TITLE

English Language Studies in SUST: Background, Current Status and Future

Prospects

Course No. Eng 525

Course Title: Report Writing and Viva Voce

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degreeof Masters of Arts in English, Shahjalal University of Science and

Technology Sylhet-3114

Instructor:

Dr. Hossain Al MamunAssociate Professor

Department of English, SUST

Prepared by:

Numan AhmadRegistration No. 2009226014

Masters 2nd SemesterDepartment of English, SUST

Shahjalal University of Science and Technology,Sylhet-3114

04 July, 2012

Table of Contents

1.Introduction………………………………………………….... 3

2.Objective of the Study………………………………………… 3

3.Review of Literature…………………………………………... 4

4.Background…………………………………………………… 6

5.The Survey……………………………………………………. 8

6.The Survey Analysis………………………………………….. 9

7.Analysis of the Results……………………………………….. 12

8.The Findings of the Survey…………………………………… 14

9.Future Prospects………………………………………………. 16

10. Conclusion……………………………………………………. 16

11. Bibliography………………………………………………….. 18

12. Appendix…………………………………………………….... 19

2

1. Introduction:

Golbalisation has become a buzzword in the era of

international relations. The process of globalization

obviously requires a common language for International

communication. For many different reasons, English has

achieved the prestige of being that lingua franca. As a

result, it has crossed national borders to reach people who

speak other languages. Statistics show that about 350 million

people speak English as a first language and another 300

million use it as a second language. It is the official or

3

semi-official language in more than 60 countries and of many

international organizations. In Bangladesh, the importance and

usage of English as a second language is rapidly growing. As a

result, each and every university in Bangladesh, whether

public or private, has included English language studies in

the curriculum. SUST is not an exception to this. English

language studies have been included in the syllabi of SUST

from the very inception of the university. Though the

department of English has been launched in 2000-2001 session,

English language is being taught here since 1991, one decade

prior to the establishment of a full-fledged department. In

this report, I have gone through the background of English

language studies in SUST, under which circumstances it has

been started; run a survey to get the present scenario of

language learning, its benefits and drawbacks; and at the end

suggested some policies for the future prospect of language

studies in SUST based on my personal observation and on the

data collected from the students and suggested what

initiatives should be taken immediately to eradicate the

drawbacks.

.2. Objective of the Study:

4

This report is divided into three parts, namely: background,

current status, and future prospects. The objective of the

study is to find out three things. These are:

i. To know the background of English language studies in

SUST; how it has been started, what is the motto of this

language courses and what are the reasons behind starting

language teaching in a Science and Technology university.

ii. To explore the current status of English language

studies and how much of the target is being achieved,

which module of language is more focused and which one is

less focused, what are the problems faced by the students

during their course of study etc. to have a clear vision

of the overall scenario of English language teaching.

iii. To find out the future prospect of English language

studies in SUST.

3. Review of Literature:

Language teaching came into its own as a profession in the

last century. Central to this phenomenon was the emergence of

the concept of “methods” of language teaching. Methodology in

language teaching has been characterized in a variety of ways.

5

A more or less classical formulation suggests that methodology

is that which links theory and practice. Now I will give a

bird’s eye view on some prominent methodologies being used in

language teaching.

Grammar-Translation Method:

The Grammar Translation (GT) Method dominated foreign language

teaching (FLT) in the 19th century and in some respects

continues to be influential in FLT up to date. Proponents of

this method believe that learning a foreign language is

achieved through the constant and fast translation of

sentences from the target language into the learner’s first

language and vice versa. Correct translations of written texts

require (a) knowledge of a vast amount of vocabulary, and (b)

knowledge of rules of grammar, which allow learners to analyse

and understand the construction of target language sentences,

thus preventing their misinterpretation.

Direct Method:

The GT method was replaced by the direct method, posited by

Charles Berlitz in late 19th century. The basic tenet of Direct

or Berlitz’s Method was that second language learning is

similar to first language learning. In this light, there

6

should be lots of oral interaction, spontaneous use of the

language, no translation, and little analysis of grammatical

rules and syntactic structures. The Direct Method enjoyed

great popularity at the end of the 19th century followed by a

little decline, but it was revived as Audio-lingual Method in

the middle of 20th century.

Audio-lingual Method:

The outbreak of World War II heightened the need for Americans

to become orally proficient in the languages of their allies

and enemies alike. The Direct Method was modified to suit the

purpose. During the 1950s it came to be known as Army Method,

and later Audio-lingual Method. The Audio-lingual Method was

based on linguistic and psychological theory and one of its

main premises was the scientific descriptive analysis of a

wide assortment of language. On the other hand, conditioning

and habit-formation models of learning put forward by

behaviouristic psychologists were marred with the pattern

practices of the Audio-lingual Method.

Situational Language Teaching:

The Situational Language Teaching (SLT) is and approach, often

termed as Oral Approach, developed by British applied

7

linguists in the 1930s to the 1960s, and which had an impact

on language courses which survive in some still being used

today. The structural view of language is the view behind the

Oral Approach and Situational Language Teaching. Speech was

viewed as the basis of language and structure as being at the

heat of speaking ability. It stresses that language must be

taught in situation in which they normally occur.

Communicative Language Teaching:

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) began in Britain in the

1960s as a replacement to the earlier SLT Method. This was

partly in response to Chomsky’s criticism of structural

theories of language and partly based on the theories of

British functional linguists, such as Firth and Halliday, as

well as American sociolinguists, such as Hymes, Gumperz, and

Labov and the writings of Austin and Searle on speech acts.

The functional view of language is the primary concern behind

CLT. The method aims at promoting real communication skill of

the learners. Students learn to use language as a means of

expression. They are able to use language as a means of

expressing values and judgements and the functions that best

meet their own communicative needs. In our country, CLT is

8

used as the method of teaching English as a second language

both in the secondary and the higher secondary level.

Other Methods:

The twentieth century has witnessed the emergence of a number

of innovative language teaching methods. Some of these are:

Natural Approach, Total Physical Response, Silent Way,

Suggestopedia, and Community Language Learning. The methods

are often called fringe methodologies, as these are not widely

accepted and only practised by selected number of teachers and

at selected institutions.

4. Background:

It was1st Falgoon of 1397 Bangla Year (February 14, 1991 A.D.).

This day marked the historical and august inauguration of the

academic activities of Shahjalal University of Science and

Technology. Prior to this, two different English language

courses were designed and incorporated in the Syllabi. The

1st course was compulsory for students of all departments while

the 2nd one was optional. These two courses were integrated

into the syllabi primordially from the understandings of the

reality that the English language is a technology by itself;

9

and this was the fruit of far-reaching cerebration of the

founding Vice Chancellor of the University Professor Dr.

Sadruddin Ahmed Chowdhury. So today’s English Department of

SUST had its glorious start as the English Language Department

17 years hence back in 1991. 

To teach English; and not to teach about English – this motto lies all

through at the back of offering language courses at SUST. The

result is that students constantly show up uttermost vehemence

to attain English language skills and this zeal of the

learners has already proved an ever proliferating one. 

Following the initiation of the prevalent semester-scheme and

the ongoing grading technique during the session 1995-1996

each English language course was bisected as ‘Theory’ and

‘Lab’. This added such an ardour to the already existing

earnestness of students that the Department had to go for

compiling a textbook called English at SUST—Book 1 for the

undergraduates so that they could use it as a fresh and

additional learning aid. Any student who did exceptionally

well in any language course was inspirited by Crest and

Certificate. It is really a matter of great complacence that

bright students have routinely been carrying ‘A+’ or ‘A’ grade

10

at repose. A huge number of youthful graduates have been

taking English Language Proficiency Testimonial from the Department and

many of them are availing opportunities of higher education

and coveted jobs home and abroad with the supplementary

assistance of these Testimonials. 

This is how one can envisage the four divergent English

language courses the English Department offers to the existent

24 other departments of the University in two consecutive

semesters of First Year Honours classes. The four courses

shoulder altogether 6 credits ranging over 8 independent class

hours.

5. The Survey:A questionnaire of 10 questions has been prepared to collect data from the students about the current status of English language studies in SUST. I have taken students from several departments of the university who are now studying from 2nd Year 1st Semester to 5th Year 2nd Semester and have successfully completed all the four language courses offered by the department of English. As the time is limited and the whole research is conducted by me alone, I have taken only two hundred (200) students as my sample of the research. But, to do so, I have chosen carefully and at random so that we can get the perspectives from as much angles as we can. The particulars of the students, their departments, and semesters are shown below in two different tables. In the first table I have shown how many participants from which department have participated in my survey and the second table shows how many of them belong to which semester.

11

Number of participants in the survey from the departments of SUST

Name of the Department Number ofParticipants

Anthropology 5Bangla 5Business Administration 15Chemical Engineering and Polymer Science

6

Chemistry 8Civil and Environmental Engineering

4

Computer Science and Engineering

10

Economics 10Electrical and Electronic Engineering

5

English 45Food Engineering and Tea Technology

4

Forestry and Environmental Science

4

Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology

4

Industrial and Production Engineering

6

Mathematics 8Petroleum and Mining Engineering

9

Physics 10Political Studies 10Public Administration 10Social Work 7Sociology 9Statistics 6Total Participant 200

Fig: 1Semester wise number of the participants

12

Semester Name Participant’s Number

2nd Year 1st Semester

20

3rd Year 1st Semester

15

4th Year 1st Semester

15

5th Year 1st Semester

10

5th Year 2nd Semester

35

Fig: 2

6. The Survey Analysis:

In this survey I have set up 10 questions for the students.

Out of these 10 questions 8 are close ended questions with

five options each. The rest of the questions are open ended

questions designed to know the participants’ opinions and

their suggestions. In the table drawn below I have shown what

the responses are from the students regarding various

questions put forward to them.

My first question to the participants was “Are you satisfied

with the language courses offered by the dept. of English?”

There were five options for them to answer, i.e. A. Yes, B.

13

No, C. Not much, D. Very much and E. Interesting. The response

of the students and their percentages are given below in the

chart.

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q.1. Are you satisfiedwith the language courses offered by the Dept. of English?

A. Yes 46 23%B. No 47 23.5%C. Not

much90 45%

D. Very much

05 2.5%

E. Interesting

12 6%

Total Participants

200

The second question to the students was in the form of a

statement viz. “The courses you have attended on English are

sufficient to develop your skill in English Language.” Here

they were supposed to respond in either A. Strongly agree, or

B. Agree, or C. Neither agree not disagree, or D. Disagree, or

E. Strongly disagree. The details of their responses are

following:

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q.2.The courses you have attended

A. Strongly agree

13 6.5%

B. Agree 37 18.5%C. Neither agree nor

47 23.5%

14

on English are sufficient to develop your skill in English Language.

disagreeD. Disagree 70 35%E. Strongly disagree

33 16.5%

Total Participants

200

The participants were asked, “Which of the following language

skills is mostly focused on your language courses?” and their

options were A. Listening, B. Speaking, C. Reading, D.

Writing, and E. All of the above. Their responses are

mentioned below in details.

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q.3.Whichof the followinglanguage skills ismostly focused on your language courses?

A. Listening 13 6.5%B. Speaking 36 18%C. Reading 18 9%D. Writing 84 42%E. All of the above

47 23.5%

Total 200

“Which of the following language skills is less focused on your language courses?” was the fourth question to the participants and their options were the same as the previous question. What they have said are described in the following table:

Question Number of Percentage

15

Options Participants

Q.4.Whichof the followinglanguage skills isless focused on your language courses?

A. Listening 38 19%B. Speaking 93 46.5%C. Reading 28 14%D. Writing 26 13%E. All of the above

15 7.5%

Total 200

The students were asked to state “What is/are the problem(s) you

face while attending the language courses?” They were supposed to

choose from the causes A. Materials are limited, B. The number of

classes offered is not sufficient, C. Lab facility is unavailable,

D. Quality teacher is not assigned and E. All of the above.

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q. 5. Whatis/are theproblem (s) you face whileattending the language courses?

A. Materials are limited

22 11%

B. The number of classes offered is notsufficient

57 28.5%

C. Lab facility is unavailable

46 23%

D. Quality teacher is notassigned

14 7%

E. All of theabove

61 30.5%

Total 200

The sixth question in the query was “Language Courses also

help a student in his/her Major courses.” The five statements

16

related to this were, A. Strongly agree, B. Agree, C. Neither

agree nor disagree, D. Disagree, E. Strongly disagree. The

number of students against each statement and its percentage

are discussed in the chart below:

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q. 6. Language Courses also helpa studentin his/her Major courses.

A. Strongly agree

45 22.5%

B. Agree 92 46%C. Neither

agree nor disagree

26 13%

D. Disagree 25 12.5%E. Strongly disagree

12 6%

Total Participants

200

The seventh question “Are you satisfied with the classroom

environment? Yes ( ), or No ( ). If No, then why?” was aimed

at learning the satisfactory level and the probable cause of

the dissatisfaction of the participants. Yes or No were the

options and if some one is not satisfied then he/she was

further asked to state the reason which were listed as A. No

audio-visual facility is available, B. Class size is not

perfect for learning, C. Sitting arrangement is not proper, D.

There is noise within and outside of the classroom, and E. All

of the above. The responses are listed below:

Question Number of Percentage

17

Options Participants

Q.7. Are you satisfiedwith the classroomenvironment? Yes (), or No ( ). If No, then why?

.

Yes 50 25%No 150 75%

A. No Audio-Visual facility is available

50 25%

B. Class size is not perfectfor learning

12 3%

C. Sitting arrangement isnot proper

14 3.5%

D. There is noise within and outside the classroom

8 2%

E. All of the above

66 33%

Total Participants

200

The last open ended question was “What is your assessment

about the achievement of the goal of the course/s (in

percentage)?” and their options were, A. 25%, B. 60%, C. Less

than 6o%, D. More than 60%, and E. Not at all. The evaluation

based on the students’ opinions are described below:

Question Options

Number of Participants

Percentage

Q.8.What is your assessment about the achievement of thegoal of the

A. 25% 45 22.5%B. 60% 44 60%C. Less

than 60%

68 34%

D. More than 60%

20 13%

E. Not at 23 7.5%

18

course/s (in percentage)?

all Total Participants

200

7. Analysis of the Result:The first question that the participants were asked was “Are

you satisfied with the language courses offered by the dept.

of English?” In response to this, 23% say they are satisfied,

where as 23.5% are not satisfied, 45% are not much satisfied,

2.5% are very much satisfied, and 6 feel the courses are

interesting to them.

While responding to the second question, “The courses you have

attended on English are sufficient to develop your skill in

English Language,” 6.5% reply that they are strongly agree,

18.5% do agree, 23.5% neither agree nor disagree, 35%

disagree, 16.5% strongly disagree with the comment.

When I put forward the question, “Which of the following

language skills is mostly focused on your language courses?”

6.5% answered listening, 18 mentioned speaking, 9% said

reading, 42% indicated writing, and 23.5% thought all of the

four skills are focused.

Previous question was followed by the question, “Which of the

following skills is less focused on your language courses?”

19

19% think listening, 46.5% speaking, 14% reading, 13% writing,

and rest of the 7.5% opined that none of the four skills is

focused properly.

Regarding the question, “What is/are the problem(s) you face

while attending the language courses?” 11% find course

materials are limited for fulfilling the demand of the

courses, 28.5% think number of the classes offered by the

respective teacher does not maintain the minimum requirement

of the system (1 credit=1 hour/week), 23% claim language lab

facility is unavailable, 7% tell that quality teacher is not

assigned as their course instructor, and 30.5% indicate all of

the aforesaid problems during their classes.

When the participants are told “Language courses also help a

student in his/her Major courses,” 22.5% strongly agree, 46%

agree, 13% neither agree nor disagree, 12.5% disagree, and 6%

strongly disagree with this opinion.

Against the query “Are you satisfied with the classroom

environment? Yes ( ), No ( ). If No, then why?” 50 out of 200

students, who comprise 25% of the total, respond that they are

satisfied with the classroom environment. Those who are not

20

satisfied with the classroom environment, mention various

causes. 25% are discontented with unavailability of audio-

visual facility, 3% think class size is not perfect because 20

to 30 students are fit to take language class together.

Another 3.5% are dissatisfied with sitting arrangement of the

classroom, 2% are irked at the noise outside the classroom and

33% mention all aforesaid reasons those affect the classroom

milieu.

The last close-ended question that follows is “What is your

assessment about the achievement of the goal of the course/s

in percentage?” 22.5% feel 25%, 22% assume 60%, 34% consider

less than 60%, 10% suppose more than 60% of the goals have

been achieved by them. The rest of the 11.5% believe the goal

has not been achieved at all.

Two questions at the end of the questionnaire were open-ended

and participants were asked to put their observation regarding

the current situations of English language studies in SUST and

give their valuable recommendations to eliminate the drawbacks

and make the scenario better.

8. The Findings of the Survey:

21

The students of Shahjalal University of Science and Technology

are not satisfied with the language courses offered to them.

Only one fourth of the students are happy with the course and

a fraction of them feel the course interesting.

The language courses offered by the department of English are

not sufficient to develop the language proficiency of the

students. Almost 75% students either disagree or strongly

disagree with the statement that the courses offered by the

dept. of English are sufficient.

All four skills of language i.e. Listening, Speaking, Reading,

and Writing are not equally focused in the courses. According

to the maximum number of the participants, it is writing which

is more focused where as speaking and listening are less

focused in the language courses. So, it is high time we

revised the syllabus and made it time-befitting.

Students feel quite a good number of problems while attending

language courses. The numbers of classes offered by the

teachers are not sufficient. Again, there is no language lab

in the department which deters the students from receiving

knowledge on all four modules of language. Inadequate course

22

materials and unskilled instructors are also two major

problems mentioned by significant number of students.

Almost all students agree that language courses help them do

better in their major field of study and that is the reason

they are more eager to join a much revised and sophisticated

language course.

Only 25% of the participants are happy with their classroom

environment where as the rest are not satisfied for several

reasons. Absence of Audio-visual facilities is the mostly

indicated cause. Some also mention the unusually large class

size where others indicate the noise both inside and outside

of the classroom.

Though the courses are aimed at giving adequate language

proficiency to the students of graduate level, they fail to do

so. Not more than 60% of the target is achieved through the

language courses offered by the dept. of English though quite

a few numbers claim that the success rate is not more than

25%. So, the target is not nearly achieved let alone be fully

achieved.

Almost all students opine that the current status of English

language courses need to be developed and upgraded and they

23

have also suggested some necessary steps to be taken

immediately to develop the scenario. Future prospect part of

this paper will be based on both their comment and

recommendation.

9. Future Prospects:

As the process of globalization is on the rise so is the

importance of learning English as a second language. That is

the reason why the future of English language studies at SUST

is so bright and prosperous. Students need to learn the

language in order to advance themselves. Besides, it also

helps them to do better in their major field of study. To make

the courses a success some initial steps are essential and

these need to be done quickly. A full fledged language lab is

a must to develop the scenario. Introducing more recent

materials including audio-visual facilities along with well

trained language instructors will definitely help the

students. Equal focus should be given on all four modules of

language. More courses and extra credits should be added in

the syllabus for language courses so that students can spend

much time and more concentration on developing language

proficiency. Not a single method of ELT is being followed to

24

acquire the motto “To teach English; and not to teach about

English” which is also one of the drawbacks. A unique method

of language teaching together with highly qualified

instructors in a fully equipped lab can provide the teaching

which will meet the demands of the students as well as time.

10. Conclusion:

From the very inception of it, the dept. of English at SUST is

doing a yeomen’s service by providing language courses to all

the students irrespective of schools and faculties. These

language courses help students not only to cope up with the

present world but also to perform better in their particular

fields of studies. However, these courses have some drawbacks.

The English courses offered by the department of English are

not sufficient to meet the students’ demand and the target

level achieved is not more than 60%. To mitigate the problems,

the first and foremost duty is to set up a full-fledged

language lab where students will receive adequate course

materials, excellent classroom environment, and exposure to

audio-visual appliances. Providing all these aforementioned

facilities along with increased attention and importance to

learning English language, the current status of English

25

language studies at SUST is ought to be developed. To achieve

the goal “To teach English; and not to teach about English”

with which English language teaching has been started, these

bold steps are necessary which not only purge the drawbacks of

the current status but also pave the way to immense success in

near future.

26

Bibliography

Barman, Dr Binoy, Zakia Sultana and Bijoy Lal Basu. ELT Theory

and Practice. Dhaka: Friends’ Book Corner. 2007. Print

Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 3rd ed.

New Jersey: Printice Hall Regents. 1994. Print

Ellis, Rod. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. 2001. Print

… Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University

Press. 1999. Print

English Raven. English Language Teaching Methodology. Web.

27.06.2012.

<http://www.englishraven.com/methodology.html>

Esljobproject.com. English Language Teaching. Web. 04.07.2012.

<http://www.esljobproject.com/esl_info/methods-

approaches.html>

27

Ted Power English Language Learning and Teaching. Approaches &

Methods in Second Language Teaching. Web. 03.07.2012.

<http://www.btinternet.com/~ted.power/teflindex.htm>

www.sust.edu. School of Social Science: Background of the Dept. of English.

Web. 20.06.2012 <http://www.sust.edu/departments/eng>

AppendixDepartment of English

Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet3114

Dear participant,

I am presently engaged in preparing a report on “English Language Studies in SUST: Background, Current Status, and Future Prospects”. This questionnaire is meant to assess the current status and future prospects of the language courses offered by the dept. of English. As your answers are importantto complete the research, you are requested to answer sincerely, honestly, and impartially. All the information willbe treated as strictly confidential and be used in research purpose only.

Thanks for your time, attention and cooperation.

28

Yours truly,Numan AhmadMasters 2nd SemesterDept. Of English, SUST

Personal InformationName of the Participant: ……………………………. Department: …………………..

Session and Semester: ………………………… Registration No. ………………

Questionnaire

1. Are you satisfied with the language courses offered by the Dept. Of English?

A. Yes B. Not C. Not much D. Very much E. Not interesting

2. The courses you have attended on English are sufficient to develop your skill in English Language.

A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Neither agree nor disagree D. Disagree

E. Strongly disagree

3. Which of the following language skills is mostly focused on your language courses?

A. Listening B. Speaking C. Reading D. Writing E. All of the above

4. Which of the following language skills is less focused onyour language courses?

A. Listening B. Speaking C. Reading D. Writing E. All of the above

29

5. What is/are the problem (s) you face while attending the language courses?

A. Materials are limited B. The number of classes offered is not sufficient C. Lab facility is unavailable D. Quality teacher is not assigned E. All of the above

6. Language Courses also help a student in his/her Major courses.

B. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Neither agree nor disagree D. Disagree

E. Strongly disagree

7. Are you satisfied with the classroom environment? Yes ( ), No ( ). If No, then why?

A. No Audio-Visual facility is availableB. Class size is not perfect for learningC. Sitting arrangement is not properD. There is noise within and outside the classroomE. All of the above

8. What is your assessment about the achievement of the goal of the course/s (in percentage)?

A. 25% B. 40% C. less than 60% D. morethan 60%

E. not at all

9. What is your opinion regarding the language courses you have attended under the

Dept. of English?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

30

10. How can we develop the scenario? Put your suggestion.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

…..………………………….

Signature of the Participant

31