, the various communicative needs of the great

English and Asia

16

number of English users legitimately match the richness of the English vocabulary.

McCrum, Cran and MacNeil are justified in concluding that English “has become the

language of the planet, the first truly global language” (ibid).

Alongside the language needs associated with Kachru and Nelson’s (1996)

concentric Outside and Expanding Circles, some countries, e.g. India, South Africa, etc.

need English owing to their acute multilingualism. Of course, promotion of a local

language to be the country’s national language would aggravate their political and social

problems and could even endanger their national unity. Therefore, taking refuge into

English would be an acceptable compromise.

In the light of what has so far been said about the international status of English

language, this paper argues that successful language education does not necessarily take

place in the major English-speaking countries only, namely Great Britain and the United

States of America. This argument seems to be reinforced by the fact that non-English

speaking countries can have their own training programmes that could be as successful

as those of the major countries in the concentric Inside Circle.

It is true that it always remains preferable for most EFL learners to acquire

English in countries where it is spoken natively. Other things being equal, in such

learning situations learners could but communicate in English. Thus, even when they

could not rise to the expectations of their interlocutors, listening to others speaking would

further familiarize learners with the speech sounds, native accents and ultimately enable

them to recognize dialectal differences. Moreover, many such training programmes

involve accommodating learners with hosting families, adding further opportunities for

learners to practice their English.

Despite all these advantages of this type of learning, it can also be argued to be

defective in many ways. First, quite a limited number of learners can access it; due to the

high cost involved, only those who are financially able can be enrolled in the relevant

programmes. Second, most training programmes (particularly the non-degree

programmes) last for a short time, which can hardly qualify learners to communicate

competently in the four skills. On the other hand, degree programmes have their own

problems. For instance, since such programmes centre upon linguistics and literature,

learners would spend most of their time communicating with books. Needless to say,

"bookish language", so to speak, is hardly communicative in situations requiring face-to-

face or phone interaction. It is interesting to mention in this connection that reports

indicated that a number of African scholars doing their postgraduate training in Britain

English and Asia

17

and USA were criticized for speaking ‘bookishly’ when they communicated with native

speakers (cf. Abdalla, 2007). All in all, learners would end up acquiring academic

English which is the least useful variety outside of academic institutions. It goes without

saying that such book-based training could equally be acquired in the learner’s country.

Where postgraduate training is concerned, most of us prefer to receive it in an

English-speaking country (preferably Britain and US). Part of the reason that we chose to

do so seem to have something to do with developing our linguistic and communicative

competence. In other words, those on a study course would be more exposed to English,

which is expected to improve their communication skills. Once more, such an objective

could be refuted on two grounds. First, it would be too late to improve one's

communicative competence at this stage.; for if they had not done so during their four-

year undergraduate training, they could not have been expected to fix it in a nine-month

stay, say, for an MA degree in an English-speaking country. Second, assuming that some

postgraduate students do indeed need such exposure, they are unlikely to succeed in

dealing with the course content (basically linguistics or literature) that they have been

sent for.

Justification for both institutional and individual interest in postgraduate training

in the major English-speaking countries could have been more logical if it had been

intended for quality purposes. Annual classification of world universities has to date

placed American and British universities on the top of the hierarchy of educational

quality. The question to be addressed in this connection is whether to eternalize such

training interest. It seems that practice does not support such training tendency, that is

many third world academic institutions did nativise English postgraduate training despite

most trainees' dissatisfaction with it. If given the choice, most postgraduate students

would choose British and American Universities to obtain their degrees. Thus some effort

need to be made to persuade them of the relevance and visibility of local training.

Fortunately, modern technology has greatly facilitated the access to the

educational materials in all forms: aural, oral and written. These can be availed online or

as software stored in disks. Now learners do not have to travel to the Britain or USA to

acquire native accent. The relevant material can easily be imported to train learners in all

aspects of English pronunciation.

Some EFL teachers and researchers might wish to contend that local training

could be devoid of an appropriate cultural level or would tend to legitimize foreign

accents. Regarding the first preservation, the cultural aspects of English, as it is the case

English and Asia

18

for other languages, is an inherent component of what has come to known as social

English. Now, cell phones short messages, chat rooms on the internet, chat programmes

on T.V. etc. are reliable resources for such language components.

As to the “deviant English pronunciation”, advocates of the Interlanguage

Hypothesis (cf. Corder 1981; Selinker, 1984; Nemser, 1984) argue that formal language

education (whether in the Inside, Outside or Expanding Circle) hardly results in the

acquisition of a native accent. In other words, the speech of EFL learners would always

suffer from a foreign accent however insignificant it is. Thus, whether people learn

English in their countries or in Britain or USA, they would end up incorporating

fossilized foreign accents in their EFL speech. Thus, it is doubtful whether the training

time spent amid native speakers could produce native accent. Such terms as

"idiosyncratic dialects", "Interlanguage" and "approximative systems" (as used by the

scholars quoted above respectively) function as descriptive tools for language forms

produced by (any) language learners. If this is the case, then learners do not need to travel

all the way to Great Britain and the USA to acquire an (approximative) native accent.

There are two facts that support this reasoning. First, the scholars just quoted contend that

learners' speech would always be characterized by a foreign accent no matter what the

level of their proficiency in the target language. Second, modern technology has greatly

benefited oral-aural skills. (Free and paid) listening and speaking materials are available

online and on disks; these are basically intended for educational purposes. Satellite

channels can also function as reliable resources for native accent. It is interesting to note

that satellite channels show a variety of speech forms ranging from most formal to least

formal overtones.

Conclusion

The objective of this paper is not nor can it be an attempt to detract from the value of

English learning and postgraduate training in the English-speaking countries. However, it

warns against the institutional tendencies that favour those trained in these countries,

which is conceived to be a form of academic discrimination, putting those who are

trained locally at disadvantage. In the light of the ideas and facts reported in (2) and (3)

above, this paper can arrive at a number of conclusions. First, the time spent in an

English speaking country (e.g. for a summer course, one academic year for an MA, etc.)

is hardly enough to improve one's linguistic and communicative competence, and could

not, therefore, be a valid basis for such academic favourtism. Secondly, English is

currently spoken in a number of dialects and accents that sometimes tend to be fairly

English and Asia

19

unintelligible. It is doubtful, therefore, whether the training received in an English-

speaking country is more appropriate than local training in preparing learners to

communicate in English across the globe. Third, where postgraduate training students are

concerned, most of their training involves the use of academic English. The best resource

for such language is academic texts; these no doubt, place the relevant trainees on the

same footing with those receiving local training. Fourth, it is now internationally

admitted that two Englishes are in the making: the one used by the traditional native

speakers and the one conceived to function as a world lingua franca. It is uncertain

whether the students are trained in both varieties in the English-speaking countries.

I would like to conclude by requesting all the relevant academic institutions to

objectively consider the issues which have arisen by the approach to English as a lingua

franca in their training and employment policies.

Bibliography Abdalla, S. Y. (2005). Towards a functional approach to the English writing research in

Sudan. Adab Journal, University of Khartoum. Vol. No. (23). Al-Busairi, M. (1990). Needs attitudes and motivations in foreign language learning: A

case study of Kuwait University students studying ESP. (unpublished Ph D. thesis. Lancaster: Lancaster University.

Corder, S. P. (1981). Error analysis and interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford University

Press. Kaplan, R. B. (1980). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. In K. Croft

(Ed.), Readings on English as a second language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop Publishers.

Kaplan, R. B. (1983). Contrastive Rhetorics: Some implications for the writing process.

In A. Freedman (Ed.), Learning to write: First language/second language (pp. 139-161).London and New York: Longman.

Kachru, B. B., & Nelson, C. (1966). World Englishes. In S. L. McKay & H. N.

Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching (pp. 71-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McCrum, R., Cran., W., & MacNeil, R. (1986). The story of English. Harmondsworth:

Penguin Books. Nemser, W. (1984). An approximative system of foreign learners. In J. Richards (Ed.),

Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 55-63). Singapore: Longman.

English and Asia

20

Seindlhofer, B. (2005). Key concepts in ELT: English as lingua franca. ELT Journal. Vol. 59/4. http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/59/4/339.pdf

Selinker, L. (1984). Interlanguage. In J. Richards (Ed.), Error analysis: Perspectives on

second language acquisition (pp. 31-54). Singapore: Longman. Talebineazhad & Aliakbar. (2001). Basic assumptions in teaching English as an

international language. The Internet TESL Journal, VII (7). http://iteslj.org Trudgill, P. (1976). Sociolinguistics - An introduction. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books

English and Asia

21

The Learning Environment and Student Motivation

BRIAN GAYNOR Muroran Institute of Technology

Abstract In Asia learning English takes place for the most part in the formal setting of the classroom. Opportunities for communicative exchange with native speakers of the language are limited. Yet, despite this context, emphasis is still placed on communicative ability for ‘real-life’ situations at the expense of context-based English that would be more appropriate and relevant to the Asian setting. This paper makes an argument for emphasizing context over communication and using this as a starting point for ensuring the relevancy of English to student’s lives.

Keywords: context, communicative language teaching, motivation

Few would deny that communicative competence in foreign language learning is a

worthy goal. Communicative competence though is too often associated, either explicitly

or implicitly, with native speaker proficiency. Leaving aside for a moment the rather

thorny theoretical debate as to what, or rather who, exactly a native speaker is, the

presumption is that competence in English is best measured in terms of its usage in an

English speaking country. This can be seen in the increasing emphasis placed upon

corpus-based studies of English grammar, concordance research and textual analysis.

Critics bemoan the artificial nature of textbook and classroom English, and how it fails to

correspond to ‘real world’ use of the language. This is not in dispute. What is contentious

though, is the underlying assumption that ‘educational’ English should correspond to the

English used by native speakers. From this perspective English as a foreign language is

primarily concerned with what Hymes’ termed “the performed rather than the possible”

(1972: 31); that is, the evaluation of proficiency is considered solely in terms of the

performance of native speakers and not other users of the language.

Yet, if we examine the English taught within the classrooms of Asian universities

then we realize that, in certain crucial respects, it cannot help but fail to be in accordance

with actual language use. Actual language use occurs naturally in what may be

considered the social world, motivated by the need for communication, the expression of

identity, both communal and individual, and determined by the differing contexts in

which the communication takes place. By contrast, the English used in the foreign

classroom setting does not occur naturally. It is akin to other subjects on the curriculum,

English and Asia

22

disassociated from the rhythms and patterns of everyday life, discontinuously placed on a

timetable, fitted into a schedule that is first and foremost determined by administrative

convenience rather than educational concerns. Additionally, in predominantly

monolingual societies like Japan and Korea, there is no natural social or individual

impetus to use the language, with the result that within the classroom a high degree of

artificiality surrounds the usage. This in turn has important implications for student

motivation and the necessary contrivance by the teacher of usage context. All this is done

within a restricted unit of time – the class, at the behest of a central controlling authority

– the teacher, towards a directly measurable outcome – the test.

The cumulative effect of this artificial learning environment is that the English

learnt in the classroom is a far cry from the natural conditions in which the language is

used. Much as we would like to introduce actual, or real, or authentic language use into

our classrooms, it is simply impossible to replicate the sociocultural conditions in which

native speakers use the language. You can, to some degree, modify classroom context so

that they more closely mimic reality, but, as Widdowson points out, “the closer you try to

get to user authenticity, the more contrivance you will have to resort to, for you have to

somehow reconstruct the original contexts and make them accessible, while at the same

time making them appropriate to the learning process” (2003: 112).

There is a curious contradiction, if not outright paradox, at the heart of this. For

pedagogic purposes ‘reality’ is taken to be the goal of language learning and this striving

for content and materials appropriate to realistic English usage drives much of teaching

methodology. Yet, at the same time the context in which much, if not all, of this learning

takes place is within the classroom. However, the classroom is too often conceptualized

as being ‘divorced’ from reality, lacking validation in terms of context and

communication. But what, one may ask, is so unreal about the classroom? It is all too real

for the students who must go there day after day. Until they graduate the classroom is, for

better or for worse, the focus of their lives. So instead of conceiving of the classroom as

an artificial and arid place, we need to recognize that it is in fact a social construct

possessing its own contexts and purposes, its own legitimate reality. In terms of English

language teaching, we need to conceive a form of English that is “appropriate for use

within the classroom on its own contextual terms and for its own purposes”.

This then raises the question of what kind of language is appropriate for courses

that teach English as a foreign language. Widdowson (2003) has suggested two guiding

parameters for determining language appropriateness: the educational objectives to be

English and Asia

23

achieved, and the process necessary to get there. With respect to the objectives to be

achieved, emphasis on native speaker like fluency or pronunciation is unrealistic and

often de-motivating as students realize that such a standard is beyond their ability. What

is within the student’s range of capability is to acquire sufficient knowledge of English

from which further learning, if so desired or necessary (i.e. for personal or professional

reasons), can subsequently take place. It emphasizes the possible rather than the ideal

situation. Such an approach recognizes that pedagogic limitations imposed on the formal

teaching of English within monolingual situations and so does not attempt the fool’s

errand of trying to be comprehensive and all encompassing. Rather, the aim of English

language teaching should be to identify those factors most relevant, motivating and

possessing the greatest potential for subsequent realization by the students. Thus for

students in a technological university like my own institution, it stands to reason that

there should be a greater emphasis on scientific or technical English as opposed to the

works of Shakespeare.

So what kind of language needs to be presented in class, and how does it need to

be presented, to activate the process of learning towards this objective? Firstly, the

English taught in the classroom has to engage the learner’s attention and interest: it has to

be made ‘real’ for them rather than simply being appropriated from an idealized and

remote ‘native speaker’ context. In other words, it has to have a relevancy to their lives as

lived now, as, extrapolating from my own professional situation, third level students in

the English language classroom of a Japanese university. Secondly, the English must be

of a type that can be learnt from. Relevancy is in of itself not sufficient: the language

must also serve the purpose of learning.

Now all this may sound like a critique of communicative language teaching

(CLT) and in a way it is. The main focus of CLT is, as the name suggests, upon

communication be it as a teaching process or educational objective. Broadly speaking

CLT is concerned with teaching the meaning, functionality and use of language in a

learner-centered manner utilizing ‘real-life’ tasks, situations and roles in order to develop

learner’s communicative proficiency in English (Yoon, 2004). This in itself is admirable,

but the problem arises in how CLT is positioned vis-à-vis the teacher and learner. CLT is

after all communicative language teaching and implicitly prioritizes teaching

methodology to the detriment of the context in which it takes place. This emphasis by

CLT on what the teacher must do suggests that the solutions to problems teachers of

English within Asia often encounter (e.g.: large class sizes, unmotivated students, rote

English and Asia

24

learning, solely exam-orientated), are primarily methodological in nature as opposed to

contextual. The, perhaps unintended, but certainly underlying, premise of CLT is that this

approach will work no matter where you are and no matter what the context. Unlike the

previously outlined approach to English language teaching that first and foremost

conceives of methodology as subservient to the student/situation context, in CLT

communication per se is held to be the ultimate goal of English teaching and this in turn

determines the methodology to be used. By relegating context to a position of secondary

importance, it erroneously suggests that CLT will work anywhere – that “the

methodology is king, and the magic solution for all our pupils” (Bax, 2003:282). By

focusing attention on what the teacher should do, CLT inevitably draws attention away

from the context in which the teacher is teaching and the students learning.

Again, using my own situation as an example, for Japanese students of English,

one of the biggest criticisms that can be directed at CLT is that it presupposes that the

English learned for ‘real-life’ tasks will be actually be used in ‘real-life’ situations. Yet,

for the majority of Japanese students this is patently not the case. This, I stress, is not to

say students do not use English, but the specific English they use or need to use can differ

greatly from the generalized task-based English found in most textbooks. Again to take

the specific example of the university I work for, Muroran Institute of Technology,

students here have minimal opportunity to interact with native speakers of English, but

the nature of their technical and scientific studies exposes them to a wide range of

English-language publications. Thus, from the learners point of view, it makes little

pedagogical sense, and lacks relevancy to their studies, if the methodological task set for

them is to adequately communicate “their plans for the weekend” when in their own

studies they are addressing such topics as aeronautics or spin-spectroscopy.

This highlights another area of English language learning that is often overlooked

in the all-encompassing drive towards communicative competency, namely the cognitive

dissonance that arises within our students due to the overwhelming difference in their

ability to clearly express their thoughts, opinions and beliefs in their native language as

opposed to English. Asking a 20 year old university student to talk about what he or she

did last weekend in order to practice the usage of the past tense may be a justifiable

methodological goal, but from the point of view of the student, the English sentences he

or she subsequently constructs may be embarrassingly simplistic and thus loathe to be

uttered. It also presupposes a willingness or motivation on the part of the student to

actually speak out in the first place. Standard CLT based textbook exhortations to “ask a

English and Asia

25

friend” or “practice with a partner” assume a willingness or motivation on the part of the

students to naturally engage in such activities. Indeed, a major weakness of many current

TEFL/TESOL textbooks is that, in catering for such diverse publishing markets as Africa,

Asia and America, the content gets watered down to a bizarre international hybrid of

seemingly randomly chosen topics and situations. The other extreme of course is the

textbook published in, for example, Japan for Japanese students, but containing a

distressingly large amount of Japanese explanatory text. In both cases no attempt is made

to discover what the students want to learn – the publisher’s presupposition takes

precedence. Student motivation is assumed. Yet, as anybody teaching English in the

Japanese classroom can attest, such willingness to learn is elusive if not often completely

absent. English language learning in Japan, unlike in China, for example, does not have

any one overriding economic or educational rationale. In many other countries, fluency in

English brings with it status and the opportunity to ascend the employment ladder. In

Japan such considerations are less important, particularly for the majority of graduates

who end up working in small to medium size companies that have little or no need for the

English language.

Rather motivation has to be inculcated in the students within the admittedly

difficult context of a compulsory classroom setting, in obedience of an externally defined

curriculum towards a mandatory test. This is no easy thing to achieve but neither should

the easy option be chosen of simply dismissing the students as being “unmotivated”.

Rather, we could begin with by looking at the academic goals we impose upon students

and thinking long and hard as to whether they correspond with the student’s own goals

for studying the English language. At the start of each term, teachers are required to

specify their teaching goals for their classes yet, more often than not, these goal

descriptions are quite distinct from the goals the students are actually pursuing during

those same classes. Indeed according to research conducted by Dornyei (2001) most

students do not really understand (or accept) why they are involved in a learning activity.

The ‘official class goal’ (i.e. mastering the course material) is often replaced by the more

prosaic but understandable goal of merely doing the minimum necessary to pass the end

of term exam.

There is no one ‘magical’ way of rectifying this situation but, in searching for a solution,

we should, I contend, begin by focusing on the relevancy of what is being thought to the

learner’s lives. As McCombs and Whisler (1997: 38) succinctly put it: “Educators think

students do not care, while the students tell us they do care about learning but are not

English and Asia

26

getting what they need”. Indeed, one of the most demotivating factors for learners is

when they have to learn something that they cannot see the point of because it has no

seeming relevance whatsoever to their lives. After all most universities’ curricular topics

and learning activities (particularly preparatory courses for taking tests such as TOIEC

and TOEFL) are selected primarily on the basis of what society believes students need to

learn, not on the basis of what students would choose if given the opportunity to do so.

English language courses in universities are ostensibly established for the benefit of

students, but from the students’ point of view their time in the classroom is devoted to

enforced attempts to meet externally imposed demands. To remedy this, somewhat if not

fully, teachers must make a conscious effort to discover, understand and integrate as best

they can students’ learning goals into their teaching curriculum. Again we are back to the

theme of relevancy – to the students, to their studies, their lives, their futures and,

enveloping all of this, the context in which the language learning takes place, the

classroom. But we can only discover these relevant factors by actually initiating

discussions with the students about language learning and what, if indeed anything, it

means to them. This is, I am all too aware, is easier said that done, but I would also

contend that unless it is done we will continue to be confronted in our classrooms with

the dispiriting sight of unmotivated students unaware of why they are there in the first

place.

Bibliography Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal,

57/3, pp. 278-287. Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language cassroom, Cambridge: CUP. McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school:

Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: Language teaching in Japan. ELT Journal,

58/2, pp.155-163. Sano, Masayuki, Masao Takahashi & Asaji Yoneyama. (1984). Communicative language

teaching and local needs. ELT Journal, 38/3, pp. 170-177. Wadden, P. (1993). A handbook for teaching English at Japanese colleges and

universities. Oxford: OUP. Widdowson, H. G.. (2003). Defining issues in English language teaching. Oxford: OUP. Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: CUP. Yoon, K. (2004). CLT theories and practices in EFL curricula. A case study of Korea.

Asian EFL Journal http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/september_04_yke.php

English and Asia

27

The Relationship between Reading Strategies and Learner Autonomy

NAHID ZAREI Islamic Azad University

Abstract

Over the last two decades, the word learner autonomy has been a household word within the context of language learning and teaching, and learners' role and involvement have been emphasized in learning the second language. As a result, there has been a shift in second language curriculum toward more leaner-centered approaches, for the very essence of education is ''not only the acquisition of knowledge and skills but also the development of independent and responsible people'' (Hedge, 2000: 82). Therefore, in order to achieve this goal and relinquish the responsibility of learning and construction of meaning, which is unique to every individual, to learners, it is incumbent on teachers to provide them with special strategies. This study investigates the impact of instruction of reading strategies recommended by Ladewig (2006), which some Iranian English teachers select according to the specific contexts in which they teach English to Iranian EFL students, on Iranian English students' reading skills and consequently self-reliance toward the end of the course. To this end, about 50 English PhD. and MA. holders, who have been teaching reading in different universities have been interviewed. Having been gathered, the results were interpreted and analyzed. They proved that strategy-based instruction leads to students' self-efficacy and independence over the long run.

Key Terms: autonomy, learning strategies, reading strategies, and learner-centered approaches. Introduction

Reading receives a particular focus in many second or foreign language teaching

situations. It is highly valued in Iranian context as well for several reasons. First, most

people try their best to improve their reading ability for study purposes, information,

pleasure and so on. Second, teachers use written texts for pedagogical purposes, that is, to

teach vocabulary, grammar, idioms, etc. Furthermore, good reading texts provide reliable

models for writing, for when the learners are exposed to several written discourses, they

gradually come to figure out how discourses unfold in written form. Thus reading is a

skill which is deemed valuable by both teachers and students. But what matters is how

reading is taught in our classes. To what extent do teachers take the findings from

research seriously? And above all, how are the students prepared for real life reading,

when the reading course is over?

English and Asia

28

As Nunan has suggested, ''not everything can be taught in class'', and Cotterball

shared the same idea believing that, ''even if it could a teacher will not always be around

if and when students wish to use the language in real life'' (Harmer, 2001: 335). If this is

so, what will serve the purpose in reading classes and enable the students to stand on their

own feet in wider contexts of real life? The answer lies in the fact that by making the

students aware of particular strategies, we can guide them toward autonomy and enhance

their comprehension and reading ability.

Definition of Autonomy

The dictionary meaning of autonomy is ''the ability to act and make decisions without

being controlled by anyone else''. In an educational context, scholars have varying ideas

about autonomy. Of course, when we talk of autonomy as making decisions on one's

own, there might be a misunderstanding. So before talking about what autonomy is, we

had better know what autonomy is not. According to Little (1991), autonomy is not self-

instruction or working without a teacher. Second, it is not a will-o-the-wisp to achieve

autonomy under the control of the teacher in the class. Third, it is not a methodology.

Fourth, there is a misconception that autonomy is a single, easily described behavior.

Fifth, it is a false assumption that autonomy is permanent because the learners may not be

autonomous in every area.

What is autonomy then? Little (1991: 4) has defined autonomy as follows,

''Essentially autonomy is a capacity for detachment, critical reflection, decision making,

and independent action. It presupposes, but also entails that the learner will help

particular kind of psychological relation to the process and content of his learning.''

McDevitt (1997: 3) believes that ''the end-product of all education should be an

independent learner. He thought of learning as a process in which the learner was located

in the center. This learner is an active and inquisitive one; a person who is able to make

decisions and choices. In this situation the teacher is expected to encourage this curiosity

so that ''the students attain a level of independence which takes them far beyond the

demands of a particular curriculum or the requirements of the next test or assignment, to

that point where instruction ends and education truly begins'' (ibid.p.4).

Holec (1988) discussed the relationship between the concepts of learner autonomy

and self -directed learning. He has described autonomy as ''the ability to take charge of

one's own learning'' (p.9). This ability, according to Holec, is not in our make-up but it is

to be learned either consciously or unconsciously. So the autonomous learner takes a

''(pro)active role in the learning process, generating ideas and availing himself of the

English and Asia

29

teacher'' (Bound, 1988; Kohonen, 1992; Knowels, 1975 cited in Thanasoulas, 2005).

Thanasoulas (2005), citing Rathbone (1971), commented that:

The autonomous learner is a self-activated maker of meaning, an active agent in his own learning process. He is not one to whom things merely happen; he is the one who, by his own volition, causes things to happen. Learning is seen as the result of his own self-initiated interaction with the world (p.11).

As it is revealed, some of these scholars like Little have been driven to extremes

believing in full learner participation, which results in Negotiated Syllabus. In this model

the learner has a dominant role in selection of content, mode of working, route of

working, assessment, and so on .As this model requires autonomy of action on the part of

the learner, it is not always considered a desirable characteristic in some contexts; for

example, for example in the societies in which power distance is a norm.

Others have taken a less extreme attitude toward the concept of learner autonomy.

They make an effort to promote self-directed learning and encourage the learners' active

involvement and inquisitiveness. These scholars focus on the autonomy in learning

whose end product is a leaner who can continue learning after the instruction is over.

This study focuses on the second definition of autonomy, i.e. autonomy in

learning not in designing curriculum.

To sum it up an autonomous learner has the following qualities:

1. Decision maker and independent

2. Active and inquisitive

3. Initiator and risk-taker

4. Tolerant and self- motivated

Learner Autonomy and Dominant Philosophies of Learning

Where does autonomy originate from? To answer this question we had better take a

glance at some of the dominant approaches to knowledge and learning, which are

connected with learner autonomy.

The first approach from which autonomy stems is constructivism, which has two

branches: cognitive and social. Jean Piaget's name is associated with the former one; in

this version, ''emphasis is placed on the importance of learners constructing their own

representation of reality'' (Brown, 2007: 12). Lev Vygotsky was the founder of the latter

believing in ''the importance of social interaction and cooperative learning in constructing

both cognitive and emotional images of the reality'' (ibid.p.12) and in applied linguistics

English and Asia

30

it is associated with Halliday (1979). As Candy explained, ''one of the central tenets of

constructivism is that individuals try to give meaning to, or construe the perplexing

maelstrom of events and ideas in which they find themselves caught up'' (1991: 245).

Constructivism posits the idea that knowledge is not something to be taught, but to be

construed and ''built up by the learner'' (von Gluserfield and Smock, 1974 cited in

Thanasoulas, 2005). In the second language learning context, internalising sets of rules,

structures and forms do not suffice because each learner carries her/his own experience

and background or task at hand (ibid). As it seems, constructivism takes affective aspects

of learning into consideration; the psychological version of autonomy which pertains to

learners' behaviors, attitudes, motivation, and self-respect (Benson and Voller, 1997). So

this approach encourages self directed learning as a necessary condition for learner

autonomy.

Critical theory, an approach within humanities and language studies, is the second

approach from which autonomy originates; this theory shares the same idea with

constructivism believing that knowledge is not something to be learned or discovered but

to be constructed. Besides, according to Benson and Voller (1997) knowledge does not

represent reality but rather comprises ''competing ideological versions of that reality

expressing the interests of different social groups'' (p.22).Within critical theory, power

and ideology influence learning which is seen as ''a process of interaction with social

context, which can bring about social change'' (Thanasoulas, 2005: 11). This theory takes

social and political character of learner autonomy into consideration. As learners become

aware of constraints imposed by social context, they defy it. They are inclined to

becoming independent and they tend to free themselves of ''preconceived ideas, and can

be thought of as authors of their own worlds'' (Benson and Voller, 1997: 22).

Conditions for Learner Autonomy

Autonomy is not a method nor is it a product. Rather, it is achieved when certain

conditions are obtained. One of these conditions is L2 learning strategies, which are

''specific behaviors or thought processes that students use to enhance their own L2

learning'' (Oxford, 1990 cited in Marcia, 2001). Oxford identified six major groups of L2

learning strategies:

1. Cognitive strategies (e.g. notetaking, summarizing, etc.)

2. Metacognitive strategies (identifying one's own learning style preferences and

needs, evaluating task successes.)

3. Memory related strategies (e.g. acronyms)

English and Asia

31

4. compensatory strategies (e.g. guessing from context in listening and reading)

5. Affective strategies (e.g. identifying one's mood and anxiety level)

6. Social strategies (e.g. asking for help in doing a language task)

These strategies, if essential conditions are fulfilled, ''make learning easier, faster,

more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new

situations, (Oxford, 1990 cited in Murcia, 2001). Oxford (1990) citing Allright (1990)

and Little (1991), mentioned that ''learning strategies enable students to become more

independent, autonomous, lifelong learners.''

Conscious use of strategies will lead to quicker and more effective learning

(Nyikos and Oxford, 1993 cited in Murcia, 2001).Vigilant teachers should make their

students aware of learning strategies and expose them to wider range of appropriate

strategies (ibid.p.365).

There are some other conditions required for learner autonomy but they are out of

the scope of this paper.

Reading Strategies

Being already literate in their mother tongue, second language learners possess their own

habit of reading. However, what matters in teaching reading in L2 is to teach appropriate

strategies to deal with different kinds of texts. These strategies should be taught

gradually. Furthermore, teachers should take the goal and purpose of reading into

consideration while assigning a particular task. The learners' style of learning shouldn't be

ignored either. What is more, the approaches to reading will influence the choice of

strategies. In the following section, some of the most useful reading strategies will be

discussed. These strategies have been mentioned in Ladewig (2006).

Annolighting a Text

This strategy means highlighting the prominent points in the text. As it was already

mentioned, we all have a specific method of reading in our native language, so we try to

transfer this habit to L2 as well. For instance, many of us usually highlight the text while

reading. Nontheles, most of the time we may end up with the whole passage highlighted,

for most of the information provided in a paragraph especially in pedagogical genres is

redundant. However, it is not easy for the novice reader to spot it at the first sight

.Therefore, in order to avoid wasting of time, energy and ink, this strategy should be

taught and practiced properly. With this end in view, it is a good idea to have the students

English and Asia

32

skim the text for general ideas and key concepts and then highlight relevant information

and skip redundant information. This strategy enhances effective and efficient use of time

and effort by reducing review time.

Annotating a Text

This means taking notes at the margins. This strategy implies reading actively and

constructing meaning from context. The students can annotate what the teacher has listed

or it can be left up to their discretion. They can take notes about main ideas, supportive

details or evidence that leads the reader to a conclusion about the text. Sometimes these

notes are the questions raised by the reader. Questioning will teach the students how to

read purposefully and critically. Scholes stressed that in the reading of both literature and

other texts, the eventual goal must be critical reading. He puts it thus, ''In an age of

manipulation, when our students are in dire need of critical strength to resist the

continuing assaults of all the media, the worst thing we can do is to foster in them an

attitude of reverence before text'' (Scholes, 1985: 16 cited in Wallace, 1992: 45). And

finally, the notes can be acronyms made up of key concepts.

Conversations across Time

Reading different texts, either fiction or non-fiction, provides us with an opportunity to

look at the world and events from different angles. This way it deepens our thinking on

the events, issues, people and etc. Therefore, in order to encourage learners' critical

thinking teachers had better draw their attention to different ideas on the same topic. To

this end, students are asked to collect variety of texts on the same topic by different

writers. Then, they can compare and contrast their ideas and connect them to their own.

Frame of Reference

Frame of reference is a graphic organizer. One small rectangle is enclosed by others. The

topic is written in the middle rectangle. The relevant information is included in the outer

rectangle and in the last one, how information is gathered (see below).

What is my source of information?

What I know about the topic.

Topic

English and Asia

33

This activity is advantageous for multiple reasons: as an awareness-raising

activity, it brings the reader's knowledge about the topic to her/his consciousness.

Second, when the source of knowledge is jotted down, the way of gathering information

is realized; for example, whether it comes from reliable sources such as articles,

newspapers, magazines, books, teachers or not very reliable like ordinary people. This

activity provides the reader with an opportunity to evaluate her/his prior knowledge on

the topic, so if it is not reliable, it can be verified. And finally, it encourages extensive

reading. This strategy is a pre-reading activity and it is mainly used to activate

background knowledge. Lack of prior knowledge is one of the obstacles which hinders

comprehension and hampers reasonable interaction between the reader and the writer.

Therefore, it is incumbent on the teachers to find a proper situation and remove obstacles

in order to ease and facilitate the process of reading. It is a good idea, for example, to

have the students read about the topic even in their first language from different sources

(e.g. newspapers, magazines, on line articles, books, etc.) before they come to class. This

crushes down uneven areas of comprehension, so the readers are not compelled to resort

to lexicogrammar in the first step to decode the message and reconstruct meaning. If the

learners resort to bottom-up approach on the first step, they may not see the woods for the

trees. As a result, they get frustrated and quit reading. Of course, it does not mean that we

ignore the virtue of ''interactive reading'', that is, switching from top-down reading to

bottom-up when the need arises (Brown, 2001).

Inferential Reading

The main purpose of teaching reading is to enable learners to cope with different kinds of

texts, either simple or complicated, and negotiate meaning. However, some texts are not

easily deciphered, so the learners can not read the writer like a book. These readers have

to read between the lines and make inferences. We have learned to make inferences in

our daily life in spoken language, but we need to transfer this skill to the written texts as

well.

One of the techniques to make inferences is to find the writer's voice, positioning

an idea toward the subject. By uncovering the writer's point of view, the learners, if they

are critical readers, may resist the text positioning or they may be submissive readers and

have an attitude of reverence for the text. Other simpler steps can be taken to make

English and Asia

34

inferences, for instance, tracing pronoun referents and guessing the meaning of unknown

words in a dictionary and as a result save time and energy.

Learners are required to make inferences by drawing on the textual evidence and

clues the writer provides in order to substantiate interpretative claims and they should

avoid distorting the writer's intentions. As Ladewig (2006) put it, ''Authors imply;

therefore, readers have to infer'' (p.3).

Key Concept Synthesis

Some of the texts are so sophisticated and challenging that main ideas do not unfold

easily. As a result, the readers get frustrated and can hardly negotiate meaning. To help

these learners, we can focus on key concepts. For instance, we can draw their attention to

titles, subtitles, supportive graphics and visuals. Then we can help them find topic

sentence in each paragraph. They must be reminded that topic sentences, particularly in

challenging texts, are not always located at the beginning and they are most of the time

implied. To find main ideas they can be taught to distinguish between general and

specific ideas. As reading becomes denser focusing on the traditional signals like

summary statements (e.g. to put it briefly, in short, in sum, to sum it up, etc.) or

statements which predict main ideas or key concepts will help with decoding the

message. Finally, they can put these ideas into their own words and make connections

between important ideas.

Parallel Note-Taking

This strategy requires the students to recognize the organizational structure of an

informational text. To do this, the students should be taught to identify the seven most

common organizational patterns as mentioned in the Marzano et al. (1997) and Jones,

Plincscar, Ogle and Carr (1987) (cited in Ladewig, 2006). These structures are listed

below:

• Chronological sequence

• Compare and contrast

• Concept/definition

• Description

• Episode (organizes a large amount of information about an event or time period)

• Process

• Cause and effect

English and Asia

35

Various graphic organizers will help the students to recognize the structural

pattern of the text and organize the information they are gathering from the text. Having

gathered their ideas from the text, the students can organize them into a thesis or claim

about the text. They can also find the relevant ideas supporting main idea.

Key concept synthesis

Directions: Use the following graphic organizer to identify the five most important

concepts (in the form of single words or) from the reading. Think about identifying the

five most important concepts this way: If you had to explain the reading to someone who

had not read the text, what are the five most important concepts you would want them to

understand? Use a highlighter and marginal notes to identify important concepts as you

read, and then complete the graphic organizer once you have completed the reading.

Five key concepts (with page #s)

Put the concept in your own words

Explain why the concept is important & make connections to other concepts

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

(Adapted from Ladewig, 2006)

English and Asia

36

Event Map

2000 All the information provided here is propriety of Family Education Network.

What happened?

Event Map

Where did it happen?

When did it happen?

Why did it happen?

How did it happen? Who was

involved in the event?

English and Asia

37

c

What's the Big Idea?

Narrow it down: What's the most important point?

How do you know that's the most important idea? Write three examples or comments that support your assertion that this is the most important idea. If there are quotes, include the page number so you can refer

to it later when writing about or discussing this idea. 1. 2. 3.

Features common

to

Comparison and Contrast

Features Unique to A: Features Unique to B:

Interview Data

Fifty MA and PhD holders in TEFL from different universities were interviewed in this

study. They were all university lecturers teaching English courses such as Reading, ESP

and so on. The interview addressed the following points:

1. Implementation of strateg

2. The length of time needed for students to detach from the teacher's direct support.

3. The result of instruction and the student's reaction.

In the following sections their responses will be presented and they will then be

discussed in the next sections.

Implementation of Strategic Reading in Iranian Context

Most of the interviewees stated that these strategies did not serve the purpose with low

proficiency students because their linguistic knowledge was not enough. They added it

was akin to swimming against the river at the beginning and a real challenge because

38

Features common A & B

Comparison and Contrast

Features Unique to A: Features Unique to B:

Fifty MA and PhD holders in TEFL from different universities were interviewed in this

study. They were all university lecturers teaching English courses such as Reading, ESP

and so on. The interview addressed the following points:

Implementation of strategic reading in Iranian context.

The length of time needed for students to detach from the teacher's direct support.

The result of instruction and the student's reaction.

In the following sections their responses will be presented and they will then be

ssed in the next sections.

trategic Reading in Iranian Context

Most of the interviewees stated that these strategies did not serve the purpose with low

proficiency students because their linguistic knowledge was not enough. They added it

was akin to swimming against the river at the beginning and a real challenge because

A & B

Fifty MA and PhD holders in TEFL from different universities were interviewed in this

study. They were all university lecturers teaching English courses such as Reading, ESP

The length of time needed for students to detach from the teacher's direct support.

In the following sections their responses will be presented and they will then be

Most of the interviewees stated that these strategies did not serve the purpose with low

proficiency students because their linguistic knowledge was not enough. They added it

was akin to swimming against the river at the beginning and a real challenge because

English and Asia

39

they had to convince the students of the techniques they intended to implement in their

classes and prepare them for the completely new ways of coping with the text. The

students were reluctant to shoulder the responsibility relinquished for them for the first

time, which was supposed to be the teacher's first. They were even incredulous of being

able to take it. These teachers believed that it was sometimes a demanding job to change

the students' bad habits of reading; therefore the teacher needed to be patient and tolerant.

One of the interviewees pointed out that:

“I try to introduce these strategies gradually. I assure the learners of the positive result of these strategies. I also make an attempt to reduce anxiety among the learners by having them do the task in groups or pairs, for when they are left on their own, they become frustrated and hesitant to do the tasks individually.” Others thought that most of the students in our context come from spoon-feeding-

style of education. They think of their teacher as an almighty one who is the only

transferee of knowledge and they do not have confidence in their own ability to attain

knowledge. So the responsibility is on the teacher's shoulders to give them a helping hand

to improve self-esteem and change their mind toward learning.

One of the interviewees asserted that at the beginning they had to accompany

low-proficiency, shy and weaker students closely and guide them individually until they

were able to perform the tasks on their own.

The Length of Time Needed for Students to Detach from Teacher's Direct Support All of the teachers noted that strategy training was a long-term one. So it required

patience on the part of both teachers and students to achieve the intended goals and

objectives. They added the amount of time needed for strategy training depended largely

on the context of situation, that is, the size of the class, the students' proficiency level and

even their position toward learning. Some pointed out that the more highly motivated the

learners the faster their training blossomed.

One of the interviewees confirmed that not all training or teaching lead to

learning, and not all learners are homogeneous; therefore, you should expect some

learners to follow the instructions and take your advice and move toward your planned

point, for we can not ignore different learning variables in our classes.

Another interviewee reminded us of the importance of socio-cultural factors in the

applicability and improvement of these strategies in the classes. He mentioned that the

English and Asia

40

more independently the learners are nurtured in the family and social context the faster

these strategies develop and work.

The Result of the Instruction and the Students Reaction

Most of the interviewees had a consensus on the idea that strategy training results in

positive outcomes. Besides, it leads to conscious reading and readers become aware of

the writer's planning of the text and move to the point the writer has planned.

One of the interviewees who had taught ESP courses noted that although the

students were accustomed to translation method, when taught strategies, they could easily

tackle comprehension problems without resorting to translation, which is deemed to be

the most convenient way by both teachers and students. He added even though teaching

reading through translation does not require a concerted effort on the part of the teachers

and students, it does not serve long term goals, so it does not lead to fruitful and

satisfactory results. It may be useful for a short period of learning and a specific text, but

it actually does not work after the instruction is over. When these students encounter new

material, they are unable to comprehend it, for translation does not give them the

essential tools to deal with new material.

Another interviewee stated that when his students were handed a passage, they

thought of it as a tough nut to crack, claiming that it went over their head and they could

not understand it. They also complained about lexical density and complexity of the text.

However, having followed the procedures and strategies provided by the assigned

textbook, they admitted that they could decipher roughly 60% of the text without

switching to traditional methods of reading. As a result, they obtained a feeling of great

satisfaction and high self-confidence. It also minimized the negative effect of past

experiences, and created ideal conditions for the following sessions.

One of the interviewees whose MA dissertation concerns a process-approach to

reading confirmed that strategic reading not only improves reading performance but it

also improves speaking and writing. He added that some pre-reading and post-reading

activities which focus on listening and speaking require students' active participation in

speaking. As a result, it helps them improve their fluency and develop their vocabulary

on the given topic. This way, the words that they use actively in their conversation are

nailed down in their brain. Besides, sometimes post-reading activities deal with writing,

for instance, summarizing, outlining, which promote the students interaction with the text

and their writing skills as well.

English and Asia

1

And finally a teacher asserted that she assigns extra readings for outside the class.

At the beginning her students wear her out because they refer to her over and over for

comprehension problems but after they are trained how to deal with the text, toward the

end of the course, they hardly come to her.

Discussion

The interview data reveals intriguing facts about reading strategies in different classes. It

demonstrates that the strategies make sense in special contexts with particular students.

For example, they take a long time to develop with low-proficiency students due to

shortage of linguistic knowledge. Nonetheless, they are more effective with high-

proficiency students.

As it is clear in the interview data, teachers have to take the responsibility for

students to make proper use of the strategies. It is up to the teachers to make

accommodations and compromises when needed, to prevent possible conflicts, for when

the strategies offered by the teacher are not in harmony with the students preferred

learning styles and strategies, clashes occur and cause anxiety, poor performance, and

lack of confidence (Oxford, 1991). In some situations when a novice teacher insists on it

without taking the situation into consideration it might even cause alienation and finally

complete withdrawal on the part of the learners.

As Oxford (1991 cited in Celce-Murcia, 2001) put, ''skilled teachers help their

students develop an awareness of learning strategies and enable them to use a wide range

of appropriate strategies'' (p.362).

According to the interviewees, strategy development and tendency toward

detachment demand a high level of motivation on the part of the learner. It is also closely

related to socio-cultural factors which influence the learners' style of learning and their

assumptions toward learning. All of the teachers agreed that strategy training does not

lead to fruitful results in a short-term period and it needs a long time to be blossomed.

And finally, all of the teachers interviewed believed that strategy training

heightens self-esteem, reading performance, self-satisfaction, promoted comprehension

and as a result fosters detachment and autonomy.

Conclusion

To conclude we can argue that by involving students in awareness raising activities and

strategy training, we can inspire continuous learning, which is the goal of education, from

the time they have stopped attending lessons. As Harmer (2001) pointed out, ''To

compensate for the limits of classroom time and to counter the passivity that is an enemy

English and Asia

42

of true learning, students need to develop their own strategies, so that as far as possible

they become autonomous'' (p.335). Thus it necessitates teachers providing instruction to

help students learn how to use more relevant and more powerful learning strategies. Of

course, in order for a strategy to be positive and helpful for a given learner, the teacher

must take the nature of the text, the readers' receptive rewarding reflective reading, skim

reading, scanning purpose, and the context of situation into consideration. This way ''the

strategies will lead to increased EFL learning motivation'' (Nunan, 1997 cited in Murcia,

2001), and ''students will enjoy a high level of self-efficacy, i.e. and a perception of being

effective as learners'' (Zimmerman and Pons cited in Murcia, 2001). Furthermore,

''Greater awareness of strategies as well as rehearsal in the classroom can lead to future

transfer of learning to independent learning situations (ibid.p.337).

Bibliography Benson, P. & Voller, P. (1997). Autonomy and independence in language learning.

London: Longman. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles (2nd ed.). Longman. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs,

JC: Prentice Hall. Candy. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning. California: Jossey-Bass. Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language.

Heinle & Heinle. Halliday, M. A. K. (1997). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold. Harmer, J. (2001). English language teaching (3rd ed.). Longman. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University

Press. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in foreign language learning. Oxford University Press. Ladewig, B. (2006). Reading strategies. Retrieved July 2, 2006 from

http//www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/6-12/Reading/Strategies/htm McDevit, B. (2004). Negotiating the syllabus: A win-win situation? ELT Journal, 58, 3-9. Thanasoulas, D. (2006). What is learner autonomy and how it can be fostered. The

internet TESL Journal, 110, Retrieved July 2, 2006 from http//www.aitech.ac.jp/iteslj

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. USA: Harvard. Wallace. (1992). Reading. Oxford University Press.

English and Asia

43

Developing a Legal English Course for Non-native Speakers of English

in Commonwealth Countries

NAVEED AHMAD Department of English, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Pakistan

Abstract

The English language has been a significant tool in introducing the British cultural, administrative and legal systems in the colonized world. The legal system, in this context, is popularly known as the common law system as it takes into account the common wisdom in the process of legal decisions. Commonwealth countries still follow this system and such countries are called common law countries. In common law countries, language of the law is English. However, in the majority of common law countries, English language users are non-native speakers of English. As legal English is a distinct and complex genre, non-native speakers of English face difficulties in their academic and professional legal settings. Potential linguistic needs of learners of the law have never been explored in such common law countries. The present empirical research (through survey questionnaires) is an investigation to measure the level of existing linguistic adequacy of learners of law in Pakistan with reference to the specific roles they are required to perform so that their problem areas could be systematically identified and subsequently reported with recommendations. The findings provide a clear picture of the learners’ level of inadequacy in the relevant skills and sub-skills. Based on the findings of this research, a needs-oriented course has been recommended for implementation at legal education institutions and other platforms in those common law countries where English is not the native language. The project is significant as it is aimed at improving the standard of legal education and developing the rule of law in countries that are in transition.

Key Terms: common law system, legal education, commonwealth countries, non-native speakers, linguistic adequacy

Introduction

The Role of English in Professional Legal Settings

In Pakistani courtrooms, lawyers use both English and Urdu. At times regional languages

are also spoken. However, command of English is always a plus-point as English creates

a good impression. It is generally believed that a lawyer who is good at English has a

good command of the subject matter as well. It sounds plausible because lawyers who do

not have the required competence in English face problems when exposed to professional

tasks. As the language of law, like other commonwealth countries, is English in Pakistan,

English and Asia

44

lawyers are routinely required to read judicial opinions written by the High Court and the

Supreme Court judges to quote them as precedents in similar cases. While reading these

opinions, mere general comprehension of contents is not enough. For instance, they are

required to distinguish material facts from immaterial, understand procedural history and

find the rule (ratio decidendi). Similarly, understanding complex structure of statutes

requires a certain level of linguistic adequacy. Although it is not mandatory to write legal

documents in English, in superior courts, lawyers do all the writing work in English. For

lower courts, lawyers write in English as well as in Urdu. However, a lawyer who writes

in English creates a good impression of his overall competence.

Statement of the Problem

Research in linguistics has already maintained that legal English is a distinct variety.

“There is no doubt that legal language is decidedly peculiar and often hard to understand,

especially from the perspective of lay public” (Tiersma, 1999: 2). The extreme

complexity and unusual nature of legal language pose:

a substantial problem, particularly for many countries where the language of the law is not the mother tongue of those involved in the legal system. In India and much of the Anglophone Africa, for example, lawyers in training need help to master not only technicalities and the legal concepts that they represent, but also the convoluted grammatical structures in which much legislation is framed. This places considerable demands upon the teachers and curriculum designers … (Gibbons 2004: 291)

In this context, common law countries where English is used as a Second

Language, the language of law (English) is not the first language of those pursuing their

graduation in law. Therefore, students studying law reportedly find it quite hard to cope

with the linguistic complexities of legal English as codified in their textbooks. Moreover,

even on successful completion of their course of studies, the law-graduates continue to

have difficulty in coping with tasks of applied nature in their legal field, which require

that they need to be fully groomed in the basic skills of reading, writing, speaking and

listening, in addition to acquiring proficiency in supplementary skills like giving

presentations, taking part in legal discussions etc. The situation as such makes a strong

case for ESP (English for Specific Purposes) in the context of English for Academic

Legal Purposes (EALP) and English for Occupational Legal Purposes (EOLP).

English and Asia

45

The Objective

The “linguistic aspects of the law raise many issues and difficulties” (Gibbons, 2004:

285). The objective of this study is to recommend an English course for the LLB

students, in Pakistan and other commonwealth countries where English is used as a

Second Language. To improve the standard of legal education in such countries, legal

educational institutions can implement the proposed course by making it a part of their

syllabi. Similarly, other commonwealth countries where English is used as a Second

Language will benefit from the proposed course.

Present Research

As the purpose is to recommend a needs-oriented EALP course for the LLB students, the

present research is a thorough investigation aimed at measuring the existing linguistic

adequacy of learners of law in Pakistan (as Pakistan has been selected as a research site)

with reference to the specific roles they are required to perform in their academic and

occupational legal settings so that their problem areas can be systematically identified

and subsequently reported with recommendations. The research has its base in the theory

of ESP in the context of EALP and EOLP.

Benefits of the Research

The research has the following benefits of practical nature. First, the recommendations

will be helpful for all the legal educational institutions in Pakistan and other

commonwealth countries where English used as a Second Language. In the light of the

recommendations, law colleges can introduce EALP courses.

Second, the recommendations will not only be useful for English for Academic

Legal Purposes (EALP) courses for law students in academic settings, it will equally be

useful for courses related to occupational settings to promote continuing legal education

for professional development. For remedial help, universities/colleges or Bar Councils

can conduct EOLP (English for Occupational Legal Purposes) courses for lawyers.

Additionally, with the collaboration of universities, law firms can arrange EOLP courses

for their employees to provide them on-job training. Similarly, certain government

departments and companies in the private sector can arrange EOLP courses for those

employees who cope with legal matters in their professional routine work. Similarly,

EOLP courses will be useful for the preparation of bar exams.

Third, this project is a starting point for EALP/EOLP research in Pakistan and

other commonwealth countries where English used as a Second Language. Further

research in areas like materials development, materials evaluation, assessment, teacher

English and Asia

46

training and discourse analysis etc. in EALP/EOLP settings will begin by taking insights

from the findings of this research.

Literature Review

The research has its basis in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) with particular

emphasis on needs analysis. In this section, I will review literature related to needs

analysis after taking into account the theory of ESP.

Definitions of ESP

Teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has emerged as a significant movement

within the field of English language education (Stoynoff, 2004). Definitions of ESP have

been put forward by a number of researchers.

Hutchinson and Waters (1987) establish the primacy of need in ESP. For them,

ESP is an approach rather than a product. This means that ESP does not involve a

particular kind of language, teaching material or methodology. They are of the view that

‘the foundation of ESP is the simple question: Why does this learner need to learn a

foreign language? To answer this question, information is gathered about learners, the

language required and the learning context. This is done through a process of needs

analysis. On the basis of the information gathered, the language to be taught is

determined.

Robinson (1991), like Hutchison and Waters also establishes the primacy of needs

analysis in defining ESP. She maintains that ESP is ‘normally goal-directed’ and ESP

courses develop from a needs analysis which ‘aims to specify as closely as possible what

exactly it is that students have to do through the medium of English’ (Robinson 1991: 3).

Besides these basic criteria, she emphasizes that ESP has certain characteristics e.g. ESP

courses have a limited time period, students are adults in homogenous classes in terms of

the work and specialist studies students are involved in.

Needs Analysis

This part reviews literature on needs analysis. Needs analysis is a process of gathering

and interpreting information (Brindley, 2000). Information is gathered through one or

more than one ways, and then interpreted quantitatively or qualitatively. Decision-making

is based on the results of needs analysis. Teachers and researchers make decisions related

to course objectives, syllabus design, materials development and assessment. Therefore,

“needs analysis can be seen as crucial to an ESP course” (Robinson 2000: 196).

Needs analysis, in fact, is a defining feature of ESP (e.g. Hutchinson and Waters,

1987; Jones and Dudley-Evans, 1991; Dudley-Evans and St John, 1998; Robinson, 2000

English and Asia

47

and1991; Strevens, 1988a; Jordan, 1997; Flowerdew and Peacock 2001). Some formal

definitions of needs analysis are as follows:

The process of determining the needs for which a learner or group of learners requires a language and arranging the needs according to priorities. Needs assessment makes use of both subjective and objective information (e.g., data from questionnaires, tests, interviews, observation) (Richards, Platt and Weber, 1985: 189) The systematic collection and analysis of all subjective and objective information necessary to define and validate defensible curriculum purposes that satisfy the language learning requirements of students within the context of particular institutions that influences the learning and teaching situation (Brown, 1995: 36)

Needs assessment involves finding out what the learners know and can do and what they need to learn or do so that the course can bridge the gap (or some part of it). Thus needs assessment involves seeking and interpreting information about one’s students’ needs so that the course will address them effectively (Graves, 1996:12-13)

…needs analysis serves three main purposes: it provides a means of obtaining wider input into the content, design and implementation of a language programme; it can be used in developing goals, objectives and content; and it can provide data for reviewing and evaluating an existing programme (Richards, 1984: 5)

There are different approaches to needs analysis. Jordan (1997) reviews needs

analysis by taking into account five approaches to needs analysis: Target Situation

Analysis (TSA), Present Situation Analysis (PSA), Learning-Centred, Strategy Analysis

and Means Analysis.

Grey areas are the methods or procedures by which needs analysis is conducted

(Braine, 2001). Jordan (1997) lists fourteen methods of data collection. These methods

include advance documentation, language test at home, language test on entry, self-

assessment (by students), observation and monitoring, class progress test, surveys,

structured interviews, learner diaries, case studies, final tests, evaluation/feedback,

follow-up investigation and previous research. Contrary to this detailed list, Robinson

(1991) presents a list that has fewer methods of data collection: questionnaires,

interviews, observation, case studies, tests, authentic data collection and participatory

needs analysis. “Although Robinson cites fewer methods of analyses, her list appears to

be more comprehensive and reflective of current practices” Braine (2001). The lists of

Dudley-Evans (1998) and Brindeley (2000) are similar in terms of size tools. Dudley-

English and Asia

48

Evans’ list includes questionnaires, analysis of authentic spoken and written texts,

discussions, structured interviews, observations and assessments. Similarly, Brindeley

provides six methods of data collection: questionnaires, structured interviews, group

discussions with learners, collection and linguistic analysis of authentic spoken and

written texts which are typically found in future context of language use, language tests

and assessments and case studies of individual learners. Hutchinson and Waters (1987:

58) list the most frequently used ways of gathering information about the needs of the

target learners as follows:

i. Questionnaires

ii. Interviews

iii. Observations

iv. Data collection

v. Informal consultations with Sponsors, Learners and Others

Another researcher lists data collection procedures in the following manner:

A range of methods is commonly used for conducting needs analysis. These include questionnaires, interviews, participant and non-participant observation, authentic language data (texts and recording), case studies of learners, self-assessment, pre- and post- course testing, and learner diaries. (Flowerdew and Peacock, 2001: 179)

Steps in Needs Analysis

Jordan (1997) indicates that with so many approaches, procedures of data collection,

sources of information and other variables, there is a danger that one may feel

overwhelmed. What is important, therefore, is to remember that there is no single

approach to needs analysis and circumstances vary from situation to situation. In fact,

choices in needs analysis will be determined by time, money and resources. For this,

planning in advance is essential. After deciding what is strictly relevant and necessary,

sufficient time must be allowed for carrying out step-by-step analysis. Deciding in

advance the answers to the list of questions posed can help following these steps: why?

whose?, who?, what?, how?, when?, and where?. The steps suggested by Jordan (1997:

23) are:

1. Purpose of analysis

2. Delimit student population

3. Decide upon the approach(es)

4. Acknowledge constraints/limitations

5. Select methods of collecting data

English and Asia

49

6. Collect data

7. Analyze and interpret results

8. Determine objectives

9. Implement decisions (i.e. decide upon syllabus, content, materials, methods etc.)

10. Evaluate procedures and results

Research Design

The purpose of this research was to recommend an EALP/EOLP course for learners of

law in Pakistan and other commonwealth countries where English is used as a Second

Language. Pakistan was chosen as a research site. The major research question under

investigation was:

What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law in Pakistan have for

performing tasks related to their academic and occupational roles?

The subsidiary questions were:

a) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing

tasks related to reading skills in academic and occupational settings?

b) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing

tasks related to writing skills in academic and occupational settings?

c) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing

tasks related to speaking skills in academic and occupational settings?

d) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing

tasks related to listening skills in academic and occupational settings?

e) How important is it to have adequate command of English for academic and

occupational purposes?

To answer the research questions, an empirical research was conducted through a survey.

I followed the method of purposive sampling. Four questionnaires were constructed for

four population groups: teachers of law, recent law graduates, senior lawyers and judges.

Piloting was done before the actual administration of questionnaires. For close-

ended items of the questionnaires, data was analyzed quantitatively by using SPSS

(Statistical Package for Social Sciences), whereas open-ended questionnaires were

analyzed qualitatively by reviewing responses, grouping related responses, and

identifying common themes.

Findings

The findings have been presented by providing answers to the research questions. To

provide answers to the research questions, I will begin with the major research question:

English and Asia

50

What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law in Pakistan have for performing tasks related to their academic and occupational roles?

As far as the answer to this question is concerned, the details of the findings

revealed that learners’ command of English falls short of the mark: they lack the required

linguistic skills and sub-skills to perform academic and occupational tasks in legal

settings. The level of incompetence varies: the more complex the text/task, the higher the

level of incompetence.

Below, the subsidiary questions have been taken under consideration:

a) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing tasks

related to reading skills in academic and occupational settings?

The members of the legal discourse community provided information related to

the level of linguistic adequacy of learners of law in the skills of reading of cases, statutes

and textbooks/law review journals.

For reading of cases, the findings related to teachers, recent graduates and senior

lawyers, reveal that majority of learners have inadequacy in six sub-skills, out of a total

of eight sub-skills, related to reading of cases. The most difficult sub-skill is to judge

whether a particular case is analogous or distinguishable for a pending case. The next

most difficult sub-skill is finding the rule. In both these sub-skills, more than 80%

respondents found inadequacy. As only two sub-skills i.e., understanding procedural

history and understanding citation are perceived to be adequate by the majority

respondents; therefore the general impression we get is that learners of law have

inadequate competence in reading comprehension of cases. The reason why learners have

adequacy in only two sub-skills and inadequacy in the rest of the sub-skills is very

simple: understanding procedural history and citation are much easier tasks, as the

language used for procedural history and citation is not complex. The rest of the tasks

included in the process of reading of cases are complex because of the complexity of

language and thought.

According to the perceptions of judges more than 50% lawyers that appeared in

their courts had inadequate competence in reading of cases. This was stated by 82% of

the judges who provided information in this study.

The qualitative analysis revealed that the task of reading the cases was considered

to be difficult and boring. Moreover, the students were not provided with any guidance in

this area. Therefore, the tendency was to read the summaries of the cases. The data also

English and Asia

51

revealed that there was a realization that reading of cases is essential in a common law

country.

It is concluded that the skill of reading of cases is essential in academic and

occupational legal settings. However, learners have inadequate competence in this area.

For reading of statues and textbooks/law review journals, according to the

perceptions of the teachers, the recent graduates and the senior lawyers, it is evident that

the level of adequacy for reading of textbooks/law review journals and statutes is not up

to the mark. 81.1% of the respondents perceive that learners have inadequate ability in

understanding the complex structure of statutes. With regard to applying statutes to cases,

74.4% of the participants feel that learners have inadequate skill.

The judges also had similar opinions in this context as the majority of judges i.e.

63.4% were of the opinion that lawyers who appear in their courts have inadequate ability

to apply statutes to cases.

As far as reading of textbooks/law review journals is concerned, the respondents,

who believe that learners have inadequate ability with this regard, are 58.6%. Although

this percentage is not very high, the majority believe that the skill is inadequate.

Findings of the qualitative analysis reveal that reading of textbooks/law review

journals is comparatively easier because the language of textbooks/law review journals is

not as complex as the language of statutes is. Keeping in view the complex language of

statutes, the respondents feel that special training is required to understand such a

language.

It is concluded that skills related reading of statutes and textbooks/law review

journals are not adequate.

To sum up, legal discourse community believes that learners’ have inadequate

skill of reading comprehension with reference to major text types of legal English: cases,

statutes and textbooks/law review journals.

b) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing tasks

related to writing skills in academic and occupational settings?

The findings related to teachers, recent graduates and senior lawyers reveal that

learners have inadequate writing skills with reference to academic and occupational legal

settings. Out of the four sub-skills taken under consideration, the mechanics of writing is

an area that is perceived to be the most difficult as 85% of the respondents felt that

learners have tremendous inadequacy in this area. The other three areas i.e., organizing

English and Asia

52

thoughts, appropriate formatting and appropriate use of legal terminology also cause

great problem for the learners as in all the cases more than 80% respondents feel that

learners have inadequate ability. This means that in all the four areas of writing, more

than 80% of the respondents feel that learners have inadequate competence.

The fourth population group i.e. judges also provided information about lawyers’

linguistic adequacy keeping in view the documents lawyers submit in the courts. Like

the other three groups, an overwhelming majority of judges i.e., 80% perceived that more

than 50% lawyers had inadequate competence in mechanics of writing. Similarly, 79.8%

judges believed that more than 50% lawyers had inadequate ability with regard to the use

of legal terminology in writing. For the organization of legal documents to be presented

in courts, 72% judges perceived that more than 50% lawyers had inadequate ability.

Moreover, 62% judges were of the opinion that more than 50% lawyers have inadequate

competence with regard to appropriate formatting of legal documents that are presented

in courts.

The qualitative data revealed that learners have inadequate competence in

mechanics of writing. According to the respondents the main reason with this regard is

obsolete teaching methodology. The other main problem reported by the respondents was

inadequacy in clarity. To read unclear documents, extra effort is required on the part of

the reader which wastes precious time of the legal discourse community. Inadequacy in

the use of subject-specific language was also reported.

It is concluded that learners’ have inadequacy in writing skills with reference to

academic and occupational legal settings.

c) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing tasks

related to speaking skills in academic and occupational settings?

According to the perceptions of two population groups i.e., the teachers of law

and the recent graduates, learners have inadequate skill of spoken English in various

academic situations: asking questions of teachers, giving presentations, group work/pair

work, and mock oral argument. In the light of the quantitative findings of combined

groups’ perceptions, 67.6% of the respondents feel that learners have inadequate ability

in asking questions to teachers, whereas 76% mentioned that the skill of giving

presentations is inadequate. Similarly, 78.3% of the respondents are of the opinion that

learners have inadequate skill of speaking in group/pair work. In case of speaking in

mock oral situations, 83.5% of the respondents feel that learners have inadequate skill.

English and Asia

53

Overall, a vast majority perceives that learners are inadequate in speaking English

in academic legal settings.

Commenting on lawyers’ difficulty in speaking English in courtrooms, a majority

of judges i.e. 75.6% believed that more than 50% lawyers have inadequate competence

with this regard.

Analysis of the qualitative data reveals that students have inadequate ability in

this skill, as it has never been taught despite the fact that spoken English creates a good

impression in addition to its practical utility in real life. One of the reasons for

inadequacy in this skill is lack of confidence. Qualitative and quantitative findings

correlate with each other.

d) What level of linguistic adequacy do the learners of law have in performing tasks

related to listening skills in academic and occupational settings?

Five areas of listening were taken under consideration: listening to lectures in the

class, listening to presentations, listening to fellow students in group/pair work, listening

in mock oral arguments, and listening in occupational settings. The analysis revealed that

majority respondents perceived that learners had inadequate ability in three areas of

listening: listening to lectures in the class, listening to presentations and listening in mock

oral arguments. The details revealed that 61.7% of the respondents believed that learners

had inadequate ability in listening to lectures in the class. For the skill of listening to

presentations, 52.3% perceived that learners’ had inadequate ability. As mock oral

situations are complicated, a vast majority i.e., 71.1% of the respondents considered that

learners had inadequate skill of listening in mock oral argument. However, listening skills

were considered to be adequate in two areas: listening in group/pair work, and listening

in occupational situations. The respondents who said that learners had adequate ability in

listening to fellow students in group/pair work were 64.4%. Moreover, 73.6%

respondents were of the opinion that learners had adequate skill of listening in

occupational legal settings.

Another area of listening i.e. listening in courtroom was analyzed separately as

the questionnaire that was meant for judges was significantly different in terms of content

and form. The analysis, in this case, revealed that majority of judges believed that the

skill is adequate as 75.8% judges mentioned that less than 50% lawyers had inadequate

competence with regard to listening in courtroom.

English and Asia

54

The qualitative analysis revealed that difficulty in listening is dependent on the

background knowledge of the topic under discussion. Moreover, it has also been noticed

that learners face difficulty in listening with concentration.

In summary, out of a total of six skills related to listening, learners had adequate

competence in three i.e. listening in group/pair work, listening in various occupational

situations, and listening to judges in courtroom. On the other hand, learners had

inadequate competence in the other three areas: listening to lectures in the class, listening

to presentations, and listening in mock oral arguments.

e) How important is it to have adequate command of English for academic and

occupational purposes?

Perceptions of all the four population groups (teachers of law, recent graduates,

senior lawyers and judges) have been taken under consideration in this context.

According to the findings, all the population groups believe that English plays an

important role in academic and professional legal settings. However, according to the

qualitative findings with reference to general comments of the respondents, learners’

command of English falls short of the mark. To overcome this problem, as the qualitative

findings suggest, legal English courses should be conducted at various platforms.

Overall Findings

From the findings of the study, the following main points can be deduced:

• English plays an important role in almost all academic and professional legal

settings.

• Learners’ competence in English falls short of the mark: they lack the required

linguistic skills and sub-skills for performing different academic and occupational

roles in legal settings.

• The level of incompetence varies: the more complex the text/tasks, the higher the

level of inadequacy.

• A specific course for English is required to address the problem.

English and Asia

55

Outline of the Recommended Course

An outline of the recommended course was prepared in the light of the findings of

the research. The course is organized into 13 units. Each unit lists topics to be included in

the unit.

Unit 1: Structures (Basic sentence Grammar): Tenses, prepositions, narrations,

direct/indirect speech, articles, punctuation etc.

Unit 2: Vocabulary: Judging the meaning from the context, prefixes, suffixes, technical

terms, common terms with an uncommon meaning, words having Latin, French or Old

English origins, polysyllabic words, unusual prepositional phrases, combination of

words, having different sources, formality: will, shall etc., vagueness, over precision (the

use of absolute terms such as “all” and “none”).

Unit 3: Reading: Reading for main ideas, reading for inferences, skimming, scanning,

reading of cases, reading statutes.

Unit 4: Case Briefs: Purpose of a case brief, format of a case brief, synthesizing cases.

Unit 5: Organization in Writing: Brain storming & outlining, how to write a good

paragraph, editing.

Unit 6: Speaking: Steps for preparing talks effectively, determine purposeS, analyze the

audience and the situation, choose the main ideas for your message, research your topic

thoroughly, organize the data and write your draft, plan visual aids if desirable, rehearse

speeches and revise where necessary, give proper attention to your pitch, rate of delivery,

volume, vocal quality and pronunciation and accent, give proper attention to your

posture, movement, gestures, facial expressions and appearance.

Unit 7: Listening: Be prepared to listen, listen with positive attitude, listen to

understand, focus your attention, concentrate on context, take notes, curb the impulse to

interrupt, summarize and evaluate.

Unit 8: Mock Trail/Oral Advocacy: Professional responsibilities in oral argument,

purpose of oral argument, mechanics of oral argument, preparation of oral argument,

techniques of oral advocacy.

Unit 9: Advanced Legal Writing skills: Omit surplus words, use base verbs (not

nominalizations), prefer active voice, use short sentences, arrange your words with care,

avoid language quirks.

Unit 10: Office Memorandum: Purpose of an office memorandum, audience for an

office memorandum, steps before writing an office memorandum, form and content of an

office memorandum.

English and Asia

56

Unit 11: Plaints: Purpose of a plaint, brainstorm for writing a plaint, format of a plaint,

editing a plaint.

Unit 12: Written Statement: Purpose of written statement, brain storm for writing a

written statement, format of written statement, editing, etc.

Unit 13: Writing Miscellaneous Genres: Complaints, bale application, acquittal

application, application for medical examination, application for expert opinion,

application for summoning of records.

Conclusion

In this paper, I have recommended a course for learners of law in Pakistan as well as

other common law countries where English is used as a Second Language. The course is

based on the potential linguistic needs of the learners, which have been investigated in

this research project. The course is comprehensive for law students and recent law

graduates who have recently entered the profession to practice law. Public and private

universities can implement this course to improve the standard of legal education of their

institutions. Moreover, the course could be conducted at various other platforms like bar

councils, judicial academies, provincial and federal law departments and the superior

courts: High Courts and the Supreme Courts. Private law firms can also conduct legal

English courses for their employees.

For L.L.B. students, the recommended course should be started in the first year of

their legal studies and can go on until the third year of their program. As the L.L.B.

program is offered at a great number of places in common law countries and different

types of legal institutions have different academic calendars, different examination

systems and different resources, therefore, each institution/university can make decisions

about the number of units to be offered in a year. It is better to follow the order of the

units in the proposed course as the units are arranged with certain considerations kept in

view. However, teachers can rearrange the order of the units, in case they desire to do so

for certain preferences and priorities and the availability of resources. Teachers can also

start more than one unit simultaneously depending upon the choices they have in setting

their timetables for the classes. For example, unit 1, which relates to structures, and unit

3, which is concerned with reading can go side by side.

Keeping in view the level of linguistic adequacy of particular groups of learners,

and the availability of resources, certain units could be omitted from the teaching agenda.

For example, Unit 1, which relates to structures, can be omitted in some cases where

learners’ linguistic background is very good, and therefore, they do not need practice in

English and Asia

57

basics related to the structure of English. Similarly, institutions that have limited

resources can choose to address the learners’ present academic needs by omitting the

units that deal with future occupational needs. For example, in such a case, the unit that

provides practice in writing an Office Memorandum can be omitted, as it is required in a

law firm, where lawyers perform occupational tasks.

For each unit, communicative teaching methodology is recommended. Moreover,

an eclectic approach is also suggested to teach the course. Teachers who have training in

ELT can teach the proposed course. However, ELT teachers will have to work hard to

prepare their lessons, as they need to be clear in their understanding of legal genres that

are complex in nature. Moreover, teachers will have to design and adapt authentic

materials from different sources like books on legal English, CCP (Civil Procedure

Code), newspapers, cases and statutes etc. as no specific textbook is available that fully

caters to specific needs of law students in Pakistan as well other common law countries

where English is used as a Second language.

The aim of this research was to investigate potential needs of learners of law in

Pakistan. In the light of the findings, a course has been recommended for implementation.

The findings of the research are helpful in investigating further unexplored areas in

English for Academic Legal Purposes (EALP) and English for Professional Legal

Purposes (EOLP). One recommendation for further research is to work on materials

development for EALP/EOLP courses in such a manner that a specific textbook could be

compiled that will cater to specific needs of learners of law in commonwealth those

countries where English is used as a second language. Another area of research is genre

analysis of legal texts in the context of legal texts produced by non-native speakers of

English in the commonwealth countries. The findings of this research will be helpful for

teachers and researchers of legal English: specific features of legal texts produced by

non-native writers of the commonwealth countries can have specific pedagogical

implications and course designers can benefit from the findings of such research projects.

Moreover, issues related to bilingualism and multilingualism in courtroom language with

reference to the courts of those commonwealth countries where English is used as a

Second Language can also be an interesting and useful area for further research. Last, but

not least, research on EALP/EOLP teacher can be very useful as still the unresolved issue

is: how much knowledge of the subject is required by an EALP/EOLP teacher to achieve

the objectives of teaching? Of course, this is a significant research question. This is

English and Asia

58

because of the unusual complexity of legal English, which makes EALP and EOLP

situations significantly different from all other EAP and EOP situations.

Bibliography

Braine, G. (2001). Twenty years of needs analysis: Reflections on a personal journey. In J. Flowerdew, & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brindley, G. (2000). Needs analysis. In M. Byram (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of

language teaching and learning. London: Routledge. Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to

programme development. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Dudley-Evans, T. & M. J. St. John. (1998). Developments in English for specific

purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Flowerdew, J.& Peacock, M. (2001). Research perspectives on English for academic

purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibbons, J. (2004). Language and the law. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook

of applied linguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Graves, K. (1996). A framework of course development processes. In J. C. Richards

(Ed.), Teachers as course developers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centered

approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johns, A. M., and Dudley-Evans, T. (1991). English for specific purposes: International

in scope, specific in purpose. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2): 297-314. Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resource book for

teachers. Glasgow: Cambridge University Press. Richards, J. (1984). Language curriculum development. RELC Journal, 15, 1. Richards, J., Platt, J., & Weber, H. (1985). A dictionary of applied linguistics. London:

Longman. Robinson, P. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner’s guide. New York: Prentice Hall. Robinson, P. (2000) English for Specific Purposes. In Routledge Encyclopedia of

Language Teaching and Learning, M. Byram (Ed.). London: Routledge. Stoynoff, S. (2004). Case studies in TESOL practice. ELT Journal, 58 (4). Strevens, P. (1988). ESP after twenty years: A re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo (Ed.), ESP:

State of the Art (pp. 1-13). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.

English and Asia

59

Risk-Taking in English Language Learning among Indian and Malay Students of SMK Main Convent, Ipoh

JOHANA YUSOF

SHEEMA LIZA IDRIS UiTM Perak

Abstract

Risk-taking is one of the most important variables in the affective domain especially in English Language learning. Risk-taking is when a learner takes calculated risk in attempting to use or to try out their newly acquired language for meaningful purposes despite the possible consequences of failures and being laughed at. It is an essential quality which a good language learner should incorporate in language acquiring process. This was suggested by Rubin et al based on studies of personal and general learner factors. Whereas, Ely (1986) assumed that high risk-taking will yield positive results in second language learning. Thus, this study is conducted to identify the variations in risk-taking behavior between learners from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. This study looks into the variation of risk-taking behavior displayed by 20 Form One Indian and Malay students of a local secondary school for the purpose of comparison. The intention of this study is to test the hypothesis that Indian language learners in our local primary school are better risk-takers compared to Malay students in the school. The data presented are based on questionnaires distributed and observation done in the classroom. The findings gathered from the students’ questionnaires and observation reveal that there are variations in the level of risk-taking in language learning between the two different groups. The study also concluded that Indian students have a good command of the language and therefore, better at taking risk in language learning. It is suggested that educators look into other factors which originate from outside educational settings which plays an important role in influencing the variation in risk-taking behaviour shown in this study.

Key Terms: risk-taking, affective domains, variables, language acquisition, cultural background Introduction It has been widely accepted among scholars and researchers that the affective domain of a

language learner is a determining factor in second language achievement. Affective

domain is centralized to the emotional side of human beings such as feelings about self,

relationships in a community of learners and emotional ties between language and

culture.

Generally, for most Malaysian students, affective variables play a significant role

in influencing the way they learn a language. As we all know, students fear to take risks

English and Asia

60

especially in English language classroom. Thus, teachers may be able to enhance and

speed up the learning and acquiring processes if they profoundly understand how these

factors function in second language acquisition. Brown (1994) stressed that

understanding how human beings feel, respond, believe and value is an exceedingly

important aspect of the theory of second language acquisition. Dulay and Burt have

suggested that attitudinal factors may relate to second language acquisition in the

following way: performers with optimal attitudes have a lower affective filter. “A low

filter means that the performer is more open to the input and that the input strikes deeper”

(Mc Laughlin, 1987). However, Scovel (2000), in his studies concluded that "we are still

struggling to come to grips with it. The great irony is that they could very well end up

being the most influential force in language acquisition, but researchers have not even

come close to demonstrating such a claim. A large part of the problem is the wide variety

of constructs that are subsumed under the term 'emotions . . . More than any other topic

covered in this book, affective variables are the area that SLA researchers understand the

least”.

Among the important and influential affective variables to be taken into account

are extroversion and introversion, motivation, anxiety, self-esteem, and the variable

which will become the focus of this research is risk-taking.

Literature Review

Risk-taking and Second Language Acquisition

One of the most important variables in the affective domain is risk-taking. Risk-taking is

when a learner takes calculated risk in attempting to use or to try out their newly acquired

language for meaningful purposes despite the possible consequences of failures and being

laughed at. It is an essential quality; a good language learner should incorporate in

language acquiring process. This was suggested by Rubin et al based on studies of

personal and general learner factors, Ellis (1992).

Ely (1986) assumed that high risk-taking will yield positive results in second

language learning. In addition, Brown (1994) stated that successful language learners in

their realistic appraisal of themselves as vulnerable yet being capable of accomplishing

tasks, must be willing to become ‘gamblers in the game of language, to attempt to

produce and to interpret language that is a bit beyond their absolute certainty’.

Risk-taking variations seems to be a factor in a number of issues in second

language acquisition and psychology in a second language class. Avoiding the risk of

making mistakes could be detrimental to students’ progress in acquiring their second

English and Asia

61

language. Brown (1987) observed that the silent student in the classroom is one who is

unwilling to appear foolish when mistakes are made. Self-esteem seems to be closely

connected to a risk-taking factor; when those foolish mistakes are made, a person with

high global self-esteem is not daunted by the possible consequences of being laughed at.

Beebe (1983: 40) described some of the negative ramifications that foster fear of

risk-taking both in the classroom and in natural settings. In the classroom, these

ramifications might include a bad grade in the course, a fail in the exam, a reproach from

the teacher, a smirk from classmates or punishment or embarrassment imposed by one.

Outside the classroom, individuals learning a second language face other negative

consequences if they make mistakes. They fear looking ridiculous; they fear the

frustration coming from a listener’s blank look showing that they have failed to

communicate; they fear the danger of not being able to take care of themselves; they fear

the alienation of not being able to communicate and thereby get close to other human

beings, perhaps worst of all they fear a loss of identity.

Ethnicity and Risk-Taking

In some aspects of second language acquisition, individual variation does exist (Mc

Laughlin, 1987). Therefore, the affective domain between individual learners may differ.

However, many questions concerning how far ethnicity and cultural background affects

acquirer’s affective factors still remain unexplored.

Craigner,’s(1997) study on ‘Language-learning Strategies for Learners of

Japanese: Investigating Ethnicity’ looked at the language-learning strategies used by

university-level learners of Japanese as a Foreign Language. The study took place in

Australia and included people from the following backgrounds: Australia, Taiwan,

Korea, Thailand, Hong Kong, Germany, the USA and Malaysia. Surprisingly, for anyone

who has thought that learners from certain cultural background tend to use specific kinds

of language-learning strategies, the study showed that there were few differences based

on ethnicity for these learners of Japanese as a Foreign Language.

The Study

The study looked at the variations that occur in risk taking among students in one of the

secondary schools in Malaysia. This is to compare students’ behaviour in risk-taking

between two ethnic groups in language learning besides finding out factors that influence

the variations of risk-taking behaviour. The research questions thus can be expressed as:

1. Is there any variation in risk-taking behaviour in language learning between learners

from different ethnic and cultural background?

English and Asia

62

2. What are the factors that influence the differences of students’ behaviour in risk-

taking?

3. Are there any factors originating from the outside of educational settings influencing

the variation in risk-taking behaviour?

Methodology

The pilot study involves 20 students; 10 Indian and 10 Malay students who were chosen

from the top class of a local secondary school. The study was conducted in one of the

classrooms to ensure that the results obtained from this study were reliable and really

reflect the true situation in educational settings. The setting where the study was

conducted was appropriate as the class was placed in a spacious room away from any sort

of distraction.

20 other students were chosen to be the observers. They were appointed to help

with the data gathering. They recorded behaviour displayed by the students during the

observation period. The procedure that the authors have used is the descriptive approach

which involved the administration of appropriate data collection devices and analysis of

all data.

The instruments used for data collection include questionnaires and observation.

The questionnaires contain 15 questions, to determine how high their inclination to take

risk in a language classroom and during formal and informal conversation outside

classroom, were distributed. The students were to rate themselves accordingly. They

were guided by the teacher to ensure that they understood every question well. This had

provided a deeper insight of the issues that were raised.

The findings were organized in a tabular form using frequency counts and were

converted using percentage scores. The scores were calculated by the given method:

Maximum individual score = 4 marks x 10 questions = 40 marks

Maximum group score = 40 marks x 10 students = 400 marks

A special set of observation forms containing five types of behaviour was given to

all the observers. A lesson plan was prepared for the process of observing the students. It

was a typical English lesson that emphasized on initiating risk-taking among students

during its progress. This was done to enable the observers to observe and record any

specific risk-taking behaviour that was displayed by each student during the lesson. The

observation was very useful in gleaning information about the student’s tendency and

capability of taking risk in English classroom. It also indicated the degree of affective

English and Asia

63

filters that were operating within the students in learning their target language in

educational settings.

The 20 observers recorded all risk-taking attempts made by the students during

the lesson. They ticked the column in the given form. As soon as the lesson ended, the

number of ticks found in the form was totalled. The type of behaviours specified was

adapted from the research done by Catherine Sasaki from Tokoha Gakuen University

(Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan).

Findings

The data has clearly shown that there are variations in the level of risk-taking in language

learning between the two different groups which have been the subject of this study.

From the questionnaires distributed, the researchers were able to record some useful data

especially on how the students rate themselves in certain aspects which are related to

risk-taking. The data has shown clearly that the Indian students were more willing to take

a calculated risk without fear of making mistakes. They also would risk using new words

which meanings they were not really sure of and construct new sentence structure of

which they were uncertain of. Whenever they talk to other persons in daily life, Indian

students were willing to ‘dive in’ the conversation without worrying too much about their

language. These facts are further strengthened by the observation made during the lesson.

Indian students generally displayed more risk-taking compared to the Malay students.

English and Asia

64

Table 1: Demographic background VARIABLES FREQUENCY (%) RACE: MALAY INDIAN

MALAY 10 (100%)

INDIAN 10 (100%)

GRADE OBTAINED FOR ENGLISH: A B

7 (70%) 3 (30%)

10 (100%)

LANGUAGE FREQUENTLY USED AT HOME: BAHASA MELAYU ENGLISH TAMIL BAHASA MELAYU / ENGLISH TAMIL / ENGLISH

4 (40%) 1 (10%) 5 (50%)

2 (20%) 1 (10%) 7 (70%)

HOUSE AREA: URBAN SUB URBAN

8 (80%) 2 (20%)

9 (90%) 1 (10%)

STARTED TO SPEAK IN ENGLISH: SINCE YOUNG AFTER GOING TO KINDERGARTEN AFTER GOING TO PRIMARY SCHOOL AFTER GOING TO SECONDARY SCHOOL

1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%)

9 (90%) 1 (10%)

Table 1 shows that 100% of Indian students obtained grade As for their English in

the previous UPSR exam while only 70% of Malay students obtained grade As and

another 30% obtained grade Bs. The data on language frequently used by students at

home reveals that 40% of Malay students use Bahasa Melayu, 10% use English and 50%

use both English and Bahasa Melayu. In comparison, 20% of Indian students use English,

10% use Tamil and 70% of them use both Tamil and English at home. The majority, 80%

of Malay students and 90% of Indian students come from urban areas while 20% of

Malay students and 10% of Indian students are from suburban areas. Table 1 also

indicates that 90% of Indian students had started to speak in English from a young age

compared to only 10% of the Malay students. The data shows that 30% of Malay students

began speaking in English after they went to kindergarten. The statistics reveals that 60%

of Malay students and only 10% of Indian students started to speak in English after they

went to primary school.

Table 2 Analysis of students’

Table 2 shows the scores that students gained when they were asked the

respective questions whereas

two ethnic groups based on the questions.

QUESTIONS

1 I don’t mind if people laugh at me when I speak.

2 I like to try out new words and structures that I’m not completely sure of.

3 I never avoid speaking English in the

4 I’m not too conscious of the accuracy when I speak English.

5 I really enjoy talking in English to other people in my group.

6 I have the confidence to converse on a familiar topic in an informal situation. e.g. with

7 I have the confidence to converse on a familiar topic in a formal situation. e.g. in classroom

8 When speaking to a very fluent speaker, I have the confidence to join in a conversation.

9 I am able to ask questions in classroom.

10 I am able to speak in English in the classroom without being asked by the teacher (voluntarily)

TOTAL

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Q 1 Q 2 Q 3

2623

31

38

33

Scores

Chart 1 : Analysis of Students' Perception on Risk

65

tudents’ perception on risk-taking behaviour in English c

Table 2 shows the scores that students gained when they were asked the

hereas Chart 1 below shows the significant difference between the

two ethnic groups based on the questions.

MALAY

I don’t mind if people laugh at me when I speak. 26

I like to try out new words and structures that I’m not completely sure of.

23

I never avoid speaking English in the classroom. 31

I’m not too conscious of the accuracy when I speak 31

I really enjoy talking in English to other people in my 35

I have the confidence to converse on a familiar topic in an informal situation. e.g. with friends

36

I have the confidence to converse on a familiar topic in a formal situation. e.g. in classroom

30

When speaking to a very fluent speaker, I have the confidence to join in a conversation.

25

I am able to ask questions in English during lesson in the 38

I am able to speak in English in the classroom without being asked by the teacher (voluntarily)

30

305

Q 3 Q 4 Q 5 Q 6 Q 7 Q 8 Q 9

31 31

35 36

30

25

3838

31

38 3735 34

Questions

Chart 1 : Analysis of Students' Perception on Risk-Taking Behaviour in English Classroom

English classroom

Table 2 shows the scores that students gained when they were asked the

Chart 1 below shows the significant difference between the

MALAY INDIAN

38

33

38

31

38

37

35

34

38

37

305 357

Q 9 Q 10

38

30

38 37

Taking Behaviour in English

MALAY

INDIAN

English and Asia

66

There are a few significant findings the authors wish to discuss in this paper. For

Q1, the scores for Indian students are 38 marks while the scores for Malay students are

26 out of 40. This shows that the Indian students do not mind being laughed at compared

to the Malay students. As for Q2, the chart shows that out of 40 marks, the score for

Indian students are 33 while the scores for Malay students are only 23. It means that the

Indian students are more capable than the Malay students in trying out new words and

structures that they are not sure of. In relation to Q3, the number of Indian students

responded that they never try to avoid speaking English. The Indian students’ scores are

38 marks and it was greater than the Malay students whose scores are only 31. However,

for Q4, the scores for both groups are 31 marks and they responded that they are never

too conscious of the accuracy of the grammar when speaking English. Q5 shows that the

Indian students’ scores are slightly higher than the Malay students’.

Q6 reveals that there is not much difference in the scores since both groups have

the confidence to converse in an informal situation. However for Q7, Indian students’

scores are higher than Malay students when it comes to formal situation such as in the

classroom. When speaking to a very fluent speaker, Indian students have more

confidence joining a conversation based on their high scores compared to Malay students

for Q8. As for Q9, both groups claimed that they are able to ask questions in English

during lessons in the classroom. Their scores are the same, 38, for both groups. Finally,

for Q10, the results show that the number of Indian students who are able to speak

voluntarily in the classroom are greater than Malay students. The finding shows that

Indian students scored 38 marks compared to Malay students who scored only 30 marks.

Table 3 Perceptions of Behaviour Behaviour Indian Malay 1

Students volunteer to answer the teachers questions. 65 62

2 Students volunteered to make sentences from newly learnt words given by teacher.

76 65

3

Students say their opinion freely in class.

8 3

4 Students initiate conversation in English when doing group work with classmates.

29 22

5

Students verbally indicate do not understand.

5 2

TOTAL

183 154

English and Asia

67

The results in Table 3 are based on the observation made in the classroom. The

number of ticks from the observation form was counted and presented as Table 3. The

number of attempts made by Indian students for behaviour 1 is 65, which is greater than

Malay students’ attempts which are only 62. As for behaviour 2, the results again show

that Indian students’ attempts are 76 which are higher than those by Malay students.

Although not many attempts were made for behaviour 3, the attempts made by Indian

students are still higher than those by Malay students. 29 attempts were made by Indian

students and only 22 by Malay students for behaviour 4. Finally, not many attempts were

made for behaviour 5 but Indian students’ attempts are still higher than those by Malay

students. Throughout the lesson they had made 183 attempts whereas the Malay students

have displayed 154 risk-taking behaviours. The range between the two scores is 183 -

154 = 29.

Conclusion and Recommendations The conclusions made here are based on the data obtained through the students’

questionnaires and observation. From the questionnaires distributed, the researchers were

able to record some useful data especially on how the students rate themselves in certain

aspects which are related to risk-taking. It can be concluded from the study that there are

variations in the level of risk taking in language learning between the two different

groups. Indian students have a good command of the language and are better at taking

risk in language learning. Besides, factors such as frequent usage of the English language

at home help to increase students’ confidence in risk-taking.

The study also revealed that students who are exposed to the English Language

from a young age will display more risk-taking behaviour. In addition, interaction

between students of two different cultural backgrounds will enhance the students’ use of

English. It can be concluded that Malay socio-culture has not sufficiently prepared

students for fluent use of the language, which is one of the factors that influence the

differences in students’ behaviour in risk-taking.

There are a few significant questions which remained unanswered and therefore

need further investigation. Although the Malay students are not as good as the Indian

students in risk-taking, they are still capable of achieving good results in their

examination. It is important in this discussion to take into account that school

examinations are more oriented towards reading and writing tests. However, through

observation during daily interaction, the authors have found out that Malay students do

have difficulties in speaking in English. The authors have also found out that none of the

English and Asia

68

previous findings by any of the researchers mentioned in the literature review are able to

explain this phenomenon. Beebe (1983), for example, has described some of the negative

ramifications that foster fear of risk-taking both in the classroom and in natural settings.

The subjects of the author’s research, nevertheless, learn in the same classroom and do

not differ very much from one another in their examination results, there are no

emotionally threatening situations in the classroom because all the subjects have been

learning in the same class for nearly six years and know each other very well. Therefore,

Beebe’s statements do not explain why variations exist in the risk-taking behaviour

displayed by both groups throughout the research. The authors ardently believe that other

factors which originate from outside the educational settings play an important role in

influencing the variation in risk taking behaviour shown in this study; most probably

socio-cultural factors. In Malaysia, the ability to speak and converse in English fluently is

one of the factors which can upgrade the social status of a particular social group. This

may be an important drive which could encourage certain groups to take risks in

acquiring English as their second language.

Bibliography Beebe, L. M. (1983). Risk-taking and the language learner. In Classroom oriented

research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publisher.

Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning and teaching. (2nd Edition).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc. Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language

pedagogy. San Francisco: Prentice Hall Regents. Ellis, R. (1992). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University

Press. Graigner, P. R. (1997). Language-learning strategies for learners of Japanese:

Investigating ethnicity. Foreign Language Annals, 30, (3), 378-385. Retrieved May 25, 2008 from http://www.edtech.connect.msu.edu/Searchaera2002/viewproposaltext.asp?propID=974

Hornby, A. S. (2000). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary. Oxford University Press. McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language acquisition. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum

Associates. Scovel, T. (2000). Learning new language: A guide to second language acquisition.

Retrieved May 25, 2008 from http://www.writing.berkely.edu/TESL-EJ/ej18/r12.html

English and Asia

69

When Items Don’t Work: Scrutinizing Language Tests with Item Indices

XING FANG

English Language Centre, Shantou University, P.R.China Abstract

When a language test encompasses a number of items on which both strong

and weak test takers achieve equal degrees of success, will you become

skeptical about the effectiveness of these items in terms of their contribution

to test reliability? If this really happens, what do you have in mind to cope

with such items? Will you disregard their inefficiency, or will you consider

making substitutes or simply discard them? These questions await all

language test developers who, without ample consideration or knowledge on

testing, inappropriately select and/or write items of low discriminating power

in test design. With the intention of appealing to careful item selection and

writing, an itemized test result analysis is carried out by measuring the

seemingly poorly-functioning items of a high-stakes and standardized

achievement test against three indices: item discrimination (or item

differentiation), item facility (or item difficulty), and distractor efficiency.

Commencing with a justification for the necessity of item analysis for high-

stakes and standardized tests, this paper then continues to elucidate on the

correlation between item indices and test reliability. Subsequently, an

introductory description of the test to be examined is presented, and an item

analysis is conducted using the item indices, with a discussion section

attached. Eventually, solutions to item problems and further suggestions are

offered.

English and Asia

70

Key Terms: indices, distractor, items, reliability, facility, discrimination

When a language test is replete with items un which both strong and weak test takers achieve

equal degrees of success, would you become skeptical about the effectiveness of these items

in terms of their contribution to test reliability? If this really happens, what do you have in

mind to cope with such items? Will you disregard their inefficiency, or will you consider

making substitutes or discarding them? These questions await all language test developers

who, without ample consideration or knowledge on testing, have inappropriately selected

and/or written items of low discriminating power in test design. With the intention of

appealing to careful item selection and construction, an itemized test result analysis is

conducted by measuring the seemingly poor-functioning items of a high-stakes and

standardized achievement test against three indices: item discrimination (or item

differentiation), item facility (or item difficulty), and distractor efficiency. Commencing with

justification for the necessity of item analysis for high-stakes and standardized tests, this

paper then continues to elucidate on the correlation between item indices and test reliability.

Subsequently, an introductory description of the test to be examined is presented, followed

by a detailed item analysis. At length, problems with utilizing item indices in the scrutiny of

tests are identified and solutions are suggested.

High-stakes and Standardized Tests & Item Analysis

A high-stakes test is a test which has significant consequences for test takers. Success in

passing the test may earn the examinee important benefits, such as a diploma, a scholarship,

or a job license. On the contrary, test takers who flunked the test may be enormously

disadvantaged, such as retaking the same class until the test can be passed, being unable to

study at university, or being prohibited from practising medicine. A high-stakes test always

requires a clear line drawn between those who pass and those who fail and a direct

consequence for passing or failing (something “at stake”) (Wikipedia, 2008). In the light of

the grave impact that high-stakes tests usually place on test taker’s future study or career, the

efficacy of the tests, i.e. high test validity and reliability, must be accomplished at all costs.

High-stakes tests can also be standardized tests. Standardized testing means that the

administration and scoring of a test is conducted in a predetermined and standard manner

(Popham, 1999). Brown (2004: 67) further indicates that “a standardized test presupposes

certain standard objectives, or criteria, that are held constant across one form of the test or

another”, which implies that high consistency in test design and development is sustained by

means of a set of objective-based guidelines. An achievement test for a college course, for

instance, can be a standardized test. Because the test is supposed to be developed upon the

English and Asia

71

predetermined learning objectives of the course and therefore should consistently incorporate

questions of the same nature regardless of its form (item type). Students will take the same

test in the same conditions at the same time of every academic year (often the end of a

semester or the course) and their performance will then be scored against uniform rubrics.

Brown (2004: 68) additionally claims that the foremost advantage of standardized testing is

realized by providing a ready-made previously validated product that frees the teacher from

having to spend hours creating a test. Since a standardized test is often designed to be

administered multiple times or to be revised, adapted and expanded to be administered in a

different form, and often happens to be a high-stakes test (failure at an achievement test for a

college course may result in students retaking the course, or worse of all, the refusal of the

university to award a degree), to examine the contribution that each item makes to the test

becomes necessary and to conduct item analysis is a must if the need for rejecting or

modifying certain items is perceived.

Item Discrimination, Item Facility and Test Reliability

Item discrimination (ID) is an indicator of how well an item differentiates between high- and

low-ability candidates (Hughes, 2003: 226). Brown (2004: 59) also explains that an item on

which strong test takers and weak test takers score equally well would have poor ID for it did

not distinguish the two groups. Conversely, an item that elicits correct responses from most

of the strong group and incorrect responses from most of the weak group has good

discriminating power. ID is crucial because it lends support to the necessity of conducting

item analysis for influential tests. In Hughes’s words (2003: 226), ID is important in that it

may enhance test reliability, which refers to the extent to which a test is dependable and

yields consistent results if it is administered to the same students with the same ability on

two different occasions. Brown (2004: 59) suggests a means as well as a formula to calculate

ID, which further illuminates why a test may become more reliable as a result of the change

of the ID of its items.

After a test has been given and the scores have been calculated, the teacher divides

test takers (students) roughly into thirds based on the scores – that is, create three ability

groups which include the top (1/3 × the total number of test takers) scores, the middle 1/3,

and the lowest 1/3. Eliminating the middle group leaves the group with high-ability students

and the group with weak students. Then, a particular item is selected for examination in

terms of the results achieved by the two groups of students.

English and Asia

72

The ID of item #10 can be calculated with the formula: # high group correct # low group correct ID = − 1/3 × the total number of test takers 1/3 × the total number of test takers

= 7/10 − 2/10 = 1 / 2 = 0.5

The theoretical maximum discrimination index is 1 and no discriminating power

would be zero. So the above result shows that item # 10 has a moderate level of ID. If the ID

result scored near zero, this item would have failed to discriminate test takers.

But why would items with high ID corroborate test reliability? Take item # 10 for

instance, suppose it has a higher ID, say, 0.7. In that case, the students in the high-ability

group who score on the item must be more than those in the low-ability group. This ensures

high-ability students a bigger chance of responding to the item with a right answer as well as

increases the chance of low-ability students’ failure on the item, because the minimum

number of correct responses from the high-ability group has been raised to 7 (>5), while the

maximum number of correct responses from the low-ability group has declined to 3 (<5).

Hence, it is more likely for the item to constantly discriminate between the two groups of

students. In other words, the item becomes more reliable at telling the strong and the weak

apart or eliciting the anticipated responses from the right test takers, which unquestionably

consolidates the reliability of the whole test.

Closely connected with ID in exerting influence on test reliability is item facility (IF,

or item difficulty), which is “the extent to which an item is easy or difficulty for the proposed

group of test takers” (Brown, 2004: 58). If an item is over test takers’ head, they may simply

guess the answer at their choice or employ test-taking strategies to eliminate implausible

answers. This is especially true of multiple-choice items (Alderson, 2000: 212). When

guessing or luck butts in, test reliability would greatly diminished, because the same test

taker may approach the same item with an entirely different response at the mercy of

guessing. Apart from this, if an item is too easy or too challenging, its discriminating power

will be doubtless poor, which, as discussed above, has a detrimental effect on test reliability

as well. Then, the value of IF becomes instantly comprehensible. To make things more

concrete, Brown (2004: 59) provides another formula for the computation of IF which

reflects the percentage of students answering the item correctly.

Item # 10 # Correct #Incorrect High-ability Ss (top 1/3) 7 3 Low-ability Ss (bottom 1/3) 2 8

* The total number of test takers is 30.

English and Asia

73

# of Ss answering the item correctly

IF =

Total # of Ss responding to that item

If 27 out of 30 students answer correctly, the IF index is 27 divided by 30 or 0.9,

which indicates that this item is probably too easy. There is no absolute IF value set or

employed to determine which item in the test should be preserved, revised, or discarded, but

acceptable IFs should range between 0.15 and 0.85.

Distractor Efficiency

As multiple choice items feature prominently in almost all tests, to measure more closely its

value in a test is often necessary and worthwhile, and this is made possible with “distractor

efficiency” which refers to the extent to which (a) the distractors tempt a sufficient number

of test takers, and (b) those responses are, to some extent, evenly distributed across all

distractors. Distractors that lure/fool very few test takers have no utility and therefore should

be replaced, modified or deleted (Brown, 2004: 60). Hughes (2003: 228) also indicates that

distractors that do not work contribute little to test reliability in that it leads to low ID and IF,

and therefore should be either fixed or rejected. However, he adds that care should be taken

in the case of easy warm-up items for they may not have many incorrect responses to be

shared among the different distractors.

Item Analysis of an Achievement Test

To better demonstrate how to detect poor-functioning test items, an item analysis is carried

out, utilizing an achievement test. Preceding the analysis is a description of the test

examined.

1) Test title: PG Final Examination (Tier-One). The test is intended for first-year

postgraduate (PG) students of Shantou University (China) who are required to take a two-

semester English course.

2) Timing: 80 minutes

3) Test takers: 91 first-year postgraduates from a variety of disciplines

4) Time and locale of test administration: The test was administered the end of the fall

semester of 2007-2008 (10 Jan, 2008) in the classroom.

English and Asia

74

5) Test type: Firstly, it is an achievement test, because it was administered at the end of the

semester to establish how successful individual students have been in achieving course

objectives. Also, it is a high-stakes and standardized test. It entails high stakes because

students who do not pass the exam will be recycled to the 1st semester of the following

academic year to restart the course. And those who perform poorly on the exam would lose

the chance of attaining a scholarship which covers full tuition fees and living expenses, for

the award of the scholarship considers the score of the final exams of the English course. The

test is also standardized because it is constructed on standard course objectives (See

Appendix I), and it is annually administered in the same place (classroom) and at the same

time (the end of each semester). Its objective items are always machine-scored, while the

subjective items are marked by the teacher. Besides, the test is revised, modified and adapted

annually, based on the test used for the previous academic year. High consistency within

tests for every academic year is highly required by the school.

6) Test structure: The test starts with a listening section which consists of three segments

(25 items). It then has a section of 20 items on language and culture notes. What come after

include a reading section with 10 items and a grammar section with another 10 items. The

final section has only one question and students need to respond to the question with a

limited number of words.

7) Item type: Multiple choice (including True/False/Not Given items) (items 1-15, 26-65);

spot dictation (items 16-25); short-answer question (item 66)

8) Scoring procedure: Students were provided with two answer sheets to write down their

responses. All objective items were machine-scored while a teacher scored the subjective

items. As for the short-answer question, all foreseeable answers were provided. The

responses which had not been predicted were subject to the agreement of the teachers

teaching at the same level. In addition, the scoring of the responses to gap-filling and short-

answer questions did not take into account spelling and grammar so as to ensure test validity.

For more information on this, see Hughes (2003: 80-81).

An Itemized Analysis of the Test Results

Method

Given that the formation of the test is based upon a great number of objective items and one

subjective item, these two item categories are to be analyzed separately with the focus on the

former in that it dominates the whole test. On items 1 to 65 (objective), a correct response

English and Asia

75

will score one while an incorrect will take a score of zero, and then the test taker’s name,

together with the score s/he attains on each of the items, will be recorded in a spreadsheet in

a high-low sequence against the total grade s/he has achieved on these items (See Appendix

II). Under support of the spreadsheet, each item’s ID and IF can therefore be calculated with

the employment of the formulas provided by Brown. Below is the result of the computation.

Item Ability Group ( number of test takers)

Number of Correct Response

Item Discrimination (ID)

Item

Facility

(IF)

1 High (30) 1 0 0.0549

Low (30) 2

2 High (30) 26 0.1333 0.8022

Low (30) 22

3 High (30) 30 0.1333 0.8791

Low (30) 26

4 High (30) 15 0.3 0.3407

Low (30) 6

5 High (30) 21 0.2 0.6044

Low (30) 15

6 High (30) 22 0.1333 0.6923

Low (30) 18

7 High (30) 23 0.033 0.6703

Low (30) 22

8 High (30) 18 0.1333 0.4835

Low (30) 14

9 High (30) 23 0.0667 0.6923

Low (30) 21

10 High (30) 12 0.2333 0.3189

Low (30) 5

11 High (30) 23 0.2 0.6703

Low (30) 17

12 High (30) 18 0.1333 0.5604

Low (30) 14

13 High (30) 30 0.1667 0.9231

Low (30) 25

14 High (30) 26 0.2667 0.7582

Low (30) 18

English and Asia

76

15 High (30) 26 0.3333 0.6813

Low (30) 16

16 High (30) 1 0.033 0.0330

Low (30) 0

17 High (30) 26 0.0667 0.8681

Low (30) 24

18 High (30) 0 0 0.0220

Low (30) 1

19 High (30) 4 0 0.1428

Low (30) 5

20 High (30) 16 0.1667 0.4505

Low (30) 11

21 High (30) 3 0.0667 0.0440

Low (30) 1

22 High (30) 13 0.2667 0.2637

Low (30) 5

23 High (30) 6 0.1333 0.1210

Low (30) 2

24 High (30) 2 0.0667 0.0330

Low (30) 0

25 High (30) 14 0.3667 0.2747

Low (30) 3

26 High (30) 15 0 0.5165

Low (30) 15

27 High (30) 21 0.1333 0.6483

Low (30) 17

28 High (30) 24 0.1667 0.6703

Low (30) 19

29 High (30) 25 0.2667 0.6923

Low (30) 17

30 High (30) 28 0.0667 0.9011

Low (30) 26

31 High (30) 28 0.0667 0.9121

Low (30) 26

32 High (30) 16 0.1 0.4835

Low (30) 13

33 High (30) 21 0.1 0.6813

English and Asia

77

Low (30) 18

34 High (30) 27 0.1333 0.8461

Low (30) 23

35 High (30) 28 0.1667 0.8242

Low (30) 23

36 High (30) 18 0.1333 0.5604

Low (30) 14

37 High (30) 21 0.2333 0.6044

Low (30) 14

38 High (30) 30 0.0667 0.9231

Low (30) 28

39 High (30) 27 0.1667 0.8352

Low (30) 22

40 High (30) 17 0.1667 0.4613

Low (30) 12

41 High (30) 29 0.1667 0.8901

Low (30) 24

42 High (30) 27 0.0667 0.8571

Low (30) 25

43 High (30) 27 0 0.9231

Low (30) 27

44 High (30) 29 0.1 0.9121

Low (30) 26

45 High (30) 28 0.1667 0.8242

Low (30) 23

46 High (30) 30 0.1333 0.9341

Low (30) 26

47 High (30) 29 0.1667 0.9341

Low (30) 27

48 High (30) 1 0 0.0330

Low (30) 2

49 High (30) 25 0.1667 0.7912

Low (30) 20

50 High (30) 10 0.1667 0.2308

Low (30) 5

51 High (30) 27 0 0.9451

Low (30) 29

English and Asia

78

52 High (30) 25 0 0.8572

Low (30) 25

53 High (30) 20 0.2333 0.6593

Low (30) 13

54 High (30) 30 0.0667 0.9780

Low (30) 28

55 High (30) 27 0.0333 0.8370

Low (30) 26

56 High (30) 26 0.0667 0.8022

Low (30) 24

57 High (30) 26 0.0333 0.8571

Low (30) 25

58 High (30) 30 0.1 0.9451

Low (30) 27

59 High (30) 30 0.0333 0.9780

Low (30) 29

60 High (30) 24 0.1333 0.7363

Low (30) 20

61 High (30) 21 0.0667 0.7143

Low (30) 19

62 High (30) 26 0.1 0.8242

Low (30) 23

63 High (30) 29 0.0667 0.9121

Low (30) 27

64 High (30) 25 0.0667 0.8510

Low (30) 23

65 High (30) 29 0.2 0.9011

Low (30) 23

In view of the above table, it is evident that the discriminating power of most of the

items is low with 0.3667 as the highest value (item 25), which signifies that the whole test

ought to be subject to meticulous revision. Considerable attention must be devoted to

severely problematic items whose ID scores zero or almost zero and IF falls out of the range

from 0.15 to 0.85, and these items include item 1, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 24, 26, 30, 31, 38, 42,

43, 48, 51, 52, 54, 57, 59, 63, 64. They must be replaced or discarded. Great care should also

be given item 3, 7, 9, 13, 23, 41, 44, 46, 47, 55, 56, 58, 61, 65, which either score below 0.1

English and Asia

79

on ID or fail to squeeze in the range of acceptable IF value. Modification and adaption is

preferable on these items.

When improving multiple-choice items such as item 3, 7, 9, 13, 41, 44, 46, 47, 55,

56, 58, 61, 65, one indispensable step to follow is examining the efficiency of their

distractors which may have lowered or raised the IF and ID values of these items. Brown

(2004, p.60) provides a means for examination of this kind.

Item 3

Choices A B* C D

High-ability Ss (30) 0 30 0 0

Low-ability Ss (30) 1 26 3 0

Item 7

Choices A B C* D

High-ability Ss (30) 0 5 23 2

Low-ability Ss (30) 0 5 22 3

Item 9

Choices A B* C D

High-ability Ss (30) 3 23 0 3

Low-ability Ss (30) 5 21 0 4

Item 13

Choices A B C D*

High-ability Ss (30) 0 0 0 30

Low-ability Ss (30) 0 0 5 25

Item 41

Choices A* B

High-ability Ss (30) 29 1

Low-ability Ss (30) 24 6

Item 44

Choices A* B

High-ability Ss (30) 29 1

Low-ability Ss (30) 26 4

Item 46

Choices A B* C

High-ability Ss (30) 0 30 0

Low-ability Ss (30) 3 26 1

Item 47

Choices A* B C

English and Asia

80

High-ability Ss (30) 29 0 1

Low-ability Ss (30) 27 1 2

Item 55

Choices A* B C

High-ability Ss (30) 27 2 1

Low-ability Ss (30) 26 2 2

Item 56

Choices A* B C D

High-ability Ss (30) 26 2 2 0

Low-ability Ss (30) 24 3 3 0

Item 58

Choices A B C* D

High-ability Ss (30) 0 0 30 0

Low-ability Ss (30) 0 3 27 0

Item 61

Choices A* B C D

High-ability Ss (30) 21 5 0 4

Low-ability Ss (30) 19 7 0 4

Item 65

Choices A B* C D

High-ability Ss (30) 1 29 0 0

Low-ability Ss (30) 7 23 2 0

Note: 1) The choice with * is correct response.

2) Item 41, 44, 46, 47, 55 are True/False/Not Given items.

The above results show that the question for item 41, 44, 46, 47 and 55 needs to be

revised to make the poor distractors more tempting. For the rest of the items, each of them

contains at least one choice that fools nobody which should definitely be rephrased or

replaced. The other distractors of low efficiency also should be improved through revision or

replacement. The item whose choices functioned best is item 61, even though it has a choice

of no utility, because its other two distractors B and D did attract a good quantity of attention

from both the high- and low-ability students.

The results above also prove that the IF value of a multiple-choice item would be

dramatically raised due to the low efficiency of its distractors which would doubtlessly

increase the chance of choosing the correct answer. The difficulty of an item is therefore

English and Asia

81

considerably reduced and the soaring of its IF value is unavoidable. Finally, the ID is also

undermined for the items being too easy to differentiate the test takers.

As for the last item of the test analysed which is a single question that requires

students to provide an answer within a word limit, it, unlike the objective questions, posed a

bigger challenge for students to give a complete correct response and made it difficult for the

examiner to determine if it has satisfactory ID and IF values. A usual practice for ID/IF

computation on this occasion is calculating the percentage of test takers who score 80 % (or

above) and 20 % (or below) accuracy on the item to determine whether it is too easy or too

difficult. As for item discrimination, it is useful to employ a band-scale to weigh test takers’

scores, like the 0-9 band scale used for IELTS writing. If test takers’ scores on an item are

distributed somewhat evenly across all bands, rather than all falling in one band or two, it

means that the discriminating power of the item is fairly strong. With regard to the short-

answer question item of the test being examined, a 0-5 band scale (See Appendix III) has

been developed for scoring, against which student’s performance was assessed. The result

shows that 68 students are placed in band 3, with 15 in band 2 and 8 in band 4 but none in

band 1 and 5. Hence, there are a large number of students who scored around 60% accuracy

on the item, which can hardly be qualified as an acceptable ID value, though the question is

neither too challenging nor too unsophisticated. Such a result also suggests the adaption or

alteration of the item to allow a more agreeable ID value.

Conclusion

This paper has looked at how to improve a language test (a high-stakes and/or standardized

test in particular) by identifying problematic items with item indices which have a fairly

close connection with test reliability, a high degree of which is always anticipated from all

tests. Through an item analysis of an authentic test, it has revealed the particulars of its

items’ failure in fulfilling their function of discriminating test takers, which justifies the

modification of the test. It has also observed that item indices are of great utility in

scrutinizing inefficient objective items but not quite fit for the examination of subjective

items on which scores given may vary with the assessor, though that spelling and grammar

do not interfere with grading can make it feasible for spot dictation. For items like essay

writing or short-answer questions, it has suggested that band scale be developed for grading

as well as exploited for detecting item efficacy.

English and Asia

82

Bibliography Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. New York: Pearson Education.

Brown, J. D & Bailey, K. M. (1984). A categorical instrument for scoring second language writing skills. Language learning, 34, 21-42.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Popham, J. W. (1999). Why standardized tests don’t measure educational quality. Educational Leadership, 56(6), 8-15.

Wikipedia. (2008). Retrieved Jun 15, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-stakes_testing

Appendix I

Course Objectives At the successful completion of the first semester of study, the student will be able to achieve the following: Oral Objectives - Communicate orally in basic to low-level social interchanges - Move beyond controlled oral practice to freer speech and expression of ideas - Develop oral experimentation through self-expression Listening Objectives - Develop listening comprehension to the level of True Colors Book One

- Competency in global listening comprehension skills - Develop ability to listen for specific information and make inferences

- Refine listening skill strategies to confidently listen to authentic English Reading Objectives - Reduction of word-by-word reading replaced by the ability to read for the main idea and to guess at the meaning of new words Writing Objectives - Exhibit writing skills beyond the Beginner level - Write descriptive paragraphs based on personal ideas

- Express written opinions on subject matter accurately and confidently Critical Thinking Objectives - Employ critical thinking skills in classroom exercises

English and Asia

83

- Use and understand the meaning of basic implications and inferences - Be able to paraphrase simple sentences and ideas - To share ideas effectively in discussions General Objectives - Exhibit awareness for interpreting behavior of foreigners - Exhibit communicative competence with existing vocabulary, fundamental social language and grammar in controlled exposure to English

Appendix II

Discrete Criteria

Comprehensibility Grammar Complexity

Score

(points)

5 Able to give an adequate response with high intelligibility and beyond requirement (e.g. able to fully express oneself)

Native-like fluency in English grammar; no fragments or run-on sentences

Able to give an appropriate and detailed response with lexical richness and varied grammatical structure

4 Able to give an adequate response with highintelligibility

Some grammar problems don’t influence communication;

No fragments or run-on sentences

Competent response, but having difficulty maintaining a broad range of vocabulary and grammatical structure

3 Able to meet the basic requirements specified, but not with elegance

Grammar problems are apparent, but ideas are getting through to the reader; run-on sentences or fragments present

Discernable difficulty in using a wide range of vocabulary and grammatical structure to respond to the task

2 Incomplete answer and often lacking in intelligibility

Numerous serious grammar problems interfere with communication of the writer’s ideas; difficult to read sentences

Obvious difficulty in expressing himself because of very limited vocabulary and grammatical structure

1 Unable to address the question, with almost incomprehensible answers

Severe grammar problems interfere with the message; reader can’t understand what the writer was trying to say; unintelligible sentence structure

Unable to write in English, with only words unconnected to each other

Note:

Band 5 – Excellent (15-13 points)

Band 4 – Good (12-10 points)

Band 3 – Fair (9-7 points)

Band 2 – Poor (6-4points)

Band 1 – Unacceptable (3-1 points)

(Adapted from Brown & Bailey, 1984, pp.39-41)

English and Asia

84

The Significance of Peer-Editing in Teaching Writing to TEFL Students at Islamic Azad University,Tabriz Branch

ZOHREH SEIFOORI

Islamic Azad University – Tabriz Branch Abstract

This study set out to investigate the effect of peer-editing as a metacognitive strategy in the development of writing in 20 TEFL sophomores at Islamic Azad University of Tabriz. It was hypothesized that "Peer-editing could be used as an indirect strategy and remedial technique to improve grammatical and compositional skills of 20 TEFL sophomore students at Islamic Azad University of Tabriz". The subjects included 40 pre-intermediate TEFL sophomores taking the course Basic Writing out of a population of 80 TEFL sophomores at the same level. Since random sampling was not possible, two groups were randomly determined as the control and the experimental groups, each with twenty subjects, and to warrant the initial homogeneity of the groups, a nonequivalent pretest –post-test design was selected. The treatment following the pre-test involved a three-phase planning procedure that included raising grammatical and compositional awareness through some in-class error recognition and error categorizing activities, writing a paragraph, and post-task monitoring of the grammatical and compositional content of the paragraph through peer-editing. Statistical analysis of the post-test composition did not reveal any significant difference between the two groups. It seems that peer-editing entails a firm grammatical foundation which needs to be formed early in the process of language learning. The fact that the subjects had successfully passed grammar courses I and II underscores the need to reorient method of teaching grammar at university level in a way to accommodate a task-based approach to cognitive and metacognitive strategies-based training. Further research is required to investigate the effectiveness of such a task-based approach to see whether it will allow learners to employ appropriate strategies to automatize the input through collaborative and cooperative learning tasks and activities.

Key-terms: writing, grammar, peer editing, metacognitive strategy, remedial techniques Introduction Second language instruction has always had two sides: the teaching side and the learning

side. These complementary facets have received various degrees of emphasis according

to research findings and the intellectual climate of the time. Learner-centeredness might

be regarded as a response to the mismatch between teaching and learning marking a shift

of emphasis away from teaching to the learning process. This type of education is subject

to different interpretations regarding how it should be implemented. Nunan and Lamb

(2001) claim that in an ideal learner-centred curriculum, learners play important roles in

English and Asia

85

planning, implementation and evaluation stages of the curriculum. This statement reflects

two major directions in learner-centred instruction: the broad curricular orientation and

the narrow learner-orientations, also referred to as learner-centeredness and learning-

centeredness (Nunan, 1999; Nunan and Lamb, 2001). In the broad curricular orientation,

learner-centeredness applies to curricula and selecting content for instruction through

needs analysis (Breen, 1987) as well as involving the learners in content specification in

the form of negotiated syllabus (Clarke, 1991). This interpretation has been criticized by

Wenden (2002) who proposes that the only way of implementing learner-centred

instruction is practice in helping learners learn how to learn.

In the narrow sense, learning-centeredness applies to particular techniques for

involving the learners in the process of language learning or for raising their awareness of

how to improve their learning through strategic investment. This relates to the learner

roles at the implementation and evaluation stages of curriculum where attempts are made

to utilize the findings as a basis for learner development proposals through training

learners and helping them learn how to learn.

The recognition of restrictions of pedagogical resources in terms of time and

facilities on one hand and the growing need for efficient second/foreign language

learning on the other, can be regarded as two major causes of the recent upsurge in the

popularity of strategic-based instruction as a way to learner autonomy: the capacity to

make and carry out the choices which govern one's learning. The application of this

general goal to language pedagogy has brought about a growing consensus over the best

methodology in language teaching: a methodology that furthers autonomy by increasing

the active involvement of the learners through strategic investment.

The need to help students develop and improve their self/peer-edit skills as part of

their learning strategies has been recognized by various specialists and is based on the

recognition of the significant role of grammatical accuracy in academic success

(Janapolous, 1992; Vann, Lorenz and Meyer, 1991; Vann, Meyer and Lorenz, 1984; as

cited in Ferris, 2002; and Santos, 1988). Another impetus comes from the researchers and

language teachers who have become aware of the need to help students self-edit their

writing (Ascher, 1993; Fox, 1992; Lane and Lange, 1993; Raimes, 1992). Writing

specialists have thus conducted research to evaluate the impact of process-oriented

writing instruction and of various self and peer-editing techniques on the development of

self/peer editing in students at different levels (Seow, 2002).

English and Asia

86

Ferris (2002) suggests both a whole-class instruction and an individualized editing

instruction with editing handbook. Following Bates, Lane and Lange (1993) and

Hendrickson (1980) who advocate teaching students a discovery approach, she used a

semester-long editing process approach in which advanced ESL writing students became

more sufficient self-editors. The results of Ferris projects (1994) showed that nearly all

students made significant progress in reducing their percentages of errors in five error

categories over the course of a semester. However, their degree of improvement varied

across error types, essay topics, and writing contexts. She then modified her instructional

approach to allow for a more individualized treatment of student editing problems by

giving them individual editing assignments from a textbook (Fox, 1992) when each essay

draft was returned. Although research on this change is ongoing, preliminary results

indicate that student improvement was even greater than with the in-class instruction

approach.

Theoretically, the process-writing approach and strategies-based instruction seem

to have been approximately effective in raising learners’ grammatical consciousness in

ESL environments. Yet, it is not known whether the same discovery approach can be

applied to teaching writing in EFL contexts particularly when learners' exposure to the

target language is significantly restricted owing to political factors. Thus, the present

research was conducted to estimate the effect of this approach on the development of

writing skill in Iranian university students majoring in TOEFL. However, owing to

political restrictions imposed on the context of English language teaching and learning

some modifications had to be made to increase the productivity of the approach.

The research executive had two options: firstly to add a final phase to include

both sentence formation and text organizational features. That is, simultaneously with the

teaching of different types of writing, students attention can be focused on error types and

grammatical accuracy through in-class error recognition and categorization activities, and

then after they realize the significance of the correct forms, through categorizing errors

into types and doing some grammatical exercises required for various types of writing,

they are assigned to write a paragraph on a relevant topic by following different stages of

process writing approach. The focus, of course, would be on self/peer editing as an

indirect cooperative strategy.

The other option is to separate the method into two and administer each at a

different level. In Grammar courses I and II, the first stage of the method will help

students recognize errors and realize the change they make to meaning. Then in Basic

English and Asia

87

Writing students will have opportunities to both recognize and categorize errors into

types and will subsequently learn to go one step beyond error recognition to producing

their own sentences and editing them.

The present study took the first option and attempted to assess the effect of

self/peer editing in the development of both grammatical and compositional skills in

English students taking Writing Course I.

Method Participants The participants included forty sophomore English students at Islamic Azad University of

Tabriz that had been assigned to experimental and control groups, each including 20

students. The two groups had to be representative of English students at Islamic Azad

University of Tabriz so that the findings could be generalized to the research population.

The manipulation of conditions was limited to the experimental setting, and it was

necessary to determine whether the variable relationships could be applied outside the

research context or not. Thirty students were required in each group to form a normally

distributed sample whose characteristics could be generalized to the population. Yet, it

was a classroom experiment and the subjects were naturally assembled. As a result, only

forty students participated and random assignment of subjects was not possible.

However, the groups were randomly determined as the control group and the

experimental group. Since intact classes were used as experimental and control groups,

one of the most serious threats to internal validity was related to selection bias. In order

to reduce this bias and to increase the internal validity, a nonequivalent pre-test-post-test

design was employed to ensure the initial equivalence of the groups. While sex and age

were not used in the selection procedure, the ratio of female to male and the age range,

19-35, is representative of student enrolment at university.

Procedures The course objective was to improve students’ writing skill', so it was essential to

determine the equivalence of the groups as far as their grammatical proficiency was

concerned. To do so, the structure section of a TOEFL test was modified to reflect

objectives of Grammar Courses I and II. This grammar test was administered to both

groups simultaneously. The test included two sections: the first section consisted of 20

multiple-choice items, and the second section included 15 error recognition items. Both

parts contained clear directions. Questions 1-20 were incomplete sentences, with four

words or phrases, marked (A), (B), (C), and (D). Students were asked to choose the one

word or phrase that best completed the sentence. Questions 20-35 had four underlined

English and Asia

88

words or phrases marked (A) (B), (C), and (D). Test takers were required to identify the

one underlined word or phrase that needed to be changed in order for the sentence to be

correct.

The treatment followed the pre-test and involved a three-phase discovery

procedure of error recognition activities, error categorizing activities, and self/peer

editing. This was applied in the research group while the control group was instructed

according to usual methods of product-oriented writing. In order to minimize the effect of

subjects' knowledge of participation in an experiment, both groups were given some

general information about process writing approach and were informed about the

necessity to follow the steps. However, in the experimental group, there was strict control

over the completion of different activities, while in the control group, such control was

missing and the class was conducted in the traditional manner. The course started with an

introductory stage of making students aware of the communicative nature of writing and

different steps involved in it, and also of the format of the materials to be presented, the

significance of the techniques to be employed, and the course expectations and standards.

Simultaneously with the teaching of each chapter of the course book, students’

attention was focused on error types and the significant role of grammatical accuracy

through some in-class error recognition activities, and then after they realized the

significance of the correct forms, through categorizing errors into types and doing some

grammatical exercises. Then, students were taught how to find and correct error types

both in their own and in their friends’ written texts.

The same process was followed in teaching higher-level skills of organizing,

joining sentences and observing principles such as unity, coherence, and cohesion in

writing. Although the syllabus was centred on different forms of paragraphs, it seemed

impossible to write without following grammatical rules and structures. Achieving

organizational adequacy was closely dependent on knowing and applying grammatical

rules, and since students’ productive performance was characterized by grammatical

inadequacy, the first phase of the approach was devoted to activating their existing

grammatical knowledge through consciousness raising, doing grammatical exercises

available at the end of the book, and finally in the form of peer-editing.

The second phase of the research focused on consolidating organizational skills

through self/peer editing. The order of presentation and practice was determined by the

syllabus. That is to say, when the teaching point was to present “Paragraph Structure” the

focus was on the organizational features such as unity, coherence, and the like. Then in

English and Asia

89

order to strengthen the theoretical knowledge, students were given a peer-editing form to

complete while editing their own writing and their friend’s.

Since the book was concerned with different types of writing, the structure of the

intended paragraph was always presented and practiced via the same procedure: students

were always guided to recognise various parts of each type of paragraph to see if the

general format was standard or not to guided construction of their own paragraph that

was to be done in steps and edited by the writer and a peer. Each student was required to

follow the necessary steps in the process of writing and particularly to edit his own

paragraph and then submit it to a friend for further correction. He was required to submit

the assignment to the teacher for final correction only after it had been revised by the

student himself and his friend.

The course book was "Developing compositions Skills: Rhetoric and Grammar"

by Mary K. Ruetten. It included eight chapters, the first four of which were to be taught

in Writing Course I, e.g. introducing the paragraph, narrating memorable events,

describing important places, analyzing reasons (causes): people and their behaviour.

Measures At the end of the term a composition test was administered to see if those students

receiving the treatment in the form of peer-editing would achieve differently from those

who were taught according to traditional methods. The selection of composition as the

test method was based on the conviction that it was the best method to elicit students'

grammatical and organizational knowledge.

To minimize scorer unreliability, two independent scorers were asked to correct

the papers and the means of the two sets of scores were used as a basis for further

statistical analysis. Moreover, the scale offered by Hughes A. (1989) was used to quantify

and scale observation of the learners' grammatical knowledge and compositional skill.

The scale was selected because it seemed to represent defined levels of language

performance. On the grammatical scale, the levels were defined in terms of the frequency

of grammar and word order errors, whereas on the organization scale, the levels were

defined in terms of the degree of organization and linking of ideas. The original scale

included five various writing components: Grammar, Vocabulary, Mechanics, Fluency,

and Organization, each with 6 levels of ability from one to six. However, the sixth level

was omitted because none of the subjects could approximate that level. From these only

grammar and organization components were taken into account because they were highly

English and Asia

90

underscored during the treatment and were supposed to have a direct bearing on the final

attainment. The original and the modified scales are available in Appendix III.

Data Analysis The data obtained through the procedures described above were analyzed. The statistical

package for social sciences (SPSS, 12) was used to confirm the results. The analyses

conducted in this respect are as follows:

Results

A t-test was carried out using the total score of the students of the two groups on a

grammar TOEFL test adapted from original TOEFL tests and adapted to conform to

course objectives. Since the standard deviation of the original population was unknown

and we had a small sample size (n=20), student's t-test was conducted and the t-

distribution was used to find critical values and probabilities. The between-groups

experimental design was selected to test the hypothesis and the two-conditioned

experiment began with a parametric test for the between-groups experimental design with

the objective of assessing the homogeneity of the samples. Each sample was the same

size and the research tested the hypothesis that the means of both samples on the pretest

were equal, that (X1-X2=0). If the null hypothesis was correct, the differences in means

would be zero and the groups could be regarded as initially equal. The pre-test results

were compared for significant difference.

The data analysis of the pre-test using SPSS is summarized in table 1 and that of

the t-test is presented in table 2. The homogeneity of the groups was confirmed at (.05)

significance level. As the table 1 reveals there was no significant difference between the

TOEFL test score means: the mean of the control group was 13.300 and that of the

experimental group was 10.7500. The difference was not significant at (0.05) significance

level: Sig= 0.071 which was more than 0.05 indicated the homogeneity of the groups. In

other words, the null hypothesis of no difference between the groups could not be

rejected.

English and Asia

91

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of the pre-test

Groups N Sum Mean St. dev. Variance Skewness

Std. Error of

Skewness

Control 20 266.00 13.3000 4.58946 21.063 -.157 .512

Experimental 20 215.00 10.7500 4.06364 16.513 .128 .512

Table 2 Independent samples t-test for equality of means

F Sig. t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

Equal variances assumed

1.617 .211 1.860 38 .071 2.55000 1.37070 -.22484 5.32484

Equal variances not assumed

1.860 37.451 .071 2.55000 1.37070 -.22617 5.32617

The Post-test Analysis Having confirmed the initial homogeneity of the groups, it was possible to proceed with

two different treatments: the experimental group exercised peer-editing as an indirect

strategy in consciousness raising while the control group received no treatment in this

regard. Analysis of the post-test results, in the form of a composition, was done using the

same procedures to find any significance differences.

The inter-rater reliability of the test scores, computed through a "coefficient

alpha", was acceptably high as follows:

Cronbach's Alpha for the Control group test results = .933

Cronbach's Alpha for the Experimental group test results = .929

Table 3 indicates the descriptive statistics for the total post-test results for the

control and experimental groups respectively. As the descriptive statistics indicate, there

was greater variance among the subjects in the control group than those in the

experimental group and though not significant, the experimental group's mean was

slightly higher than that of the control group. The difference may seem meaningful with

regard to the initial superiority of the control group on the pre-test of grammar where

their mean score was 13.30 out of 35 and higher than the experimental group which was

10.75 out of 35.

English and Asia

92

Table 3 Descriptive group statistics of the total post-test results

At this significance level the difference is not significant and the null hypothesis

of no difference cannot be rejected. We conclude that self/peer editing does not seem to

have made any significant difference in the development of the experimental group.

The SPSS analysis of the post t-test presented in table 4 supports the analysis. As

it is shown in the table the obtained t value (.676) is more than 0.05 and therefore, the

null hypothesis of no difference between the groups cannot be rejected at a =0.05

significance level. In other words, peer-editing did not seem to have played a significant

role in the development of writing skill in students.

Table 4 Independent samples t-test: t-test for equality of means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error Difference

Equal variances assumed 5.713 .022 .676 38 .503 -.50000 .73967 .99737

Equal variances not assumed

.676 31.550 .504 -.50000 .73967 1.00749

Discussion and conclusion The research findings could not provide support for the alternative hypothesis; self/peer

editing did not seem to have considerable impact on the development of the grammatical

and compositional skills in English students at Islamic Azad University of Tabriz. The

findings could be explained in several ways.

Firstly, the two sets of grammar and composition scores on the post-test were

correlated to assess the relationship between grammatical accuracy and writing

organization (Tables 5 and 6). As indicated, there seems to be a strong correlation

between grammatical accuracy and writing organization in both groups. The relationship

may be justified with reference to the fact that learning grammar rules and enhancing the

ability to use those rules in production may sensitize students to rule learning of any type

on one hand, and provide them with the necessary tools for more fluent expression of

ideas on the other.

N

Mean

Std. Deviation

Variance

Std. Error

Mean

Control 20 7.4500 2.81864 7.945 .63027

Experimental 20 7.9500 1.73129 2.997 .38713

English and Asia

93

However, the initial comparison of the scores on the pre-test revealed that the

mean score of both groups on the 35 item grammar test was in fact very low: 13.300 and

10.750 suggesting the inadequacy in the prerequisite grammar knowledge that had been

obtained in grammar courses. The attempt to develop and exercise such understanding in

the research project failed because the subjects had not developed an adequate

prerequisite understanding of English grammar and the wide range of the data necessary

for writing a paragraph made it impossible for them to monitor what they were to write or

to edit.

Secondly, having to pay attention to both grammatical and compositional features

seemed to be distracting and to have an enervating effect on the students' ability to attend

to either set of features in isolation. The technique might have been more effective had it

been introduced in grammar courses when students had to focus only on grammatical

points. As mentioned in the introduction, the other option was to separate the method into

two and administer each at a different level. In Grammar courses I and II, the first stage

of the method would help students recognize errors and realize the change they made to

meaning. Then in Basic Writing students would have opportunities to both recognize and

categorize errors into types and will subsequently learn to go one step beyond error

recognition to producing their own sentences and editing them.

And finally, students were absolutely inexperienced in pair work and cooperative

activities and did not know how to proceed. They needed much guidance and help and

were at times demotivated. Employing some cooperative activities from their early days

of education at university could bear considerable impact on the students’ ability to rely

on their own capacities and on their friends' for more independent language learning

experiences.

Suggestions for Further Research The apparent ineffectiveness of the independent variable might have been owing

to the impaired grammatical knowledge students bring to writing courses. It is assumed

that further empirical research in Grammar Courses I and II, which are prerequisite for

writing, is required to investigate whether including supplementary communicative tasks

in such courses will help language learners to bridge the gap between pure theoretical

grammatical knowledge that they have received and everyday use of that knowledge to

convert their thoughts and ideas both orally and in written form.

English and Asia

94

Bibliography Allwright, D. (1984). Why don't learners learn what teachers teach: the interaction

hypothesis. In D. Singletone & D. Little (Eds.), Language learning in formal and informal contexts. Dublin: IRAL.

Ascher, A. (1993). Think about editing. Boston, AM: Heinle & Heinle. Bates, L., Lane, J., & Lange, E. (1993). Writing clearly: Responding to ESL

compositions. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Breen, M.P. (1987). Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design, parts 1 and 2. Language

Teaching 20(3), 81-92. Brown, D. H. (2001). Teaching by principles. (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. Clarke,

M.A. (1991). Ferris, D. (1994). Can advanced ESL students be taught to recognize and correct their

most frequent and serious errors? In D., Ferris (2002), Teaching students to self-edit. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 328-324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ferris, D. (2002). Teaching students to self-edit. In J.C. Richards & W. A. Renandya

(Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 328-324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fox, L. (1992). Focus on editing. London: Longman. Hendrickson, J. (1980). Error

correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. In K. Croft (Ed.), Readings on English as a second language (pp. 153-173). Boston, AM: Little, Brown.

Hadley, A. O. (2003). Teaching language in context (3rd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge, Cambridge University

Press. Husiao, T. Y., & Oxford, R. (2002). Comparing theories of language learning strategies:

A confirmatory factor analysis. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 368-383. Nam, C., & Oxford, R. (1998). Portrait of a future teacher: Case study of learning styles,

strategies, and language disabilities. System, 26, 51-63. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle

Publishers. Nunan, D., & Lamb, C. (2001). Managing the learning process. In D. R. Hall &

A.Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English language teaching (pp.27-45). London: Routledge.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What every teacher should know.

Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

English and Asia

95

Oxford, R. L. (2001). Language learning styles and strategies. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.),

Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 359-366). Boston: Heinle & Heinle/Thompson International.

Oxford, R. L. (2001a). Language learning strategies. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The

Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (166-172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. L. (2001b). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL

suggestions. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 69-79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Raimes, A. (1999). Exploring through writing: A process approach to ESL composition

(2nd ed.). New York: St. Martins Press. Santos, T. (1988). Professors' reactions to the academic writing of nonnative-speaking

students. TESOL, 22, 69-90. Seow, A. (2002). The writing process and process writing. In J. C. Richards & W. A.

Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 315-320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenden, A. L. (2002). Learner development in language learning. Applied Linguistics,

23(1), 32-55. Wenden, A. L. (1995). Learner training in context: A knowledge-based approach. System,

23(2), 183-194.

English and Asia

96

The Students Meeting for Intercultural Language Exchange (SMILE)

Initiative GEORGE ROBERT MACLEAN

Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Japan ABDULLAH ADNAN MOHAMED

Information & Communication Technology Centre, Universiti Malaysia Pahang

Abstract

The following paper considers the viability of cyber exchanges between students in two Asian nations, Malaysia and Japan. In keeping with the theme of the conference, the paper will present the ideology and rationale for such an initiative, some applicable research, preliminary results, as well as a discussion of this emerging format’s potential.

Key-terms: cyber exchanges, language ideology, intercultural, initiative Introduction In November 2007, the 10 member states of ASEAN signed the Charter of Southeast

Asian Nations. Article 35 of the charter states that “ASEAN shall promote its common

ASEAN identity and a sense of belonging among its peoples in order to achieve its

shared destiny, goals and values.” In order to accomplish this, Article 34 provides that the

official working language of ASEAN shall be English. The following paper

acknowledges that there are many issues regarding the use of English as a global

language and shares the concern that English is regrettably serving a gatekeeper function

in all too many contexts, with a resultant overemphasis within educational environments

on testing, instead of using the language for communication and for the promotion of

understanding and respect amongst the peoples of the world. It is also an implicit

assumption of this paper that English should be adopted for communication in

international contexts with full respect for its local varieties, furthermore that English

should not be a vehicle for the spread of cultural values that may conflict with the first

language (L1) or first culture (C1) of the context in which it is used. It is therefore with

the strongest possible conviction that the authors affirm the value of diversity and respect

for linguistic, cultural and religious differences on a global basis. With this in mind, the

English and Asia

97

following paper has little to say about historical aspects of how English came to play

such a prominent role in global interaction, nor does it consider the ideology of higher

language policy. Rather, as Al-Salman (2006) has noted, it accepts the fact that English

can provide students with wider access to opportunities such as (1) resources: economic,

political, material, (2) a role in the decision-making process at the international level; (3)

the ability to introduce and cope with global technical developments, including the

Internet and Information Communication Technology (ICT).

A key objective of this study is to create a situation where students of English are

able to interact and realize the potential of English as a língua franca. An unfortunate

aspect of many teachers’ approach to the English language is that they convey an

impression which designates certain aspects of English as the preserve of native speakers.

This can result in a situation where learners do not take full ownership of their learning

experience, and it perpetuates a certain attitude toward the use of English which is

counter-productive for language acquisition. As Tsuda (2008) has noted, English

language instruction is all too often associated with the west exclusively, and is too

closely associated with power issues. This is a situation which obscures English’s full

potential to be used as a língua franca. The Students Meeting for Intercultural Language

Exchange (SMILE) initiative seeks to alleviate this situation by allowing students the

opportunity to interact in an international forum with other Asian members of their

generational peer group, to exercise their developing language skills and to test and

explore emerging technologies. Implicit in this process are efforts to develop

international understanding between two Asian nations and attempts to make effective

use of ICT in educational settings that could be described as typical, and even those

which are somewhat ICT-challenged. This paper will therefore summarize some recent

studies, outline the rationale for the SMILE initiative, as well as note progress to date.

English and Asia

98

Technical rationale A parallel goal underlying the SMILE project is to allow students to experience language

and explore emerging technologies at the same time. It is with some urgency that

language teachers and materials developers should consider the use of technology where

language teaching is concerned. Extensive opportunities are being made possible by

emerging technology. Furthermore, an increasing number of students today are moving

close to becoming what Prensky (2001) has referred to as “digital natives.” Higher

education language teaching must at times make efforts to accommodate this reality, and

make efforts to incorporate relevant aspects of emerging technologies in instruction and

also to afford students the opportunity to use the target language in situations that will

hopefully help them to mitigate demands that the ‘real world’ will place upon them once

they have graduated. Wiley’s (2006) report to the American Secretary of Education’s

Commission on the Future of Higher Education summarizes this imperative nicely by

noting that:

We must recognize that not only is “the world” changing, but our students are changing along with it. Normal life experience for today’s undergraduates involves assumptions about instant, on-demand access to multiple sources of information and multiple people via myriad technologies…With significant changes occurring in its societal context and participant base, higher education must innovate in teaching and learning, as well as other areas, to hope to remain relevant.

With the above in mind, the authors decided to try to implement a project where

students could speak to other students in remote locations via the Internet. Voice over

Internet Protocol (VoIP) allows users to speak over the Internet. One of the most popular

VoIP programs available is Skype. Skype functions closely along the lines of traditional

telephone service, albeit in a web environment. It is user friendly, once it is installed and

configured. The initial set up of the web camera and the audio can be somewhat

complicated, but thereafter the operating system is largely intuitive. Skype is available for

English and Asia

99

PC, Mac, and Linux operating systems. It enables users to talk with other Skype users

throughout the world. Furthermore, the service is free when used between two computer-

connected lines. Skype provides conference calling for as many as 10 simultaneous users.

Endeavours to date which have used Skype include The CultureQuest Project, and The

eTandem Network. The CultureQuest Project involves students and teachers in inquiry-

based classroom projects that explore other peoples and cultures. The project has used

Skype to enable American students to engage in mini cyber-exchanges with students

from numerous countries. The eTandem Network allows language learners to work

together with a language learning partner from another country by Skype, telephone, e-

mail or other media.

Studies to date Mackey, Oliver and Leeman (2003) note that an important aspect of interaction is that

learners receive various types of feedback on their non target-like output. Their study

investigated the provision of feedback by native speaker (NS) and non-native speaker

(NNS) interlocutors in task-based interaction to assess if there was any difference in (1)

the amount of feedback, (2) opportunities for modified output, (3) immediate

incorporations of feedback. Such differences would have important implications for

assessing the value of learner-learner pair work and inform the design of instructional

programs. Analyses revealed significant differences for amount, nature, and response to

feedback according to dyad type. Results showed that feedback is less common among

adult NNSs, however, even they provided it in response to 32% of their interlocutors'

non-target like forms, which suggests that such interaction can be a valuable source of

target language information for learners.

Where technical versus non-technical interaction is concerned, MacLean and

Elwood (in press) have found that students show no preference between face-to-face

versus Internet chatting, while An and Frick (2006) have found that students prefer face-

English and Asia

100

to-face discussion for most tasks, however computer mediated communication (CMC)

was preferred for simple learning tasks. Abrams (2003) compared the performance of 3

groups of learners (a control group, a synchronous CMC group, and an asynchronous

CMC group) on 3 oral discussions tasks, and found that there was an increase in quantity

of language produced by students in the synchronous CMC group as compared to the

other two groups, albeit no significant difference was shown in terms of the quality of

language indicated among the 3 groups either lexically or syntactically. Kotter (2003) has

suggested that online voice exchanges can contribute to successful second language

acquisition (SLA) and the development of learners' metalinguistic abilities. The author

compared the discourse between 29 language students from classes at a German and a

North American university, and found that there was a marked difference between

conversational repair in spoken interactions and in the CMC-based exchanges. Repair is

defined as a reaction to some trouble spot in speech or nonverbal behaviour that attempts

to right the trouble spot. The trouble spot can be an error, but is not necessarily so; it is

sometimes found where no detectable error occurs, such as word searches characterized

by silence (MacLean 1998). Jepson (2005) compared the patterns of repair moves in

synchronous non-native speaker text chat rooms in comparison to voice chat rooms on

the Internet and found a higher number of total repair moves made in voice chats and a

significant difference between them and those made during text chats. Thus concluding

that voice chats offer an environment which is more conducive to the negotiation of

meaning and therefore of value for second language development.

Participating Schools Universiti Malaysia Pahang (UMP) is a competency-based technical university that

specializes in the fields of engineering and technology. It is located in the East Coast

Industrial Belt of Peninsular Malaysia, which hosts a large number of multinational

English and Asia

101

corporations in the chemical, petrochemical, manufacturing, automotive and

biotechnology industries. Participants in the SMILE initiative are first year freshmen who

are enrolled in the university's compulsory first year English Communication courses.

The gender composition of classes is almost equal and most students are between the

ages of 18-23. They are from different Engineering majors such as Software Engineering,

Manufacturing Engineering and Occupational Safety and Health.

Tsukuba University is a four year national university, located approximately 80

kilometres from Tokyo. It is one of the more competitive Japanese universities to enter.

Students come from throughout the Japanese archipelago, and they thus represent a

geographic cross-section of highly-motivated Japanese university students. Participants in

the SMILE initiative are first year freshmen who are enrolled in the university’s

compulsory English Communications course. Gender composition is mixed, with a mean

age of 18. They are from different majors, including Humanities, Civil Engineering,

Biology and one advanced-English class.

Japan is mostly a unilingual country with a large degree of cultural homogeneity.

Understandably then, the majority of students have had limited opportunity for discourse

in English, and their knowledge of the world beyond Japan is limited and academic. A

survey of 250 student-participants found that their knowledge of the Muslim world was

particularly limited. Using an eInstruction Interwrite Personal Response System (PRS),

students were asked to rate their knowledge in increments of 10 between 0 and 100 (see

Figure 1). Results revealed that students largely perceived that they had very little

knowledge of the topic (M = 20). This suggested that an exchange endeavour, such as

SMILE, would be a worthwhile undertaking if it could promote further understanding in

this one area alone. Additional motivation to undertake the project was that learners do

not receive enough feedback or opportunity to interact in large classes and that they do

English and Asia

102

not use the target language enough during interaction-inspired activities. Discussion

between the researchers found other common obstacles to language learning, such as

those described by Kassim and Mohd Radzuan (2008)

Conversing in a second language particularly in English can be demanding for second language learners; they [students] are often reluctant and embarrassed to communicate due to the fact that they are afraid they will commit grammatical inaccuracy. Concerns over accuracy often hinder students’ ability to speak fluently.”

It was therefore decided to give students the opportunity to converse with peers

from another country, and to observe if this resulted in more use of the target language. It

was also hoped that such experiences would improve students’ fluency as well as give

them an opportunity to use their English in an intercultural communications setting.

Results to date Results of the SMILE initiative thus far are limited due to the short time since the project

was conceived. It will take yet some time before the program is able to harmonize its

objectives with existing curricular demands and develop tasks accordingly. Still, contact

has been established between instructors at both locations, using Skype. An initial session

between student representatives in Malaysia and the instructor in Japan has also been

accomplished. Students were shown a PowerPoint presentation about places that the

instructor went during his summer vacation as well as his activities. There were

approximately 7.33 million users online when the exchanges were undertaken. Initial

exchanges were attempted using audio and visual communication. Seven attempts were

undertaken, with connection times ranging from 0.28 to 3.30 minutes. Particular

difficulty was encountered establishing video communication, and sound quality varied.

The eighth attempt resulted in a 5.13 minute connection, and a conversation with a

student who spoke very well resulted; however technical difficulties thereafter required a

switch to Skype’s text messaging. Questions ensued regarding the instructor’s houses

English and Asia

3

Canada and Japan. Conversations typically featured self introductions, procedural

discussion and questions regarding the PowerPoint presentation.

Limitations Several limitations have been revealed thus far in the SMILE project, which present

challenges to overcome before the full potential of this endeavour is realized. The most

obvious shortcoming regards technical obstacles to effective VOIP communication.

Notably, a lack of bandwidth prevented effective use of Skype audio and visual features,

as mentioned above. Additional difficulties occur regarding differences in the school year

and the scheduling of various holidays. To date, it has been challenging to find an

extended period when students from both countries are in school, so as to properly

introduce the format to students. The timing of each school’s class schedule and the

length of classes also vary. Tsukuba University classes are 75 minutes whereas Universiti

Malaysia Pahang classes are 90 minutes. Finally, the student ratio is unbalanced in some

classes. Tsukuba University classes typically have 40-48 students, whereas the number of

students in Universiti Malaysia Pahang classes is in the low thirties. Thus, there are a

number of issues to be resolved before further progress can be accomplished; however,

both instructors are optimistic that accommodations will ensure that further exchanges

are carried out.

Future directions The SMILE initiative aspires to continue cyber exchanges and encourage more effective

use of English at both universities. It will attempt to identify effective practices and

contrive tasks that will enable instructors to incorporate cyber-exchanges as a normal part

of a blended English language curriculum. Ideally such tasks will promote fluency in the

target language, critical thinking, problem solving and intercultural awareness. A further

step is to encourage students to undertake independent learning attempts using Skype,

once they are familiar with this format. Discussion is ongoing regarding the feasibility of

English and Asia

104

opening supervised computer labs at designated times to enable students to have access to

the Internet and other resources necessary for such attempts. Ultimately, the SMILE

initiative hopes to record and transcribe some sessions, and to survey student reactions to

this format with the goal of further qualifying and quantifying how to articulate the full

potential of this medium for language learners.

Conclusion

The above account describes how students from different cultures are currently or will

soon be able to meet and learn about each other using VOIP technology such as Skype. It

suggests that the incorporation of such experiences into the language learning curriculum

will expose students to ‘real world’ skills and better prepare them for their futures. It also

contends that such experiences will help them to better perceive the usefulness of English

as a lingua franca and to develop fluency. Results of the SMILE initiative are admittedly

limited to date, and several obstacles have been identified. However, essential progress

has been achieved and further accomplishments in the near future are anticipated.

Bibliography

Abrams, Z. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 157–167.

Al-Salman, S. M. (2006). Global English and the role of translation. Asian EFL Journal,

9(4), pp. 141-156. Retrieved September 25, 2008 from: http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/ Dec_2007

Altbach, P. G. (2004). Higher education crosses borders. Retrieved September 25, 2008

from www2.nea.org/he/healma2k5/images/a05p63.pdf An, Y. J., & Frick, T. (2006). Student perceptions of asynchronous computer-mediated

communication in face-to-face courses. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 485–499.

ASEAN. (2007, November). Charter of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Retrieved September 20, 2008 from www.aseansec.org/21069.pdf Chang, B. M. (2008). English acquisition through NNS-NNS interaction in EFL context:

focused on the distance learning between Japan and Korea. English Language & Literature Teaching, 13(2).

English and Asia

105

Cheon, H. (2003). The viability of computer mediated communication in the Korean

secondary EFL classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 5(1), 1-61. Retrieved September 25, 2008 from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/march03.sub2.php

CultureQuest. (n.d.). Retrieved September 28, 2008 from http://www.culturequest.us/ Ellis, R. (2003). Principles of instructed language learning. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3).

Retrieved September 25, 2008 from http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/September_05

eTandem. (n.d.). Retrieved September 28, 2008, from http://www.slf.ruhr-uni-

bochum.de/etandem/etindex-en.html Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations—and negotiated interaction—in text and voice chat

rooms. Language Learning & Technology 9(3), 79-98. Kassim, H., & Mohd Radzuan, N.R. (2008). Resolving conflict: Enhancing engineering

students’ English fluency through workplace situation. The International Journal of Learning, 14(11), 51-59. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from http://ijl.cgpublisher.com/

MacLean, G. R. (1998). Laughter and Repair in a Junior High School Classroom.

Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, Temple University Japan, 13, 77-89. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On The Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Qiang, N. & Wolff, M. (2005). Is EFL a modern Trojan horse? English Today 8, 21(4),

55-60. Shehadeh, A. (1999). Non-native speakers’ production of modified comprehensible

output and second language learning. Language Learning, 49(4), 627–675. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of ouput in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidhofer (Eds.), For H. G. Widdowson: Principles and practice in the study of language

(pp. 125-44). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tsuda, Y. (2008). English hegemony and English divide. China Media Research, 4(1),

47-55. Wiley, D. (2006). Report to the Secretary of Education’s Commission on the Future of

Higher Education. Retrieved September 23, 2008 from www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ hiedfuture/3rd-meeting/wiley.pdf

English and Asia

106

Figure 1. Student response using PRS

English and Asia

107

Teaching Science and Mathematics through English: The Challenge of Using Scripted Lessons

SHIRLEY TAY SIEW HONG

Sabah Education Department

Abstract

Classroom observations on teaching and learning Science and Mathematics using the English language at primary school levels in most of the primary schools in Sabah reveal the need for classroom instructional improvements. The rationale behind the Sabah Education Department’s decision to embark on a project to produce scripted Science and Mathematics lessons for Primary 6 teachers is to provide direct and immediate professional support for teacher development. At this point in time, the project is in still in progress. Some verbal as well as written feedback for the improvement of the modules was obtained from teachers involved in the pilot programme. These teachers were not specially trained to integrate Science or Mathematics content-learning with English language development. Moreover, some of the teachers who did not major in Science and Mathematics and who are less proficient in the English language find these two modules very helpful. However, even though the modules aim to help teachers with their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and to encourage teachers to use English language in their classroom teaching, this effort faces yet another challenge: mispronunciation of words in English language. Pronunciation problem tends to occur and sometimes might distort meanings. This paper explores the mispronunciations made by the teachers and the possible effects on the pupils’ understanding.

Key Terms: scripted lessons, classroom instruction, teacher development, pronunciation, content knowledge Background

The Sabah Education Department has always been aware of the challenges faced by a

number of primary school teachers in Sabah who are teaching Science and Mathematics

using the English language. Numerous efforts have been taken to guide and support these

teachers in executing their duties effectively. This year (2008), the Sabah Education

Department embarked on a project to produce scripted Science and Mathematics lessons

for Primary 6 teachers. The rationale behind this project is to provide direct and

immediate professional support for teacher development. Each Primary 6 Science and

Mathematics lesson was systematically designed by experienced Primary 6 teachers. At

the outset of the implementation of this project, the scripted lessons posed another

challenge for teachers who are less proficient in their English - pronunciation errors

arose. The importance of pronunciation cannot be side-lined. This is because when

English and Asia

108

teachers pronounce words incorrectly, there will be a high possibility that pupils listening

to them will learn the incorrect pronunciation and/or will misunderstand the meanings of

the words. Consequently, the objective of the lesson will not be achieved. This paper

explores the mispronunciations made by the teachers and the concern over the possible

effects on the pupils’ understanding.

JPN Sabah’s Project: Reach out, Move on and Rise Up

JPN Sabah ‘REACH OUT, MOVE ON and RISE UP’ project was initiated based on

research studies and findings documented elsewhere. Tay (2007) in her research findings

on how teachers teach lower secondary Science in their classrooms in a rural school

reveals teachers’ needs to possess pedagogical content-knowledge of the subject as well

as communicating the content using English language. Based on the literature, in the

process to integrate Science or Mathematics content with English language for primary

school students, teachers need to teach minor genres of Science which are academic

language micro-functions such as defining a concept, describing an object, and

explaining a phenomenon (Laplante, 1997).

The community in the rural schools is found to be linguistically disadvantaged as

the English language is hardly used as a spoken language. The local community

communicates with each other in Bahasa Malaysia, Kadazandusun, Rungus, Bajau or

other local dialects. In school, spoken English language is confined to English language

classrooms only. Teachers are not specially trained to integrate Science or Mathematics

content learning with English language development. Moreover, to teach students to

acquire academic English language in a non-English speaking environment, poses a

greater challenge for the teachers who themselves were trained in the Bahasa Melayu

medium. In general, students cope with their inadequacy by learning Science and

Mathematics in English through code-switching from English to bahasa Melayu.

According to research findings in learning Science in English, (Yager, 2004; Lemke,

1990; Merino and Scarcella, 2005; Laplante, 1997) this does not promote science

literacy.

Inspection and monitoring of teaching and learning Science and Mathematics in

English (TLSME) programmes throughout the year indicated that there is an acute need

to improve Science and Mathematics teaching particularly at primary school level. The

most critical issues that were identified by officers from the district levels as well as from

the state education department include:

i. That some Science and Mathematics teachers wrote sub-standard lesson plans.

English and Asia

109

ii. That lesson plans lacked consideration for pupils’ ability.

iii. Teaching strategies used sometimes did not meet the objectives of the lesson.

iv. Teachers lacked the ability to communicate the content of the lesson well.

v. Teachers have difficulties in conveying the lesson in English.

Therefore, if the situation is left unchecked, the goals of Teaching Science and

Mathematics in English (TeSME) and consequently, the aspirations of the government to

achieve a scientifically literate society that will be able to compete globally will not be

fulfilled. Hence, JPN Sabah hopes to develop a practical model to enhance teachers’

teaching and students’ learning Science and Mathematics in English before the current

problems faced by both the teachers and students increase further. Basically, these

teachers need to improve their pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) that includes the

following elements:

• Knowledge of subject matter.

• Knowledge of students and possible misconceptions.

• Knowledge of curricula.

• Knowledge of general pedagogy.

In short, PCK is knowing what, when, why, and how to teach using the reservoir of

knowledge of good teaching practice and experience (Veal and MaKinster, 1999).

A team from the Academic Management Sector comprising experienced Science

and Mathematics teachers put in unceasing effort to produce two modules which

comprise lesson plans and scripted lessons for each chapter of the Primary 6 Science and

Mathematics subjects. The objectives of the modules are:

i. To ensure that Science and Mathematics teachers write standard lesson plans (SPI

BIL.3/1999: Penyediaan Rekod Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran)

ii. To encourage Science and Mathematics teachers to conduct their lessons

systematically.

iii. To guide teachers on the fundamental way to teach Science and Mathematics at

Primary 6 level.

iv. To ensure Science and Mathematics teachers use English language to teach the

subject ( SPI BIL.11/2002: Pelaksanaan Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sains dan

Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris di SK, SJKT, SM dan Tingkatan 6 mulai tahun

2003)

English and Asia

110

The Project

The project began with the collection of data in terms of reports from school inspection,

classroom observations, interviewing teachers and video-recording teachers while

teaching in the classroom. Two workshops were conducted by the Academic

Management Sector to train teachers to write scripted lessons. Approximately 50 primary

school Science and Mathematics teachers attended these two workshops which were held

during the December 2007 term break. The lesson plans and scripted lessons were

developed and returned by January 2008 to our sector for improvement. In March 2008, a

trial run of the scripts was launched in three selected primary schools in the west coast of

Sabah. The pilot programme ended in April 2008, where officers identified the strengths

and weaknesses of the lesson plans and scripted lessons. This was followed by two

intensive sessions of making further improvement to the lesson plans and lesson scripts.

This tedious task of developing lesson plans and scripting the lessons required a lot of

thinking, patience and cooperation among teachers and officers from the Sabah Education

Department.

The target group in this project are teachers who need extra help to teach

systematically knowing what, when, why, and how to teach using English as the medium

of instruction. The lessons are designed with the intention to be used by teachers who

may not have enough pedagogical content knowledge of the subject and who are still

lacking confidence to speak in English. The script was carefully thought over, giving

special consideration to both the teachers and pupils’ proficiency level. The script was

written using simple sentence structures, referring closely to the textbook which is

available to every primary school pupil.

A pilot programme that involved three Primary schools was conducted to give a

trial run of the effectiveness of the use of the Primary 6 Science and Mathematics

modules in real classroom settings. From the feedback obtained by the teachers involved

in the pilot programme, it was noted that the teachers felt more confident teaching in

class. For those who were not conversant or competent in the English language, they said

that the scripted lessons equipped them with the correct usage of the terms in English.

The teachers also felt confident in their teaching because they understood the sequence of

the teaching process while using the scripted lessons. The feedback from these teachers

also included suggestions to teach them the correct pronunciation of the words in English

and to have more help in answering questions. Therefore, in our endeavour to provide

coaching and mentoring to primary school teachers in Sabah, we have planned to provide

English and Asia

111

assistance in different phases. Overall, this project is intended to be implemented in three

main phases:

PHASE 1 - Producing the lesson plans and scripts

- Training teachers at district levels

PHASE 2 - Creating suitable teaching aids and using teaching courseware

PHASE 3 - Advanced Multimedia Presentations

We hope that when teachers begin to use the scripted lessons, they will gradually

build up their confidence to teach their students. We empathise with teachers who may

feel threatened when facing students in their class who are able to converse in English.

Therefore, these two modules are designed to be user-friendly according to the standards

stipulated in the curriculum specifications. Simple yet practical academic English for

teaching and learning Science and Mathematics is used. We hope that this scaffolding

given to the teachers will spur them to teach well and to move on to bring about positive

changes in the education of the next generation of Sabahans.

Importance of Correct English Pronunciation

Well-written lesson plans that are not translated into instructional practices that meet the

needs of students are equivalent to naught. In delivering a good and effective lesson,

teachers need to convey the lesson by speaking. Hence, a person's pronunciation is the

way they sound when they speak a language. It is noted widely that the main way to learn

a language is to read and listen to correct English pronunciation and sentences in that

language. Therefore, if students were not exposed to correct spoken English then

ultimately the students would not be learning proper English. Szynalski (2008) asserts

‘And the results of bad pronunciation are tragic. Even if you use great vocabulary and

grammar, people may simply not understand what you want to say’.

This paper discusses issues relating to Standard English pronunciation of English

words. Although pronunciation includes many aspects such as phonetics and

phonological aspects like stress, intonation, rhythm and pacing, this paper focuses only

on the phonemic correctness of the speaker. It must be noted that the intention is not to

force teachers to speak in perfect British English language. But good English

pronunciation means being able to make other people understand what is being said and

which is spoken in a way that is pleasant to listen to (Szynalski, 2008).

Research findings have shown that the acquisition of Standard English

pronunciation is one of the most difficult skills to master for non-native English speakers

English and Asia

112

(Odlin, 1989; McCarthy, 1997). Many research findings have also shown that

pronunciation error is basically due to the intrusion and interference from the language

learner’s phonemic inventory of the foreign language learner’s mother tongue. Odlin

(1989) shows the strong influences of native language phonetics and phonology

influences on second language pronunciation. Moreover, López and Greenfield (undated)

also cited Romaine’s (1995) research findings on L2 acquisition which shows that during

the L2 acquisition process, transfer occurs at the phonological, morphological, and

syntactical levels. Some phonological interference with regard to pronunciation may

occur based on the sound system of the L1.

In a recent study conducted by Sheik Badrul Hisham (2006) on English language

teachers from the Kadazandusun ethnic background, the findings support the fact that

indeed the Kadazandusun English language teachers had difficulty in articulating certain

sounds or words when compared to the Standard English pronunciation. Similarly, there

is a high possibility when Science and Mathematics teachers read the words from the text

shown on the screen or from the textbook with errors in their pronunciation. The

implication of this pronunciation variation is it can bring about confusion, problems,

misunderstanding and misconceptions on the part of the listeners (Odlin, 1989; Sheik

Badrul Hisham, 2006). Sheik Badrul Hisham (2006) also points out that the

pronunciation variation by the Kadazan English language teachers will affect the

intelligibility level among the students in the classrooms. According to James (1998:

130), this level of error is called ‘errors in encoding in speaking or mispronunciations’.

In Tay’s (2007) research findings, she identified a list of mispronunciation of

English words spoken by the lower secondary school teachers in a rural Sabah secondary

school. Table 1 shows some of the pronunciation errors committed by the lower

secondary Science teachers in SMK Aman while teaching in the Science classroom.

English and Asia

113

Table 1 Some pronunciation errors made by lower secondary Science teachers in SMK Aman

WORD RESEARCHER’S

INTERPRETATION WORD RESEARCHER’S

INTERPRETATION SALT Sult EXPOSURE eks –po- ser PROPERTIES prop-per-tais DISSOLVE di-solf SIMILARITIES si-mi-lea-ri-tais QUESTION kwe-sen ALKALI al-ka-lee SUBSTANCE sub-stens LEMON lay-morn VOLUME var-lume SEVERE ser-ver CARBON kar-born FULCRUM fool-crem SHINY Shee-ny SOURCE short-ch DULL Dool

Table 2 shows a list of some of the pronunciation errors committed by the Primary

Science and Mathematics teachers noted during classroom observations in primary

schools in various parts of Sabah.

Table 2 Some pronunciation errors committed by primary Science and Mathematics teachers WORD RESEARCHER’S

INTERPRETATION

WORD RESEARCHER’S

INTERPRETATION

Determine dee-ter-mine Point Peoint

Fulcrum fool –croom Passage par –sej

Intersect inter –sex Shape Sheepe

Water vapour water wafer Illuminated ee –li –minated

Breathed bree – terd Larger lar-zer

From Prom Aerosol Eroso

Food Pood Pressure prey –ser

Remind re – man Pyramid pai –ri –mid

Brush Broos Electrolysis e-lek –tro- lai –sis

Vertical vay –ti –kal Vertex ver –tiks

Decimal dee –sia –mal

Possible Misunderstandings: Now and in Future

Let us consider some possible misunderstandings at the present moment when the pupils

hear teacher’s mispronunciation and the possible effects later in their learning stages.

With prior knowledge of a corpus of English words, pupils may misunderstand what their

English and Asia

114

teacher is trying to convey to them if their teacher mispronounce some words that may

sound similar to some other words. For instance, if a teacher with pronunciation errors

says,

‘The light illuminated the dull part of the rectangular shaped room.’

The sentence may sound like:

‘The light (eliminated) the (dool) part of the rectangular (sheep) room.’

Listening to and exposure to good pronunciation is crucial for pupils learning

English language. In a paper written by Reima Al-Jarf (undated) which discusses the

sources of spelling errors, it was noted that similarly to other studies conducted on

students’ spelling ability in higher institutions; there is a strong relation between students’

mispronunciation and their spelling errors. Odlin (1989) cite instances of misspelling of

English words due to the way the words are pronounced or to phonological influence

from the native language influence. Therefore, in the examples cited during some Sabah

teachers’ classroom teaching, where pupils learn to read and pronounce from their

teachers’ faulty pronunciation, the effect on the pupils learning can be unfavourable.

When these pupils are exposed to the Standard English pronunciation in the future, these

pupils may be confused again; resulting in the misconception of words and concepts.

The Challenge Using Phonetics to Learn Better Pronunciation

This paper focuses solely on the phonemics correctness of learning the English language.

In our endeavour to help teachers to improve their classroom English language we are

aware that the semantics and syntactic aspects are equally important in second language

learning. Nonetheless, we need to begin with the basics first. To improve primary school

Science and Mathematics teachers’ English pronunciation using the systematically

planned and scripted lessons, a feasible and practical plan must be formulated. Among

the possible solutions are listening to the teaching courseware provided by the Ministry

of Education; seeking help from English language teachers in the school; referring to

online pronunciation guide; and attending in-service courses. Indeed the relevant

authorities have considered all the possible support to assist teachers to teach Science and

Mathematics with the least amount of difficulties. The expectations that teachers will

make full use of the technological support and multimedia equipment in their teaching

were unfortunately not fully achieved in many schools in Sabah. Among the reasons for

teachers who do not use the technical support are: the teachers’ lack of computer–

competence, faulty computer notebooks or technical equipment, insufficient computer

notebooks to share among teachers, tediousness of setting up equipment for use, too

English and Asia

115

many restrictions imposed to ensure the safety of the computer-notebooks and the lack of

power supply as well as frequent interruption of power supply.

Another initiative taken by the Ministry of Education to help teachers with their

English language proficiency is through EteMS (English for teaching Mathematics and

Science) courses for the past five years. However, conducting another extensive

programme similar to the EteMS course will incur huge costs.

The International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) is very popular. The symbol in the IPA

can be seen as used in phonetic transcriptions in modern dictionaries for English learners.

However, there is a big problem with this alphabet: the IPA symbols are difficult to type

on computers and it would seem an uphill task for adult teachers to learn all the symbols

and their respective sounds.

Hence, having considered all possible solutions and their setbacks, we need to

consider an action-plan that would bring about immediate and direct impact on the

teachers’ learning of Standard English pronunciation. The vast literature on

interlanguage studies, language transfer, language distance, language acquisition, second

language acquisition informs us of the positive and negative transfer (Odlin, 1989; James,

1998) of native language on the target language. Odlin (1989) explained that transfer is

not merely interference or hindrance, it can also facilitate in learning a second language.

He asserts that when there are more similarities between two languages, the target

language can easily be learnt with little effort.

In the Sabah context, the pronunciation of English words by speakers whose

mother-tongue is Kadazandusun, Bajau, Rungus with their lingua franca being Bahasa

Malaysia (Malay), portrays both positive and negative transfer. The positive transfer in

the pronunciation of English words which facilitates the learning of the English language

is the sounds of the consonants. Both the alphabetic languages, Bahasa Malaysia and

English have similarities in their consonant sounds. Hence, phonological awareness

among L1 speakers allows them to apply to reading the target language. However, the

confusion and difficulties arise because of the different vowel sounds between bahasa

Malaysia and English language. This is noted by Odlin (1989: 36) who advocates that

‘Similarities between vowel systems can make the identification of vowel sounds easier.’

The contrary is also true. Bahasa Malaysia pronunciation sounds as you would

expect it to read as there are no silent vowels or letters. The Bahasa Malaysia vowel

sounds are rather limited compared to the variety of pronunciation for a single vowel in

English. For instance, the 'a' is the 'aa' sounds in ah and calm (Bahasa Malaysia word:

English and Asia

116

apa, jaga). There are two 'E' sounds which is the low and high 'e'. The low 'e' sound

sounds like the 'a' in about, which sounds something like er (elaun, jerebu). The high 'E'

is the e in met and lend (merah, lepak). The 'I' is the i in fit and win (ini, kari). The 'o' is

the o in spot and lot (kolot, lori). The 'u' is the u in could and not the u in university (lucu,

turun). Bahasa Malaysia has such syllables as ca, ce, ci, co, cu which are read with the ch

sound such as cha, che, chi, cho, chu respectively.

Besides that, Bahasa Malaysia has adopted many English words. Among some of

the examples are: signifikan (significant), hipotesis (hypothesis), rekreasi (recreation),

biologi (biology), fizik (physics), impak (impact), debat (debate), implikasi (implication)

and kinetik (kinetic). James’ (1998: 179) Contrastive Analysis (CA) hypothesis informs

that ‘elements that are ‘similar’ in the L1 and the FL will be easier to learn than those that

are different…’ Based on the collection of the pronunciation of words by the teachers, it

is noticed that teachers generally do not have problems pronouncing English words that

were adopted by Bahasa Malaysia. Nevertheless, sometimes teachers get confused when

they apply the same principle of pronouncing some words that were adopted. Therefore,

this supports Odlin’s (1989: 127) statement, ‘Similarities and differences in writing

systems can result in positive or negative transfer.’

What Is The Best Way?

The best way here will mean the simplest, fastest and most direct solution to help

teachers make use of the systematically-planned scripted lessons. On-site training for

teachers in the 26 major district education centres all over Sabah is imperative. This is

especially necessary for the multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual community in

Sabah. The training sessions shall be based on the Science and Mathematics modules that

are distributed to the primary schools in May 2008. The training shall include making

teachers aware of the systematically planned lessons, focusing on pedagogical aspects

and content knowledge. It shall also involve teachers giving their feedback on the

practicality and usability of the planned lessons for their respective Science and

Mathematics classes.

The next step taken is to help teachers who do not have easy access to computer

technology to speak using Standard English pronunciation to their pupils in their Science

or Mathematics class. The phonetics should be provided in written form to help them say

the English words correctly, using Standard English pronunciation. However, as noted in

the preceding section, it will be quite an uphill task if local teachers were to be trained to

use Standard IPA phonetics system. Hence, our next attempt will involve local teachers

English and Asia

117

interpreting Science and Mathematics terms in English into the way they would

pronounce the word using alphabets. It is hoped that a common locally accepted

phonetic system will be derived to help local teachers reduce their pronunciation errors.

A subsequent task that can be undertaken to fine-tune the product is through using an

algorithm to perform Error Analysis and corrective explanations (James, 1998).

Error Analysis and Corrective Explanation

Based on James’ (1998) algorithm for doing Error Analysis and principles in error

correction, we shall work out an algorithmic format to explain the set of procedures to

follow when performing the task to identify errors and to provide effective error

correction to the teachers. Figure 1 shows a summary of a flow diagram on the whole

process in conducting error analysis and corrective explanation.

Keeping in mind that our project’s theme ‘Back to Basics’ aims to help

teachers improve their English word pronunciation, we would only focus on the

phonological feature at the Segmental level only. We are aware of other aspects which

are equally important. It is argued that a focus on the Suprasegmental level is more

important to improve learners’ intelligibility in ESL classrooms. For instance, at the

Suprasegmental level which takes into account general speaking habits in areas such as

clarity, speed, loudness, pauses, fluency, voice pitch, intonation, stress and rhythm are

important aspects to consider when diagnosing learners’ spoken English (Hebert, 2002).

In our context, teachers are provided with scripted lessons that are planned and written in

reasonably good English. We intend to help further enhance teachers’ confidence level in

using English language to teach Science and Mathematics by refining their pronunciation.

As mentioned earlier in Section 6, we shall focus on phonemic correctness. Hence, at the

segmental level, articulation of consonants and vowels are diagnosed. Using a diagnostic

learner profile, provided by Hebert (2002:191) who cited Firth (1987), we would be able

to detect the mispronunciation of words. The diagnostic profile identifies elements in

pronouncing consonants and vowels according to areas as listed below:

English and Asia

118

Figure 1 Algorithm for Error Analysis and Error Correction (based on James, 1998)

I. Consonants

Substitutions. Is the learner (in this case, the teacher) substituting one phoneme for

another?

Omission. Is the learner omitting consonants?

Articulation. Is the consonant being articulated properly?

Clusters. Are consonants clusters articulated properly?

Linking. Are consonants linked together?

II. Vowels

Substitutions. Is one vowel being substituted for another?

Articulation. Is the learner articulating vowels correctly?

Length. Do vowels have their appropriate length?

Reduction. Are vowels reduced in unstressed syllabus?

Linking. Are vowels properly linked to other vowels across word boundaries?

Sample teachers’ language in classroom

Register each utterance of sample, focusing on language phonetics and phonology

Is utterance normal?

Correct pronunciation Mispronunciation (Segmental errors)

Vowel errors Consonant errors

Error Corrections

English and Asia

119

Having diagnosed their errors in pronunciation, we shall proceed with a training

session to provide feedback and outline the areas common to all the teachers. A more

precise approach in the ‘correction’ process, according to James (1998: 237) is called

remediation. This approach involves informing teachers of the errors, providing

information and treatment of the errors and also explaining how or why the error was

made. Thus, by giving remediation the teachers shall be aware of the similarities and

differences of the L1 and English language. In other words, we are conducting

‘Contrastive and Error Analysis that explains why the error was committed’ (James, 238).

James (1998) also gives some practical options and principles in doing error

correction. James points out that to what extent feedback should be more salient, overt,

direct or explicit, will depend on factors like individual differences, the group’s level of

accomplishment in the English language and other psychological and sociological factors

(Jones, 2002). Hence, when correcting, we must be sensitive to the teachers’ needs,

personalities, learning styles and cultural backgrounds. Another principle to observe

when correcting teachers’ mispronunciation is to create a non-threatening learning

environment and to provide room for self-correction.

Conclusion

Integrating English in teaching and learning Science and Mathematics is an area of

concern locally. Researchers in the western countries such as Ann K. Fathman, David T.

Crowther, Fred Dobb and Deborah J. Short have published many works on teaching

Science for English language learners. However, their works are carried out in a more

favourable English learning environment compared to our local context. Hence, many

primary school teachers in Sabah face great challenges in the teaching and learning

process of Science and Mathematics in English. Numerous concerted efforts at different

levels have attempted to alleviate the situation. This project undertaken by Academic

Management Sector, JPN Sabah is another one among others to help teachers improve the

current situation in the local context. The discussion in this article focuses on the

importance of executing lesson plans systematically and meaningfully in classrooms

using good spoken English. Teachers must understand that through the teaching of

Science and Mathematics in English, pupils can develop English proficiency while

learning the process skills and the content of Science and Mathematics. Our project aims

to further encourage primary school Science and Mathematics teachers to move on and

rise up. Follow-up sessions include re-training primary school teachers at district levels

and observing the impact of the modules on these teachers while teaching Science and

English and Asia

120

Mathematics in their classrooms. It must be emphasised that the project is an on-going

developmental process to provide continuous professional development to primary school

teachers in Sabah.

Bibliography Al-Jarf, Reima. (2007). Sources of spelling errors in EFL Arab college students.

Retrieved on July 23, 2008 from http://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/aljarf/Publications/ Hebert, J. (2002). PracTESOL: It’s Not What You Say, but How You Say It! In J. C.

Richards & W. A. Renandya. (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.

James, C. (1998). Errors in language learning and use. London: Longman Jones, R. H. (2002). Beyond ‘listen and repeat’: Pronunciation teaching materials and

theories of second language acquisition. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya. (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching .UK: Cambridge University Press.

Laplante, B. (1997). Teaching science to language minority elementary classrooms.

NYSABE Journal, 12, 1997. Retrieved on May 6, 2006 from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/nysabe/vol12/nysabe124.pdf

Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ:

Ablex Publishing. López, L. M. & Greenfield, D. B. (2004). The cross-language transfer of phonological

skills of Hispanic Head Start children. Bilingual Research Journal, 28:1 Spring 2004. Retrieved on August 10, 2008 from http://www.brj.asu.edu/content/vol28_no1/art1.pdf

McCarthy, M. (1997). Discourse analysis for language teachers. United Kingdom:

Cambridge University Press. Merino, B. and Scarcella, R. (2005). Teaching Science to English learners. UCLMRI

Newsletter, 14(4). University of California, Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Retrieved on March 14, 2006 from http://lmri.ucsb.edu/publications/newsletters/v14n4.pdf

Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Sheik Badrul Hisham B. Jamil Azhar. (2006). Consonantal differences between standard

and localized English: Several problematic areas of pronunciation for the Kadazan ethnic English language teachers in Tuaran and Tamparuli. Unpublished Masters of Education Dissertation. University Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu

Szynalski, T. P. (2008). Successful English learners. Retrieved on July 22, 2008 from

http://www.antimoon.com/learners/tomasz_szynalski.htm

English and Asia

121

Tay, S. (2007). An evaluation of teaching and learning Science in English in a rural school in West Coast of Sabah. Unpublished Ph.D thesis. University Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu.

Veal, W. R. & MaKinster, J. G. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies

pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies. Retrieved on June 1, 2008 from http://wolfweb.unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/vealmak.html

Yager, R. E. (2004). Science is not written, but it can be written about. In E. W. Saul

(Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and Science instruction - Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark: International Reading Association.

English and Asia

122

An Evaluation of English Language Curriculum Components

MOHAMMAD ZOHRABI

Abstract

Any instructional program and/or course of study needs a radical overhaul from time to time in order to ensure that it is functioning adequately. Testing students at the end of the course is not the only means of indicating whether the program is working as it was planned. There should be a complete investigation of all the curriculum components in order to make sure that the teaching-learning process is taking place appropriately. The components that need to be evaluated are: objectives, attitudes, time, students, needs analysis, classroom activities, materials, study skills, language skills, vocabulary, grammar and assessment. Undoubtedly, scrutinizing all these constructs provides us with a better understanding of the virtues and weaknesses of our course. These components are the essential ingredients of any English language program offered at different levels, i.e. from primary school to secondary to tertiary level. To this end, the necessary data can be collected through different instruments (e.g. questionnaires, interviews, classroom observations, etc.) and through different sources (e.g. students, teachers, program staff, etc.). It is believed that all these components affect the students’ learning in one way or another. Therefore, it is necessary that all of them to be evaluated one by one. This evaluation can be implemented either by the classroom teacher who is familiar with the program and its setting (an insider expert) or by a researcher (an outsider expert). This paper attempts to elaborate on these essential curriculum elements.

Key-terms: instructional program, testing, teaching-learning process, curriculum components, evaluation, evaluation Introduction

It is certain that limiting program evaluation to only some of the curriculum constructs

would hardly illuminate the issue at hand. It is, therefore, necessary that all the elements

(objectives, attitudes, time, students, needs analysis, classroom activities, materials, study

skills, language skills, vocabulary, grammar and assessment) to be studied in detail. In

the following sections these main curriculum components will be discussed and

elaborated on one by one.

English and Asia

123

Objectives

One of the quintessential aspects of any teaching-learning process is the objectives. In a

program of study every stakeholder (learners, teachers, syllabus designers, institutions,

etc.) has his/her own specific objectives.

Tarone and Yule (1993: 33) state that we should determine “what the learners’

aims are in learning the language.” To this end, Hedge (2002: 44) believes that the

important objective in recent years is “The ability to communicate effectively in

English.” On the other hand, Harmer (2002) emphasizes that the students should know

and be informed about their aims. If the learners do not have any goals they will not

know where they are going and why they are studying. At this juncture, Richards and

Schmidt (2002: 370-1) categories students’ goals into two types: “general objectives and

specific objectives.” General objectives or aims are the large-scale and long-term goals

determined by an institution, syllabus or curriculum designer. However, specific

objectives are the ones which the learners or teachers intend to achieve at the end of a

course or program of study. Clearly, there are different and varied types of aims

depending on different situations and intentions. “The classroom is the meeting point of

various subjective views of language, diverse learning purposes, and different

preferences” (Breen 2001a: 129). Obviously, some learners have a clear goal and are

motivated to follow the instructional programs. However, others either do not have

specific goals or have quite vague aims. The motivated students can fix their objectives,

monitor their learning and achieve their goals rather easily.

It is important that the teachers involve the learners in setting objectives. In this

way, the learners can feel attached to the objectives of the course and try to fulfill them

along with the teacher. In this regard, Snow and Brinton (1997: 120) contend that the

teachers should clarify goals for themselves and negotiate it with the learners so that

“things go much more smoothly.” Unfortunately, very few teachers try to inquire about

their students’ objectives which consequently bring about some conflicting ideas about

how to teach and learn language. Therefore, Mercer (2001: 243) points out that the

teachers should determine the goals in order “to organize activities to occupy classes of

disparate individuals.” On the whole, it is the teachers’ responsibility to interpret the

general goals set by the decision-makers at the ministry and balance them with the

students’ aims of learning language. Flowerdew and Peacock (2001: 179) are of the

opinion that the syllabus designers should define the “goals for the course as well as an

evaluation of the potential difficulties learners will have in meeting those goals.”

English and Asia

124

Attitudes

It is an accepted fact that students’ attitudes determine whether or not they intend to learn

a foreign or second language. Lightbown and Spada (2001: 33) claim that “positive

attitudes and motivation are related to success in second language learning.” To this end,

Harmer (2002: 74) holds that “If students feel hostile towards the subject of study … they

will be unlikely to achieve much success.” Therefore, if learners hold a positive attitude

towards the foreign or second language they will try hard to acquire it. In this regard, Lin

(2001: 271) asserts that “many students in the world hold an ambivalent, want-hate

relationship with English.” At this juncture, Breen (2001b: 313) surmises that learners

approach the classroom discourse “in different ways depending upon their own

definitions of the situation.” On the whole, Hedge (2002) proposes four different aspects

of the attitude: motivation to learn a language, integrativeness with the target language

group, attitudes towards the instructional program and the language teacher and finally

the degree of anxiety in the classroom.

In the main, one of the realizations of positive attitude towards a language is the

motivation. The motivated students try hard to learn language as fully as possible. The

other important factor in terms of the students’ attitudes towards a language is the

affective filter. Hedge (2002: 21) maintains that “affective factors such as attitudes,

anxiety, competitiveness … can help or hinder language learning.” Obviously, the

external pressure to learn a language will develop negative attitudes in the learners.

However, internal motivation to learning will create positive attitudes in the students.

In the main, the teachers can play a crucial role in upgrading the students’

attitudes towards the language. In this regards, the teachers should “gain as much

understanding” (Harmer, 2002: 308) of the students as they can. Also, the teachers need

to support the students and create a cooperative environment for the different types of

learners. The teachers need to enhance the students’ motivation in order to augment heir

positive attitudes towards the language that they are learning. In order to contribute to the

learners’ positive attitudes, the teachers should “counter the development of anxiety by

building self-confidence through positive early experiences, through providing reassuring

feedback” (Hedge, 2002: 21). Meanwhile, the teachers should try to create a harmonious

and agreeable classroom because “Asymmetrical relationships very often entail

disagreement in belief, in attitudes, and in values held” (Breen, 2001a: 131).

Furthermore, in order to promote the learners’ positive attitudes towards the language, the

English and Asia

125

teachers should train the learners. That is, encouraging them “to become more involved,

active, and responsible in their own learning” (Hedge, 2002: 85).

Time

One of the crucial elements that the teachers should consider in a course or program is the

time factor. Harmer (2002: 335) contends that language is so vast and varied which there

is hardly “enough time for students to learn all they need to in a classroom.” Therefore,

planning the class time is of prime importance. To this end, Jordan (1997: 65-6) stresses

that “On a course there is often insufficient time to cover all that is desired.” It seems that

in a short period of time the teachers can hardly teach what they want to teach and

students can rarely learn what they yearn to acquire. As Brinton & Holten (2001: 250) put

“it is doubtful whether ten or fifteen weeks of instruction can really impact a student’s

overall language proficiency.” In this regard, Rahimian (2005: 94) also emphasizes the

importance of time and states that “other important factors are also at work such as hours

of instruction per week.” Clearly, the time factor is quite critical for EAP (English for

Academic Purposes) students. As Peacock (2001: 248) asserts “for EAP learners … time

in the EAP classroom is limited.”

Evidently, the students need to develop clear and detailed time plans for their own

study inside and outside the classroom. Harmer (2001: 335) suggests that “To

compensate for the limits of classroom time … students need to develop their own

learning strategies.” In this way, they can become independent and autonomous learners

to some extent.

Mainly, the teachers need to sensitize the students to the importance of time.

Schmitt (2000: 144) suggests that “it is better to use teaching time (which is always

limited) to help students acquire” the necessary strategies. The teachers should be careful

about “the hours available for teaching and the distribution of those hours” (Hedge, 2002:

25). Therefore, the teachers need to spend the time appropriately on each activity and

skill. In this regard, Nunan (1999: 3) states that what little class time there is must

therefore be used as effectively as possible.”

Students

Undoubtedly, students are the main stakeholders in a language course or program.

However, Skehan (1998: 289) claims that “there has been remarkably little enthusiasm, in

materials or methodology, to cater for the individual learner.” Certainly, there are grave

differences among the learners and the way they learn a language. As Hutchinson and

Waters (1995: 8) put it the learners “have different needs and interests.” Therefore, the

English and Asia

126

existence of differences influences the way in which learners approach the task of

language learning (Hedge, 2002). Harmer (2002) maintains that some learners are better

in oral tasks and others are more competent in written work. Quite often, within an

academic context, there are tangible differences among the university students. For

instance, Clapham (2001) asserts that life & medical science students and physical

sciences & technology students are more competent than the business and social science

students. In this regard, Mercer (2001: 243) claims that the ELT “classes are made up of

individuals of various personal characteristics and cultural backgrounds.” Ferris (2001:

299) also states that “significant differences exist across L2 contexts and populations.”

Furthermore, Gatehouse (2001) believes that ELT classes consist of heterogeneous

learners who differ in their language proficiency level, prior education and experience,

motivation, etc. At this juncture, Mitchell and Myles (2001: 24) depicts the learners’

peculiarities as follows:

Intelligence

Cognitive Language aptitude

Language learning strategies

Learner traits Language attitudes

Affective Motivation

Language anxiety

Figure 1: Learner traits

When the above figure is taken into consideration, Harmer (2002: 45) suggests

that individuals’ brains differ drastically so that learners react differently to “the same

stimuli.” However, Hedge (2002) assumes that the cause of difference in cognitive style

is related to the students’ prior teaching methodology which in turn stems from cultural

influences. Nonetheless, Lightbown and Spada (2001) are of the opinion that the

difference among the learners can be traced to their aptitude. That is some learners have

outstanding flair for acquiring language. Richards and Schmidt (2002) also hold that

learners with high aptitude learn language more quickly than others.

Therefore, learners opt for different styles and strategies of learning based on to

their particular aptitudes and cognitive styles for learning language. In the past decade

there have been attempts to explore and render the characteristics of good language

learners who are somehow successful in learning and using language (Skehan, 1998;

English and Asia

127

Brown, 2000; Peacock, 2001; Lightbown and Spada, 2001; Hedge, 2002; Harmer, 2002).

Mainly, good language learners:

- have clear objectives and goals for learning language,

- have a high degree of self-confidence and self-awareness,

- try hard to learn and use language inside and outside the classroom,

- are willing to take risks and use language in different situations,

- organize their time effectively and efficiently,

- monitor and evaluate their progress continuously,

- try to recognize their weaknesses and reduce them as far as possible,

- try to find their own way and become autonomous,

- have a tolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity,

- use their linguistic and world knowledge to help them in comprehension,

- receive and produce language simultaneously,

- have positive attitudes towards the language they are learning,

- try to know their needs and use every resource available to them,

- show great perseverance.

To this end, the teachers need to know their learners as fully as possible.

Therefore, the teachers should determine their methodologies and materials in accordance

with the learners’ objectives, language levels, needs and interests.

Needs Analysis

An instructional course or program is set up based on a group of learners’ needs. Hence,

needs analysis endeavours to study the different parties’ (learners, institution, parents,

sponsor, society, etc.) needs. To this end, Schmitt (2000: 136) states that “we must be

very sensitive to our learners and their needs.” Furthermore, Hutchinson and Waters

(1995: 53-4) are of the opinion that “any course should be based on an analysis of learner

need.” On the other hand, Flowerdew and Peacock (2001: 178) claim that needs analysis

is one of the main forerunners of learner-centeredness and attempts “to fine tune the

curriculum to the specific needs of the learner.” It might be assumed that the general

English courses at the high schools or some language institutes are run without any felt

need (Hedge, 2002). However, Hutchinson and Waters (1995: 53) insist that “There is

always an identifiable need of some sort.” The crucial issue to remember is that needs

analysis is not a one-off activity. Rather, it is an ongoing process which should begin

before the start of a course and continue till after its end. At this juncture, Hutchinson and

Waters (ibid.) emphasize the importance of being aware of the needs. Certainly, needs

English and Asia

128

analysis is carried out in order to compensate for the shortness of the language courses

and select and teach the most crucial elements of the language. Therefore, Dudley-Evans

and St John (2000) maintain that we should gather enough information in order to select

the appropriate materials. That is, in a limited time we want to teach the language

structures which we perceive are needed by our learners.

It is preferable to take heed of learners’ needs and wishes. If we disregard this

issue “the result can be frustrated and disappointed students” (Peacock, 2001: 283). In

order to better study the learners’ needs, Hutchinson and Waters (1995) subdivide the

needs into necessities, lacks and wants. Necessities refer to the requirement of the target

setting. In other words, the linguistic elements the learners need to use in the target

environment. In this way, the target situation analysis comes to the fore. Determining the

necessities of the target situation is one of the aspects of what the learners need to learn.

The other more important issue is to know what the learners already know. By

determining what the learners have at their disposal, we can identify which of the

necessities they lack. Therefore, by studying the gap between the necessities and the lack

thereof, we can select and teach the appropriate materials to the learners. The necessities

and lack of it are the objective points that are determined by the needs analysis. However,

the learners themselves have their own wishes and wants. Therefore, any curriculum or

syllabus designer should consider the learners’ wants. However, the learners’ wants may

be in conflict with the teachers’ or other parties perceptions. The following figure

illustrates the different aspects of needs analysis at a university level:

Learners

Teachers Sponsors Government Society University Ministry of

Education

Specialist Department

Figure 2: Perceived Need by Different Parties

Data for needs analysis should be collected through different procedures. Merely

gathering information from the target situation concerning the linguistic elements is not

Needs Perceived

by

English and Asia

129

enough. On the whole, information can be collected through these methods:

questionnaires, interviews, observations, etc. Meanwhile, there are several sources from

which information can be deduced: current students, ex-students, teachers and so on.

Classroom Activities

Classroom activities and exercises have a great impact on the learners’ progress rate.

Therefore, the key agents who could implement and make learning more effective and

interesting are the teachers. The factors which also influence the learning-teaching

processes include the learners’ characteristics, their language level, objectives, previous

education, cultural background, and more importantly the teachers’ methods and

preferences. The classroom activities and “teaching is not static or fixed in time but is a

dynamic, interactional process” (Richards, 2001: 168). In this regard, Nunan (2001)

expresses his discontent with the way the relationship between form and function are

treated. He states that only the forms are taught and their functions are not used in

meaningful communications. Of course, there are many factors involved in a classroom

learning-teaching processes which cannot be generalized (Robinson, et al. 2001). That is,

instructional activities vary from institution to institution (Mercer, 2001). Mainly,

different types of activities and exercises can yield different types of outcomes for

different types of learners (Breen, 2001b). It is better to plan and devise classroom

activities which can engage and motivate the learners. There should be a variety of

activities which can encourage learners to learn and not to get bored.

Generally, there is no best method to be used for implementing classroom

activities. Long (2001: 181) claims that the methods overlap and “worse, it may actually

do harm by distracting teachers from genuinely important issues.” Brown (2000: 169)

also contends that instead of using and adhering to methods, it is preferable to use

“communicative, interactive techniques.” That is, it is better to use a variety of tasks

based on learners’ goals and their preferences. In this regard, Farhady (2005) assumes

that the adopted methodology will depend on the type of learners, their goals, availability

of the resources, the institution’s objectives, etc. Askari Arani (2005) argues that there is

no principled way which is appropriate for all learners in all contexts. Teachers can make

use of their experience to apply existing techniques and try novel and innovative ways of

activities. On the other hand, Sadeghi (2005) states that an efficient methodology should

be comprehensive and consider every pertinent aspect and factor in the learning process.

More importantly, learners should be motivated to use their thoughts rather than

doing abstract and mechanical exercises. Classroom activities are better to be centred on

English and Asia

130

tasks which could arouse the learners’ interest for learning. Teachers should consider the

learners and their wants and consequently modify their teaching in accordance with the

learners’ tastes.

Materials

In a learning-teaching situation, the materials mediate between the learners and the

teacher and enhance the learning process. English language materials might consist of a

textbook, in-house material, handouts, teaching aids, etc. However, the most essential one

is the textbook. The first step in preparing the materials for a course of study is

determining the objectives which in turn stems from the identification of the learners’

needs. As Clapham (2001) argues, finding and selecting appropriate and suitable

materials are difficult. Also, the appropriacy and suitability of the selected materials can

hardly be known in advance. However, the important issue to consider is that the selected

materials should be relevant, appropriate to the learners’ levels, interesting, etc. (Hedge,

2002). Meanwhile, Harmer (2002) suggests that the materials should be of different

complexity, genre and length. In this regard, Hirvela (2001) reasons that exposing the

learners to various types of texts makes them familiar with different types of rhetorical

styles which in turn activates their interest in reading.

Also, the materials, especially the textbooks, should be selected and prepared

based on the learners’ attitudes, values and cultural beliefs (Hedge, 2002). Certainly,

good materials do not teach, rather, they encourage the learners to learn, make them think

and engage them in interesting and challenging activities and exercises (Hutchinson and

Waters, 1995). Moreover, good textbooks act as a coherent syllabus which teachers can

rely on when they have no free time or possibility of preparing their own materials.

Obviously, learners like coursebooks because they allow them to prepare in advance and

they can look back at them for revision (Harmer, 2002). On the whole, useful textbooks

offer a planed sequence of activities both for learners and teachers. Certainly, language

courses are better to use both textbooks and in-house produced materials. Also, the

textbooks should have supplementary activities in order to make the learners to use

language in meaningful and communicative contexts (Hedge, 2002). Furthermore,

Harmer (2002) contends that the learners should be provided with authentic materials. It

is because the learners may encounter the authentic spoken and written materials in their

real life.

The crucial issue that every language teacher should consider is that they should

constantly evaluate their coursebooks and materials before, during and after the program.

English and Asia

131

In order to assess the usefulness of their coursebook, the teachers can prepare a checklist

or adapt the checklists used by other evaluators. Harmer (2002: 301) suggests the

following criteria in evaluating a coursebook: “price, availability, layout and design,

instructions, methodology, syllabus type (selection and grading), language study

activities, language skill activities, topics, cultural acceptability, usability, and teacher’s

guide.” However, these checklists cannot be exhaustive in themselves and every teacher

needs to prepare a checklist based on his/her local needs. In evaluating a coursebook we

should assess whether its content relates to its purported goals, whether it gives an

accurate picture of the intended culture, their lifestyles and people, whether it can meet

the needs of our learners, etc. More importantly, we should include our learners’ views

and opinions. In the end, the materials should be revised from time to time in the light of

classroom use and they should be piloted before a large-scale use.

Study skills

Students who wish to pursue their studies in an academic setting need to know study

skills. Certainly, these skills can equip the learners with necessary abilities to perform

well in their studies. As Dudley-Evans and St John (2000: 34) put “students whose first

language is not English may need help with both the language of academic disciplines

and the specific study skills required of them during their academic course.” Study skills

consist of a wide variety of activities. Richards and Schmidt (2002) divide these skills

into two parts: (1) the general study skills which consist of reading, listening, or writing.

Also, their main sub-skills include: guessing unknown word meanings from surrounding

context, using the dictionary, summarizing, paraphrasing, note-taking, using the library,

using computers, using self-access centre, etc. (2) the study skills in reading which

comprise scanning, skimming, identifying main vocabulary, etc. Flowerdew and Peacock

(2001) believe that teaching and learning the study skills are more important than

instructing the main language skills. As Jordan (1997) puts it, regrettably, the study skills

course is missing from the academic syllabuses and students do not develop these skills.

After evaluating the ESP courses at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico, Lynch

(1996) realized that the students need study skills before embarking on their ESP courses.

One of the mainstays in an EFL situation is the dictionary. Clearly, the general

monolingual and specialist dictionaries are necessary both for learners and teachers. The

teachers should try to discuss the advantages of the monolingual dictionaries with the

students (Jordan, 1997). For example, the dictionaries offer the meaning of words in

context, their used in different situations, their part of speech, pronunciation, spelling,

English and Asia

132

synonym, etc. Unfortunately, some English language teachers assume that their students

already know how to use a dictionary. However, the fact is that most EFL students do not

know how to use a monolingual dictionary and consequently take refuge in bilingual

dictionaries. Nevertheless, the bilingual dictionaries do not show how the words are used

in different contexts, what their connotative meanings are, in what context they are

appropriate, etc. (Harmer, 2002).

In general, every academic institution should have a self-access centre. The self-

access centre can offer a wide range of teaching aids and materials to the learners. These

aids and materials consist of: grammar references, dictionaries, workbooks, reading and

listening texts, cassette tapes, videos, CDs, internet, etc. Students can use these materials

in their free times. Therefore, in order to make their learners independent, teachers should

encourage them to go to self-access centres in their free times and learn language. In this

way, students can take responsibilities for their own learning and can find their particular

styles and strategies of learning language. To this end, Robinson (1991) maintains that in

order to bring about autonomous learners it is better to ask them to do a project. In this

way, learners become involved in the language outside the classroom and try to search,

use and learn language for themselves.

Language skills

The language skills are the main ingredients of any language. Therefore, we should try to

practice these skills as completely and uniformly as possible. Harmer (2002) believes that

the priority of skills depends on the syllabus or coursebook. However, McDonough

(1984) puts emphasis on the goals of learning and specification of needs. Yet, Jordan

(1997) is of the opinion that the local circumstances determine which skills should be

prioritized. No matter how experienced a language teacher is, it is indeed difficult to meet

the different expectations of heterogeneous group of learners and maintain a balance

across the four language skills (Brinton and Holten, 2001). The point is that language

skills cannot be restricted to only one area, for example, reading. Any skill requires a

combination or integration of other skills to some degree. As a matter of fact, we cannot

and should not split the receptive (listening and reading) and productive (speaking and

writing) skills (Brown, 2001). Moreover, interaction requires transmitting and receiving

information simultaneously. Furthermore, written and spoken language are so

inextricably linked that separating them damages the integrity of the language. Each

language skill reinforces the other one and learning one skill requires the other skills.

English and Asia

133

Also, in order to enrich learning, to guard against boredom and have variety we need to

integrate the four language skills.

Vocabulary

One of the main elements of any language is the vocabulary. Hence, the main problem of

EFL and ESL learners is learning and using the vocabulary. It is a mistake to believe that

learning a language means simply mapping the L1 and L2 words. The main issue is the

appropriate use of the words in different contexts. Vocabulary cannot be learned

separately rather they should be acquired in relation to each other. That is, the vocabulary

of a language forms an interconnected network which completes each other in a discourse

environment (Schmitt, 2000). Therefore, vocabulary acquisition depends on various

variables such as objectives, amount of exposure, age, motivation, L1, culture, interest,

etc. In fact, a language consists of millions of words and a learner cannot learn all of

them. However, learners need to master the high-frequency words, the words that they

want, and the words that they like in order to function effectively and be able to

understand and produce language (Coxhead and Nation, 2001). Meanwhile, it is believed

that university students need to learn the general vocabulary because their main problems

are related to these words and they can learn and handle their technical terms in various

contexts (Farnia, 2005; Mahbudi, 2005).

Mainly, there are two types of meanings: denotative and connotative. Denotative

meaning refers to the basic or core meaning, or their dictionary meaning. On the other

hand, connotative meaning relates to the extra meaning that a word assumes when used in

a particular context. That is, it refers to the attitudes and feelings of a language user in

choosing and using words and their influence on the intended recipients (Hedge, 2002).

In the main, learners have problem with the connotative meaning because they learn the

dictionary or denotative meaning either in the classroom or by themselves. Therefore,

learners need extensive exposure to authentic listening and reading materials in order to

learn how words are used in different contexts. Also, learners have the problem in

collocations, i.e. the words that co-occur. They do not know which words can combine

together, and sometimes use combinations which are rather odd in the eyes of native

speakers. Here also learners need more exposure to the authentic use of language.

Certainly, vocabulary acquisition takes a long time to be mastered, i.e. knowledge of

vocabulary grows over time and is incremental and gradual. Schmitt (2000) argues that

vocabulary acquisition is not merely the mastery of individual words. Rather words

English and Asia

134

should be received and used productively through various registers, genres and in terms

of their grammatical constraints.

Grammar

Whether we like it or not we need grammatical knowledge to understand and produce

correct language. Concerned with learners’ language accuracy, teachers, syllabus

designers and material writers are trying to include explicit grammatical forms in the

teaching-learning materials (Hedge, 2002). Students can be exposed to structural forms

inside and outside the classroom. Inside the classroom they can receive grammatical rules

from other students, teachers and textbooks. Outside the classroom they can obtain it via

native speakers, mass media and extensive reading, etc. However, in EFL situations there

is a dearth of language use in which the learners could pick up the knowledge of

grammar. Therefore, Nunan (2001: 192) argues that students barely test for themselves

the existing relationship between “form, meaning, and use.” In fact, presenting “isolated

items one at a time” may hardly contribute to learners’ grammatical competence (Long,

2001: 183-4). It is believed that grammar and context are interwoven and structural

knowledge as well as their function can be acquired through genuine communication

(Nunan, 2001). Therefore, learners need appropriate and ample opportunities to explore

grammar knowledge in co-text (surrounding words, closes and sentences) and context.

More importantly, learners need vocabulary knowledge in order to understand the

meaning of discourse and make sense of grammar rules (Schmitt, 2000). Also, learners

need more examples to see how grammar works. Therefore, grammar rules should be

simple, true, clear and relevant for learners in order to be able to internalize them

(Harmer, 2002). Meanwhile, the amount of time that learners need to learn grammar rules

varies among learners. Consequently, teachers need to recycle the new structural forms

frequently through the subsequent lessons in order to ensure students’ retaining ability.

Assessment

Assessment is a systematic monitoring of learners in order to ensure that they are making

appropriate progress and to diagnose their weaknesses. Students need feedback to know

whether or not they are learning adequately. Thus, it is expected that teachers provide

students with necessary information about learning. Scores, grades and marks hardly

provide enough feedback on the learners’ progress (Rea-Dickins, 2002). Teachers need to

identify the specific areas in which the learners need help. Useful assessment can be

carried out through collecting enough information over time. However, testing is a

mechanical process which is usually carried out at the end of a program to measure the

English and Asia

135

attainment of the material and course objectives by the learners. Testing can reveal the

learners’ ability in learning the language elements: vocabulary, grammar and

pronunciation. It hardly reveals anything about learners’ practical use of language.

Meanwhile, assessment is an on-going and/or formative process which is carried out

throughout the whole program. However, testing and/or summative measurement is a

one-off procedure which is done at the end of the program. Unfortunately, the exam-

oriented nature of some language programs makes the learners prepare themselves for the

end-of-term exams and tests instead of trying to learn the English language (Askari

Arani, 2005). However, it is better that teachers test not only the language elements and

structures but also assess the content of what learners say or write (Harmer, 2002).

On the whole, the format of language tests has changed in recent decades. For

instance, there has been a shift of emphasis from form-focused tests to more

communicative ones (Rea-Dickins, 2002). For example, teachers might ask students to

write a message to somebody, to listen to a tape and retell the gist of what they

understood, read a text and explain its meaning in their own words, etc.

Conclusion

It is clear that evaluating a course or program requires a lot of time, energy and expertise.

This is because of the enormity of the task and heterogeneity of the curriculum elements.

In this regard, learners, teachers and program administrators are invaluable sources of

information for any evaluator. Also, in order to triangulate the data and add to its

truthfulness and richness, this information can be gathered through different means:

questionnaires, interviews, classroom observations and so on.

Bibliography

Askari Arani, J. (2005). Issues of learning EMP at university: An analysis of students’ perspectives. Proceedings of the First National ESP/EAP Conference. 2 (1): 127-143.

Breen, M. P. (2001a). The social context for language learning: A neglected situation? In

C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 122-144). London: Routledge.

Breen, M. P. (2001b). Navigating the discourse: On what is learned in the language

classroom. In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 306-322). London: Routledge.

Brinton, D. M. & Holten, C. A. (2001). Does the emperor has no clothes? A re-

examination of grammar in content-based instruction. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 239-259). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

English and Asia

136

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed). New York:

Longman. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language

pedagogy (2nd ed). New York: Longman. Clapham, C. (2001). Discipline specificity and EAP. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock

(Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 84-100). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coxhead, A. & Nation, P. (2001). The specialized vocabulary of English for academic

purposes. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 252-267). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dudley-Evans, T. & St. John, M. J. (2000). Developments in English for specific

purposes: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Farhady, H. (2005). Reflections on and directions for ESP materials development in

SAMT. Proceedings of the First National ESP/EAP Conference. 3 (1): 2-32. Farnia, M. (2005). The role of web resources in ESP courses. Proceedings of the First

National ESP/EAP Conference. 3 (1): 174-186. Ferris, D. R. (2001). Teaching writing for academic purposes. In J. Flowerdew & M.

Peacock (eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 298-314). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Flowerdew, J. & Peacock, M. (2001b). The EAP curriculum: Issues, methods, and

challenges. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 177-194). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gatehouse, K. (2001). Key issues in English for specific purposes (ESP) curriculum

development. The internet TESL Journal 7 (10). Retrieved July 9 2007 from http://iteslj.org/articles/gatehouse-ESP.html

Harmer, J. (2002). The practice of English language teaching (2nd ed). London:

Longman. Hedge, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. (3rd ed). Oxford:

Oxford University Press. Hirvela, A. (2001). Incorporating reading into EAP writing courses. In J. Flowerdew &

M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 330-346). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1995). English for specific purposes: a learning-centered

approach (10th ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

English and Asia

137

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for

teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (2001). Factors affecting second language learning. In C.

N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 28-43). London: Routledge.

Lin, A. M. Y. (2001). Doing-English-lessons in the reproduction or transformation of

social worlds? In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 271-286). London: Routledge.

Long, H. M. (2001). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.

In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 180-190). London: Routledge.

Lynch, B. K. (1996b). Language program evaluation: Theory and practice. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Mahbudi, A. (2005). ESP or general English? Proceedings of the First National

ESP/EAP Conference. 1 (1): 202-218. McDonough, J. (1984). ESP in perspective: A practical guide. London: Collins ELT. Mercer, N. (2001). Language for teaching language. In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer

(Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 243-257). London: Routledge.

Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2001). Second language learning: key concepts and issues. In

C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 11-27). London: Routledge.

Nunan, D. (1999). The learner-centered curriculum (10th printing). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Nunan, D. (2001). Teaching grammar in context. In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.),

English language teaching in its social context (pp. 191-199). London: Routledge. Peacock, M. (2001). Language learning strategies and EAP proficiency: Teacher views,

student views and test results. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 268-285). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rahimian, M. (2005). Developing communicative syllabus in ESP/EAP classes and how

to deal with it in EFL situations. Proceedings of the First National ESP/EAP Conference. 2 (1): 86-98.

Rea-Dickins, P. (2002). Classroom assessment. In T. Hedge, Teaching and learning in

the language classroom (pp. 375-401). (3rd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

English and Asia

138

Richards, J. C. (2001). Beyond methods. In C. N. Candlin & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 167-179). London: Routledge.

Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and

applied linguistics. (3rd ed). London: Longman. Robinson, P. C. (1991). ESP today: A practitioner’s guide. New York: Prentice Hall. Robinson, P. C. Strong, G., Wittle, J. & Nobe, S. (2001). The development of EAP oral

discussion ability. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 347-359). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sadeghi, A. R. (2005). ESP methodology: a transition from the present state. Proceedings

of the First National ESP/EAP Conference. 2 (1): 21-33. Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. Snow, M. A. & Brinton, D. M. (1997). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on

integrating language and content. White Plains, NY: Longman. Tarone, E. & Yule, G. (1999). Focus on the language learner. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.