Academic English is No One’s Mother Tongue: Graduate and Undergraduate Students’ Academic English Language-learning Needs from Students’ and Instructors’ Perspectives
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v1i2.67Keywords:
needs analysis, English for Academic Purposes, English as a first language, English as an additional language, graduate and undergraduate studentsAbstract
A research project designed to assess English-as-first-language (EL1) and English-as-an-additional-language (EAL) undergraduate and graduate students’ academic language-learning needs in the context of an academic language-support unit was conducted. This paper reports findings pertaining to 370 EL1 students and 88 instructors at the graduate and undergraduate levels. These participants responded to questionnaires, which requested them to rate the importance of academic language skills, to assess their own or their students’ skill status, and to respond to open-ended questions regarding their own or their students’ academic communication challenges. In addition to reporting EL1 students’ perceived needs and assessments of their skills, a comparison of findings between EL1 and EAL contexts is presented. Findings point to a match between instructors and students at both the graduate and undergraduate levels in their perceptions of important academic language skills, but a great divergence in their assessments of students’ competence in those skills. These findings indicate a need to re-examine the divide often made in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) programmes regarding divergent needs of EAL versus EL1 learners as well as to determine whether the convergence of their needs can be considered when planning EAP courses or workshops, especially during challenging economic times, when priorities must be set in response to the rise of international EAL student enrolment in English-speaking countries.
References
Allen, J. (2004). The impact of student learning outcomes assessment on technical and professional communication programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 13(1), 93-108.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15427625TCQ1301_9
Alderson, C. (1992). Validating questionnaires. Centre for Research in Language Education, Working paper 15. Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University.
Beaufort, A. (2007). College writing and beyond. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
Behrens, L. (1978). Writing, reading, and the rest of the faculty: a survey. English Journal, 67(6), 54-60.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/815872
Belcher, D. D. (2006). English for specific purposes: teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study, and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 133-156.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40264514
Berwick, R. (1989). Needs assessment in language programming. In R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 48-62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524520.006
Block, D. (1998). Exploring interpretations of questionnaire items. System, 26(3), 403-425.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(98)00022-0
Bloom, A. (1987). Closing of the American mind. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Bridgeman, B., & Carlson, S. B. (1983). A survey of academic writing tasks required of graduate and undergraduate foreign students (TOEFL Research Rep. No. 15). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Bridgeman, B., & Carlson, S. (1984). Survey of academic writing tasks. Written Communication, 1, 247-280.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741088384001002004
Brindley, G. (1989). The role of needs analysis in adult ESL programme design. In R.K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 63-78). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524520.007
Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Clark, I. L., & Hernandez, A. (2011). Genre awareness, academic argument, and transferability. The WAC Journal, 22, 65-78.
Cowles, M. A. (1998). Needs analysis in program development. In T. B. Fryer and G. Guntermann (Eds.), Spanish and Portuguese for business and the professions (pp. 23-38). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of psychological testing (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Deutch, Y. (2003). Needs analysis for academic legal English courses in Israel: A model of setting priorities. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(2), 125-146.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00013-4
Devitt, A. (2004). Writing genres. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Eblen, C. (1983). Writing across curriculum: A survey of a university faculty’s views and classroom practice. Research on the Teaching of English, 17, 343-349.
Ellis, R. (2010). Editorial. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 351-353.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375361
Elisha-Primo, I., Sandler, S., Goldfrad, K., Ferenz, O., & Perpignan, H. (2010). Listening to students’ voices: A curriculum renewal project for an EFL graduate academic program, System, 38(3), 457-466.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.02.002
Eslami, Z. R. (2010). Teachers’ voice vs. students’ voice: A needs analysis approach to English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in Iran. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 3-11.
Evans, S., & Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3-17.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005
Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (Eds.), (2001). Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524766
Friedlander, A. (1990). Composing in English: Effects of a first language on writing in English as a second language. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 109-125). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524551.012
Glisan, E. (1987). Beginning Spanish students: A survey of attitudes at the University of Pittsburgh. Hispania, 70(2), 381-394.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/343382
Ginther, A., & Grant, L. (1996). A review of the academic needs of native English-speaking college students in the United States (TOEFL Monograph Series Report No. 1). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Graves, K. (2001). A framework of course development processes. In D.R. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English language teaching: A reader (pp. 178-196). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hale, G., Taylor, C., Bridgeman, B., Carson, J., Kroll, B., & Kantor, R. (1996). A study of writing tasks assigned in academic degree programs (TOEFL Research Report No. 54). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (2001). English for academic purposes. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 126-130). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Harris, M. J. (2006). Three steps to teaching abstract and critique writing. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 136-146.
Horowitz, D. (1986). What professors actually require: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 445-462.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586294
Horwitz, E. K. (1987). Student beliefs about language learning. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 119-129). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Huang, L.-S. (2010). Seeing eye to eye? The academic writing needs of graduate and undergraduate students from students’ and instructors’ perspectives. Language Teaching Research, 14(4), 517-539.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168810375372
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733031
Hyland, K. (1997). Is EAP necessary? A survey of Hong Kong undergraduates. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 7, 77-99.
Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP issues and directions [Special issue]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 1-12.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00002-4
Ismail, S. A. A. (2011). Exploring students’ perceptions of ESL writing. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 73-83.
Jarratt, S. C., Mack, K., Sartor, A., & Watson, S. E. (2009). Pedagogical memory: Writing, mapping, translating. Writing Program Administration, 33(1-2), 46-73.
Jenkins, S., Jordan, M. K., & Weiland, P. O. (1993). The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices. English for Specific Purposes, 12(1), 51-67.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(93)90027-L
Johns, A. M., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1991). English for specific purposes: International in scope, specific in purpose. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 297-314.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587465
Jordan, R. R. (1997/2005). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733062
Knowles, M. (1994). Self-directed curriculum renewal: A process analysis in one university French program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Lape, N. (2012). The worth of the writing center: Numbers, value, culture and the rhetoric of budget proposals. Praxis: A Writing Center Journal, 10(1). Retrieved from: http://praxis.uwc.utexas.edu/index.php/praxis/article/view/91/html
Leki, I. (2001). Hearing voices: L2 students’ experiences in L2 writing courses. In T. Silva & P. K., Matsuda. (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 17-28). London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T. (2008). A synthesis of research on second language writing in English. New York, NY: Routledge.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1994). Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-101.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587199
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 39-69.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587974
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1-55.
Littlewood, W., & Liu, N. F. (1996). Hong Kong students and their English. Hong Kong, PRC: Macmillan.
Liu, J.-Y., Chang, Y.-J., Yang, F.-Y., & Sun, Y.-C. (2011). Is what I need what I want? Reconceptualising college students’ needs in English courses for general and specific/academic purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 271-280.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.09.002
Long, M. H. (2005). Methodological issues in learner needs analysis. In M. H. Long (Ed.), Second language needs analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667299
Morell, V. W., Sharp, P. C., & Crandall, S. J. (2002). Creating student awareness to improve cultural competence: Creating the critical incident. Medical Teacher, 24(5), 532-534.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0142159021000012577
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. London: Cambridge University Press
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S., (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching: a description and analysis. Cambridge Teaching Library.
Richterich, R. (Ed.). (1983). Case studies in identifying language needs. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Rosenfeld, M., Leung, S., & Oltman, P. (2001). The reading, writing, speaking, and listening tasks important for academic success at the undergraduate and graduate levels. TOEFL Monograph 21. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Savignon, S. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Schaffer, B., & Riordan, C. M. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best practices approach, Organizational Research Methods, 6(2), 169-215.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094428103251542
Sherman, J. (1992). Your own thoughts in your own words. ELT Journal, 46(2), 190-198.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/46.2.190
Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 657-677.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587400
Spratt, M. (1999). How good are we at knowing what learners like? System, 27(2), 141-155.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00013-5
Swales, J., & Feak, C. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Thorp, D. (1991). Confused encounters: Differing expectations in the EAP classroom. ELT Journal, 45(2), 108-118.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/45.2.108
Tollefson, J. (1991), Planning language, planning inequality. London: Longman
Waters, A., & Vilches, M. (2001). Implementing ELT innovations: A needs analysis framework. ELT Journal, 55(2), 133-141.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/55.2.133
Wang, M., & Bakken, L. L. (2004). An academic writing needs assessment of English-as-a-second-language clinical investigators. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 24(3), 181-189.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/chp.1340240309
West, R. (1994). Needs analysis in language teaching. Language Teaching, 27(1), 1–19.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800007527
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Zhu, W., & Flaitz, J. (2005). Using focus group methodology to understand international students’ academic language needs: A comparison of perspectives. TESL-EJ, 8(4). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej32/a3.html
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
