Teach English in Jinmiaopu Zhen - Jincheng Shi

From the early 1960’s, English for Specific Purpose (ESP) has grown to become one of the most prominent areas of EFL teaching today. In fact, there are now several well-established international journals dedicated specifically to ESP discussions. Since ESP has had a relatively long time to mature, we would expect the ESP community to have a clear idea about what ESP means. Strangely, however, this does not seem to be the case. ESP is still a field in which new venues and perspectives are unfolding. In fact, English for Specific Purpose (ESP) is a relatively new area in China and Taiwan. Traditionally, teachers defined themselves as either language teachers or content teachers. ESP requires both content and language in a course and will soon be a requirement of university English teachers in the future. Therefore, it is important to address the issues that surround ESP and how it will affect the future of teachers. The first question that must be addressed is, how is English for Specific Purposes (ESP) different from English as a Second Language (ESL)? The most important difference lies in the learners and their purposes for learning. “ESP concentrates more on language in context than on teaching grammar and language structures. The ESP focal point is that English is not taught as a subject separated from the students’ real world; instead, it is integrated into a subject matter area important to the learners” (Fiorito, 2019). Strevens (1988) gives the definition of ESP by identifying its absolute and variable characteristics: I. Absolute characteristics. ESP consists of English language teaching which is: a. Designed to meet the specific needs of the learner b. Related in content (i.e. themes and topics) to particular disciplines, occupations and activities c. Centers on the language appropriate to those specific activities in terms of grammar, lexis, register, study skills, discourse and genre II. Variable characteristics. ESP may be, but is not necessarily a. Restricted as to the language skills to be learned (e.g. reading only) b. Not taught according to any pre-ordained methodology (Strevens, 1988) c. Designed for intermediate or advanced adult learners d. Assumes the learner has some basic knowledge of the language If we agree to this definition, we can begin to see how broad ESP really is. In fact, one may ask ‘What is the difference between ESP and a General English approach?’ Hutchinson answers this quite simply, “in theory nothing, in practice a great deal” (Hutchinson & Waters, 2006). Hutchinson and Waters theorize that “ESP is an approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to content and method are based on the learner’s reason for learning” (Hutchinson & Waters, 2006, p. 19). If we think about it, people start learning any second language when they have a special purpose for using it. This connection of purposes, conditions and content of training are essential to create effective strategies of teaching English for Specific Purposes. In this case, students have a particular purpose and focus for learning the language as they study English “not only to understand everyday speech but also use the language in a special context for career opportunities” (Voyakina & Korolyova, 2014). Thus, “The focus is no longer on grammar, learning from rote but using language as a means to connect with others around the world. What is more, the purpose of learning English has changed and evolved from cultural to purpose of international communication” (Jaglowska, 2012). Thus, though General English courses exist to provide students with a foundation in the English language, ESP courses are tailored to the specific English-speaking needs of students in their individual fields. This idea is great in theory and in purpose, but it also creates challenges for both the teacher and the student requiring a new teaching paradigm, new teaching methods, and a change in the current curriculum standards. Such a need is described by Hutchinson and Waters (1987), who stated that the “great majority of ESP teachers have not been trained in ESP teaching. They need, therefore, to orientate themselves to a new environment” (Hutchinson & Waters, 2006). The problem facing most university professors is that they have only been trained in one area – English, Business, Medicine, Engineering, etc. Teaching ESP requires that teachers should be able to combine professional knowledge in addition to a good command of English. “As English teachers are usually only experts in English, this is a great challenge for them” (Lin, 2018). The ESP ideal professor would be a, “combined needs assessor, specialized syllabus instructor, authentic materials developer, and content-knowledgeable instructor, capable of coping with a revolving door of content areas relevant to learners’ communities” (Belcher, 2006). This is more than a daunting task for an ESP instructor. Many language teachers may find the technical content areas of ESP learners such as chemical engineers, medical professionals, or air traffic controllers unfamiliar, uninteresting, and even intimidating. Abbott (1983) no doubt spoke for many when wondering in how many content areas, realistically speaking, any instructor could acquire even a “layman’s outline knowledge” (Abbott, 1983). How much knowledge is enough for ESP instructors is still very much an open question. Recent debates on ESP have focused on “issues related to needs analysis and authenticity – the two most important aspects of ESP” (Tsou, 2009). The needs analysis, based on a questionnaire, helps “identify what learners will be required to do with the foreign language in the target situation and how learners might best master the target language during the period of training” (Tsou, 2009). This requires the teacher to conduct a needs analysis of their students and then build their course curriculum around those needs. This presents three issues. One, it requires the teacher to “develop the course after analyzing learners’ needs” (Chalikandy, 2013). A second potential issue of relying exclusively on data from learners via questionnaires, is that the questionnaires “do not provide a comprehensive view of the learners’ needs because the learners do not have related work experience and they do not know how English functions within a specific discipline” (Hsiao-I, 2013). A third issue with teaching ESP for a specific discipline, (for example the culinary industry), is that the students may not end up getting a job in that field and go into another line of work, such as tourism or working in an office or hotel. This makes designing curriculum specifically to meet the needs of the students quite a challenge for teachers. The challenge facing ESP students in China and Taiwan is that the students coming out of high school currently have “poor speaking skills, limited vocabulary, poor writing, and poor listening comprehension” (Hwang, 2010). While English is included in the national curriculum as a compulsory subject in school, English is not an official language in China. This means that “English is a foreign language in China instead of an additional language” (Lin, 2018). Thus, students do not live in a place where the use of English is indispensable. Most of the children are not surrounded by the target language, are only exposed at school, and have no means of practicing it. Therefore, the need to use it for interaction with others is non-existent. “A survey shows that 82.5% of the Chinese university students are unable to use English effectively in their own field even though they have passed the required English standard tests” (Lin, 2018). This creates a challenge for ESP students as they don’t have the language skills required for them to adapt to the rigor of an ESP course. “Many students find the English level too demanding” (Tsou, 2009). An additional challenge facing students in both China and Taiwan is that the educational system is still focused on memorization, with the emphasis on the examination, and not on comprehension or critical thinking skills. Recent studies show there is a gap between the workplace and classroom resources. This means that there is also a gap between the target need and learning needs of students in college or university ESP programs. The gap has resulted in “negative effects such as employer unsatisfactory impressions of current graduate English performance” (Hsiao-I, 2013). In 2015, the Vietnam Higher Education Department conducted a survey of Vietnamese students and found that 50.2% of graduates do not meet the English requirement of employers, with the average score of first-year students reaching only 220-245 points of the 450-500 minimum TOEIC scores required by employers. (Hoa & Mai, 2016) Given these issues and the need for students’ to be proficient at English in the real world, what aspects of English are the most important for ESP instructors to teach? Jaglowska suggests that task-based learning, where students are to solve and produce characteristic tasks for true living standards, is the next example of new trends. (Jaglowska, 2012). Studies show that employers state, “email writing, telephone conversations, and internet searches in English are three important skills within technological development” (Hsiao-I, 2013). In any ESP class, tasks should center around reading authentic texts, company documents, and industry specific journals such as newspapers and magazines; listening and understanding instructions, supervisors’ orders, explanations, descriptions, and discussions between customers; and writing short notes, emails, memos and company communication. Speaking tasks should include dialogue between professionals, carrying on daily conversations, negotiating with team members, banking up professional vocabulary, and dealing with difficult situations or complaints when they meet customers. “Answering the phone is crucial, too, because face-to-face interaction differs significantly from phone conversation” (Jaglowska, 2012). This can be done via television and radio programs, YouTube content, and authentic materials which introduce the student to the contemporary world in which he lives, “which is important in arousing students’ interest in the learning process” (Jaglowska, 2012). I will be teaching ESP this coming Fall at National Chi Nan University, so this subject, and how to teach it, is of primary concern. In doing the research for this paper, I discovered that ESP is significant to all of Europe, Asia, China, and Taiwan. “In order to sustain competitive excellence in a globalized world, a curriculum paradigm shift towards teaching ESP is exerting a powerful influence on English programs at the university level. As a result, ESP has become a trend and a reality, particularly in the Asian educational context” (Chen, 2011). Chen (2011) suggests that there is a crisis of ESP pedagogy in Taiwan, that the current teaching methods are no longer relevant, and that a new educational paradigm must be accepted in order for Taiwan to move forward. Cai (2010) suggests that “ESP is much needed by college students and is the future orientation for Chinese college English teaching” (Cai, 2010). In the 21st century, “the focus in language education is no longer on grammar and memorization, but on using language and cultural knowledge as a means to communicate with others around the world. This requires an individualized learner-centered approach” (Jaglowska, 2012). In conclusion, even though ESP has been around since the 1960’s, it’s value is just beginning to be recognized by universities and colleges in Asia and around the world. In order to be a competent communicator in today’s world, it is important that a paradigm shift take place in our approach to teaching ESP. As English becomes the global language of choice, ESP courses will be more in demand and will affect the future of teaching as well as student learning, requiring new teaching methods and a change in the current curriculum standards. Works Cited Abbott, G. (1983). Training teachers of EST: Avoiding orthodoxy. ESP Journal, 2, 33-36. Belcher, D. (2006, March). 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. Cai, J. (2010, June). Implications of Taiwan's ESP for the Mainland's College English Reform. Retrieved from www.cnki.com.cn: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFCTOTAL-WYWJ201006007.htm Chalikandy, M. A. (2013). A Comprehensive Method for Teaching English for Specific Purpose. Arab World English Journal, 4(4), 310-322. Chen, Y.-H. (2011, June 1). The Institutional Turn and the Crisis of ESP Pedagogy in Taiwan. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 3(1), 17-30. Fiorito, L. (2019, January 25). Teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Retrieved from Usingenglish.com: www.usingenglish.com/articles/teaching-english-for-specific-purposes-esp.html Hoa, N. T., & Mai, P. T. (2016). Difficulties in Teaching English for Specific Purposes: Empirical Study at Vietnam Universities. High Education Studies, 6(2), 154-161. Retrieved from www.ccsenet.org/hes Hsiao-I, H. (2013, April ). A Needs Analysis of Culinary Arts Majors' ESP Learning in Taiwan's Context. Asian ESP Journal, 9(3), 1-30. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (2006). English for Specific Purposes: A leaner-centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hwang, Y. (2010, April). A Study of Medical Students' Linguistic Needs in Taiwan. The Asian ESP Journal, 6(1), 35-58. Jaglowska, M. (2012, May). Trends in Teaching and Challenges on an Example of Specific Language for Gastronomy Industry. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 2(2), 137-143. Kassim, H., & Ali, F. (2010). English communicative events and skills needed at the workplace: Feedback from the industry. English for Specific Purposes, 29, 168-182. Lin, F. (2018). Exploring the Influence of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) Curriculum on Chinese Graduates' Career. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 7375. Retrieved from https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/7375 Sargsyan, C. (n.d.). Difficulties of Teaching English for Specific Purposes. Retrieved from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/blogs/editorrachael/difficulties-teaching-english-specific-purposes. Strevens, P. (1988). In ESP: State of the Art. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Centre. Tsou, W. (2009). Need-based Curriculum Development: A case study of NCKU's ESP program. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 1(1), 77-95. Voyakina, E., & Korolyova, L. (2014). To the Problem of Teaching Business English as English for Specific Purposes in Higher Educational Institutions. 47-55.