Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Graduate School of TESOL

English for Specific Purposes (ESP)

Spring 2006

Week 4 - ESP Chapters 4 and 5 & Ellis & Johnson (1994), PART TWO, pp. 43-111 - Answers

1. What are the six approaches to language that have had the largest effect on ESP? (ESP 4)

The six approaches to language that it had the largest effect on ESP are the following:

Classical or Traditional Grammar

Classical grammar refers to grammatical descriptions which were created for Greek and Latin over hundreds of years. Most of the terms that we still use to describe language were derived from classical or traditional grammar, such as subject and object and morphine. Since Greek and Latin at extensive morphological systems most of the focus in traditional grammar, and indeed in comparative grammar or what is today called typology, is on morphology. For language like English which does not have a huge amount of morphology there is not very much use for a strict application of this approach, but as was mentioned in the text is impossible to think about teaching language today without using some of the concepts and terms which were first created for classical grammar.

Structural Linguistics

Although structural linguistics has been around since the beginning of this century (it is old), many of its basic ideas are still used in foreign language teaching. The basic idea structural linguistics is that language is created from a system of generalizations and that these generalizations can be changed in the linguistic situation to create new and more novel types of utterances. Structural linguistics is where the whole idea of slot filling was developed. Linguistic units like words and sentences are made up of slots and each language has certain rules about what type of unit can fit into a particular slot. This is the basic idea behind structural linguistics and I`m sure it is also something that you are still using the new teaching of English although maybe we shouldn`t.

Transformational Grammar

Transformational grammar was the original name of the model developed by Chomsky in the late 1950s which we now call universal grammar. Rather than focusing very much on the nature of universal grammar which is extremely not useful to teach our students, we will instead focus on the idea of competence. The idea of competence, first raised by Chomsky, has been extremely influential in language teaching circles. By taking the I basic idea of competence and extending it into an idea called communicative competence teachers now have some idea of what they might actually need to teach. This is because we can possibly investigate and surmise what it is that language speakers actually need to do when speaking language.

Language Variation and Register Analysis

We have already talked about the whole idea of language variation and register analysis. The bottom line is that different people in different situations (and this most strikingly refers to different fields of endeavor, like a job) use different types of linguistic structures in a more or less patterned way. So, language varies and register (formal or informal) is one very important type of variation. Obviously, as teachers of English for specific purposes we need to know about the particular variety of language as well as the register of language used in the area that our students are going to try to use it.

Functional/Notional Grammar

The basic idea underlying functional/notional grammar is that all of language use begins first with a need. We can call this need a function and every time language is used there is an underlying function pushing its use. The idea behind this grammar is to try to organize specific elements of grammar (structure and vocabulary) according to these different functions or needs. Understanding this, it should not be at all surprising how the functional/notional approach has had a great effect in the continuing development of ESP. Should also be mentioned that functional/notional grammar led to the notional approach of language teaching which developed into the communicative approach.

Discourse Analysis

As we mentioned last week, we are going to look at discourse (in this course) as study of the way in which people structure interactions. Basically discourse analysis looks at some of the larger concerns related to how conversations are structured. Things like how to start a conversation, as well as close one, and turn taking, and changing topics. These are all extremely important elements in being able to use a language effectively and, not surprisingly, they change from one particular context to the next. Any ESP practitioner needs to be aware of the discourse norms in the particular area that they are trying to teach.

The six areas above are ranged more or less in chronological order, based on when they applied and not necessarily on how much they have brought to field the ESP. None of these, of course should be any surprise. I think we know all of them and we also know how they work. This only goes to show the ESP is more or less the same as any other endeavor in teaching language. ESP Follows the same rules, and has been subject to the same kind of developments as every other field of English language teaching. The only difference really is a ESP has a different focus, and we know that it focuses on the goals and particular needs of the learners in particular use situations. It is this focus that really makes all the difference and how ESP must be set up and conducted.

2. What has each of these brought to the ESP approach? (ESP 4)

To review these different methodologies would be to really review the history of language teaching in general. How these have been played out in the field of ESP is an interesting topic. We know that ESP as a subject unto itself has a history unto itself. We know that ESP started basically as a way of looking at and analyzing different texts in different fields. The real focus was simply on the forms the different types of language in different fields would have to hold. The first three of the different approaches mentioned above really are just form based, but in slightly different ways. The next three really show the development of ESP as we know it and as we have studied it. We know that paying attention to form simply isn`t enough. That we need some set of context and some sort of space in which the language occurs to be able to describe how the language can actually be used.

The developments in ESP have really been about movements from form to function to use and then finally as we discussed in the book earlier to the learner themselves in some cognitive theories which have really helped.

Form ----> Function------> Use-------------------> Learner

3. What are their each of their limitations? (ESP 4)

Although we follow these six basic approaches, they also have their limitations. Obviously, none of them alone are going to be able to give us the whole picture. It is true that basically, we need to put all of them together to really help us figure out what is going on in ESP and really give us an idea of how we can teach and how people learn when they are figuring out things in particular fields. And that is where this conglomeration becomes really important. There is no one system that really works. The only thing that really works is a conglomeration or mix of a whole bunch of different systems or different concerns. Again, you never really know what is going to happen in your classroom in advance or who your students are going to be or what they want to be or do and you have to figure that out very soon and often as things are constantly changing. For that reason it is really important that you know about different theories and are able to use different theories interchangeably in the classroom. And of course ESP, with its student centered goals makes this absolutely essential.

4. Why are theories of learning important for second and foreign language teachers? (ESP5)

This question might seem to simple to actually ask, or to want to ask. Of course, we all know that theories of learning are extremely important for any type of teaching, but they would seem to be even more important for language teachers and particularly second and foreign language teachers. This is because language is simply much more complicated than anything else that human beings will have ever learned. Linguistic systems are so complicated than we really have still very little idea about how they work and how they are stored and used in the brain. Our knowledge is increasing but it is still very much fragmentary. Learning is the same. There are some very general theories of learning, still a lot of contradictory theories of learning, and really were still not sure how people learn. One of the problems is that it could very well be that there is no one system for learning, or for anything for that matter. We know the brain is vast, far vaster than we had ever previously conceived. It also works then our own artificial brains computers. There need not be theories of strict economy which rule brain functions. Therefore, it is highly probable that there is no one way, or one system. How does knowing this help us? Well, what's the alternative? Between knowing and not knowing something, wouldn't you usually want to know, even if the facts that you wind up knowing are not necessarily pleasant.

The bottom line is that knowing theories of learning or being familiar with theories of learning will help us set direction for how we are going to teach. They should determine how we stage our teaching as well as what we teach. Without knowing these theories, as vague as they may be, we are really functioning blind in the classroom. In short, we need them and we need to use them, at all stages of our planning and implementation.

5. How do behaviorism and mentalism differ ? (ESP 5)

We all know that the tenets of behaviorism, as described by Pavlov and Skinner, revolve around the idea that learning happens as a result of habit formation. That is, people learn by doing something over and over again after having forced somebody else do the same thing over and over again. This theory was developed not necessarily by watching people learn from other people but by studying animals, which has actually caused the theory to be criticized by many people who are more concerned with human learning as opposed to general learning or animal learning. Critics of behaviorism would also point out that language learning is a much more complex feat than any other type of learning simply because language is the most complex system in our minds (maybe). Language learning can't just be a series of habit formed behavior. That would not work because they is simply too much variation in language. If this were true people would be coming up with their own versions of language which other people might not be able to understand.

Chomsky, as the great proponent of mentalism, would say that language learning is much too complex to be acquired simply by copying and mimicking what other people do. This would allow for way too much variation in the types of language use that people often engage in. Since speakers of the same language generally have very little difficulty understanding each other and create language that is basically very similar, Chomsky proposes the idea, and particularly for language learning, that language use and learning must be rule governed. Following this, the great contribution of mentalism is that rules determine how people learn, what they learn, and even when they learn. In order for this to happen there must be some sort of hardwiring built into the brain which guides learning. In this theory, language learning is seen as being distinct from every other type of learning. The argument for this again is due to the complexity of language as opposed to other cognitive functions. Thus, this theory is reliant upon the idea of strict modularity within the brain.

The main difference, then, between mentalism and behaviorism is in the underlying systems. In mentalism there is an underlying system, a very strict one, whereas in behaviorism learning is seen as being more general. All learning follows similar principles, and really very simple principles.

6. How do mentalism and cognitive code differ? )ESP 5)

Since we already went over mentalism in the previous question why we now take a look at cognitive code and see what that means. What cognitive code is all about is the belief that people learn by associating new information with older already set information. In this way they can make immediate sense of the new material or the new information that there being exposed to. In effect, then, learning is all about information and how it stored and integrated into memory. Recent publications, for example Jackendoff (2002) go to pains to extend and defend the view that language itself as well is stored in the memory. It seems obvious to us now but for people in the past it is not clear where words (their forms), their meanings, and their uses were stored. A lot of the research into the workings and organization of the lexicon seem to mirror the kind of studies have been done in cognitive theory and cognitive quote.

The main difference between mentalism and cognitive code, then, is based on how material is stored and organized in the brain. The mentalism seems to rely on a system of finite rules which serve to constrain what is possible in language. Cognitive code on the other hand is more expansive. It does not try to constrain, but rather shows how things are built and interpreted in the brain. Things are learned and links are created and established across groupings of similar types of phenomenon. So, in cognitive code the whole brain works the same way, including language and it is the groupings of small bits of information which makes meaning possible both in general and also in language.

7. How does the affective factor relate to all the different models of learning? (ESP 5)

Affective concerns are extremely broad and have yet to be very well classified, that is, very clearly classified. This fact, however, does not stop us from noticing the tremendous importance affective factors have across the board in all types of learning and especially in foreign language learning. Effective factors touch on every single aspect of the learning process. The main idea being that learning will only occur in so-called optimal conditions. In reality, the fact remains that people will only learn when they want to learn: when they feel like it. As teachers, we need to try to find ways and means as well as topics and practice types which will make our students want to learn. In short, we need to try to create that optimal environment. This of course is difficult because every student's degree or type of optimality varies. Traditional aspects of the affective factor include motivation, anxiety, acculturation, language ego, identity, and many others. If the optimal settings are not achieved in the classroom then learning can simply shut down not just for one student but for all students. Classrooms are kind of like nerve centers wherein diseases quickly spread. If one student falls down on learning very often this will spread to the other students. Though, as mentioned before, it is difficult to create an optimal environment that will fit everyone perfectly there are some basic things that we can do to create a more optimal environment, which will work with as opposed to against any and all affective dimensions.

One of the biggest ways that is practiced in the ESP classroom is the guarantee of success. By designing activities in which we are sure all our students will be able to do with some degree of success we are feeding the affective process. Students are happy when they are succeeding and very unhappy when failing. This might seem like an oversimplification but the simplest facts are often the most powerful ones. So, in trying to deal with affective factors always try to keep in mind the idea of guaranteeing students success.

8. How can we measure performance in business English? (EJ2)

In business English as with any ESP course how we actually go about assessing our students is probably going to be somewhat different than in a standard General English type of course. Because in ESP we are preparing people for the real world we need to actually make sure that we are having them practice actual language use and if we are going to all the trouble of setting up actual practice in the classroom, then we should probably assess that as well. This means that in business English we can not rely supposedly on pencil and paper types of tests. We may use them, but it is also true that in most of these types of pencil and paper tests measure only potential performance. For business English we are also going to have to measure actual performance. This means having students actually produce real language under certain types of conditions or in specific contexts.

In order to do this we need to set up a specific performance criteria as well as a way of scaling these criteria. At this point than what we also need to do is devise a performance checklist which will make it easier for us as a teacher to assess the student and will also make it more useful for the students themselves. The basic idea is that as a student is performing we use the checklist to show how well they did and then give the student the checklist (or copy of the checklist) so they can get a good feel for what they are doing well and maybe not so well. Luckily for us, we as Sookmyung students have the MATE. The MATE already has a specific design for both criteria and levels. As teachers all we ESP and in this case business English all we need to do is combine some of our particular goals and the specific areas that the students need to work on which we got in our initial and highly specific needs analysis (now we can really see why we need to devise a highly specified needs analysis for ESP) with specific criteria and levels for each criteria. Basically, what we are doing is taking our goals and organizing them into specific criteria and then scaling them. In this way we can see very systematically how our students are moving up the scale. It`s all good.

9. How can we gather information about our learners in business English? (EJ2)

We have already talked briefly about the idea of gathering information about learners in ESP courses, so this will probably be more review than anything else. The basic idea is that we need to combine what we know about the business world in general (such as the different roles that people in different positions and even in different types of companies play) with specific knowledge about the specific needs and roles each students must do. To the basic idea is that we need to combine the business world or companies positions with the specific needs analysis information that we have accrued from our students. Again, as we mentioned previously one of the ways we are going to have to get this general information is to go through and look at research on the language of business English. We may very well need to get this from things like business English books, but don`t rely too much on these printed resources because they may not be extremely accurate or authentic. In order to be safe about the language that you are actually getting you might need to ask a few native language speaker informants. It is important that the language you give your students as hard as authentic and this must be blended with students needs and experiences.

10. How can we develop materials in a subject as wide as business English? (EJ2)

Developing materials in business English is similar to how this might be done in any other ESP type of course. The basic idea is to develop the materials based on what you know and have found out about your learners. It is also important that you develop your materials using some sort of principles. Your materials must involve different aspects of language use as well as some idea of the difficulty which the materials might pose for the students. It seems wise at this point than to link our materials development with the assessment tool that we have generated. When our assessment tool is valid and carefully constructed as is the one which we might be able to adapt from the MATE. The task development guidelines for a performance exam like the MATE have a dual function of not only being useful for assessment but can also be used for task development were in class activities or materials development which will ultimately help people on specific tasks, the tasks that you have put into your assessment scale. All this fits together really nicely and while it might take some time to put together the assessment tool, which incidentally needs to be done with information about business English and your specific student needs as well, it will eventually not only save you time but enable you to make your class much more systematic. In the end the students will be much happier because they will be able to gauge their progress as you do.