Stephen van Vlack

Sookmyung Women`s University

Graduate School of TESOL

English for Specific Purposes (ESP)

Spring 2006

Week 7 - ESP Chapters 10 and 11 & Chamot and O`Malley. (1994), pp. 4-79 - Answers

1. What is the nature of good materials? How should good materials be looked at in ESP? (ESP 10)

The nature of `good` materials? This is a very subjective question, but it doesn't have to be. Good materials are materials which meet the objectives they have been set out to do. In fact, this is a good anything when looking objectively. If the goals are bad or even evil than we can see how `good` can become a very subjective term. Aside form this, if something does not do what it has been set out to do then it's not very good, is it? So it is with materials. Good materials allow the students to figure out themselves the points that you want them to learn. They engage students and raise their interest in what they are supposed to be doing. Good materials make students want to do something and that's really important. Getting your students to do things is the essence of what triggers learning. The motivation to learn is not enough. We'll be honest, learning is generally quite boring! Nobody really wants to learn, at least not everything all the time, but people do like to have fun and enjoy themselves and if the materials allow them to do that and the learning is a side effect, then is a most welcome side effect.

2. What are the four elements in the model of materials development they offer? Is this a sound model? (ESP 10)

The four elements in the model of materials development that Hutchinson and Waters offer are input, content, language, and task. This is a little bit different than some of the other models which we might have seen basically because it is a task based model. As with any other model of language learning/instruction what this model basically starts with is input. The input can take a shape of a text and dialogue via recording, a diagram, or any other piece of communicative data. It does not necessarily have to be linguistic in nature, but if we are thinking about EAP then it might be strange to include non-linguistic input as the main input although it might do well as a starter. The input should include such things as new language items, correct models of language, and it should be interesting. What's more, the students will need to take the input and be able to do things based on what the input contains; either the content, the language (or in the CALLA some academic functions). The content focus is of course based on the different content that is in the input and is developed from there. The idea is that dealing just with language as a content is actually fairly boring and as such can be unstimulating and ultimately demotivating. But having the students focus on certain content, and by creating a content focus, we are getting them to do things authentically. The language focus is of course based on some of the language forms that are apparent in the input. It could be language forms or we can take this further and actually have them develop or work on strategies, functions, and many other things as related to the input. The task is the final stage and is where the students really get to use or develop productive strategies within the realm of a controlled area.

       The question as to whether this is really a sound model depends on how the individual components within the model each time a written up. In general, this task based model is time-tested. Nunan has been advocating this model for at least 10 years. Still, however, teachers are reluctant to integrate this model into their teaching. Its efficacy, however, has been proved time and time again. The model is, therefore, sound when implemented effectively.

3. What is the difference between predictive and evaluative and why do we need both? (ESP10)

The difference between a predictive and evaluative model are based on point of view. It predictive model is a model by which the teacher, having looked at it, can make certain predictions about what the students will be doing in the class, and also what they will be learning. It stages or ranges the goings-on in the class. An evaluate model, on the other hand, acts as a feedback device. It is through the evaluative model that the teacher can checkoff or figure out how the students are doing. The teacher can then decide what needs to be repeated based on what the students did not understand or what can be put to rest and what can you do over in the future. In reality these do not represent two different syllabus or materials types. The same set of materials can be both predictive and evaluative at the same time. It simply a matter of how the teacher looks at the materials and uses them. This relates to the ten stages.

       The 10 stages that Hutchinson and Waters suggest for developing tasks are quite interesting. What is potentially interesting is the way that they have the materials designer moving from front to back and an active front and double checking everything. This shows a thoroughness that most of us should try to follow in our materials design. It may seem a bit tedious when you actually have to go to do it, but it should help to make the materials you design better.

4. Of the eight methodological concerns mentioned in the beginning of this chapter which do you think is the most important, the least important? (ESP 11)

There are eight methodological concerns that they described in the beginning of this chapter. They are,

1. Second language learning is a developmental process.

2. Language learning is an active process.

3. Language learning is a decision-making process.

4. Language learning is not just a matter of linguistic knowledge.

5. Language learning is not the learner's first experience with language.

6. Learning is an emotional experience.

7. Language learning is to a large extent incidental.

8. Language learning is not systematic.

In reality, all of these are actually quite important. Some of them could even be combined. For example, numbers 7 and 8 would seem to be fairly similar. Likewise, numbers 2 and 3 are also quite similar. For my own part, once we have combined numbers 2 and 3, I believe them to be the most important simply because they give us the most direction. What they really tell us is that we need to try to engage students and get them to do things with language. This means that real production and practice is the most important thing. This does not mean that we should neglect any of the other concerns mentioned above, of course they are all important and they are things that we must be aware of, but they would seem to be secondary in the face of the simple concern that practice is an absolute necessity.

Looking again at the list above, we find that all of these are important to a certain extent. Having said this, it would seem that possibly No. 7 would be the least important for me. Yes, it is true that language learning is to a large extent incidental, but this is not necessarily something that we as teachers need to focus on. Rather, we should be focusing on making language learning less than incidental. That is really our goal. We need to get students to focus on their language learning by getting them to form strategies to work with the content and by having them acquire skills which are necessary both inside and outside the classroom. If we do this well then the fact that language learning is incidental is not something that should really bother us.

5. Of the three sample lessons in the chapter, which one do you think is the most effective, which one the least effective? ESP 11)

In my opinion, model lesson three is definitely the least effective of the three model lessons provided in this chapter. It simply seems that the materials author has run out of steam here. There's nothing exciting in this lesson. Students simply need to practice over and over again a rather simple and closed ended type of activity. There's little room for creativity or development. Also, the choice of the subject matter (content), while useful in the real world, is also rather mundane. It is not difficult or challenging and is certainly not interesting. I don't know if this content area warrants so much practice. The best sample lesson, in my opinion, is sample lesson 2 for the most part because it gets the students to follow a process from beginning to end and allows them to see the same process for many different people's points of view. In this way, the students truly become familiar with the task in general and functions of this particular task. There are many different types of activities in this practice and they all build towards the end result which involves an open ended creative type of task. It forms a really nice and interesting chain for the students to try to practice this. Once more, it is a task which is also tied well to the real world and hopefully reflects the needs and wants of the students.

6. Do you think it is possible to integrate all ten of the techniques mentioned in the analysis section of the chapter in everything you do?, How? (ESP 11)

In this part of the chapter they give us 10 different techniques which they claim we should try to integrate into our ESP teaching. They are;

1. Gaps,

2. Variety,

3. Prediction,

4. Enjoyment,

5. An integrated methodology,

6. Coherence,

7. Preparation,

8. Involvement,

9. Creativity,

10. Atmosphere.

While it might seem difficult if not impossible to try to integrate these into a single lesson, it should be possible to integrate all of these into a unit of teaching, for example. This needs to be our goal in ESP-driven teaching. For example, when we are trying to bring our students to do a task chain we need to try to integrate as many of these different ideas into the chain as possible. This a very important aspect of how ESP should work and is formed by the very basic idea that ESP is developed and practiced mainly with adult language learners. It is adult language learners who are very conscious of their learning processes and what actually goes on in the classroom. Therefore, we need to try to integrate as many of these different ideas into the classroom to make our adult learners happier. Of course, this does not mean that younger learners are not aware of what's going on. Certainly younger learners do know what's going on the classroom to a certain extent, but younger learners do lack the sophistication of many different kinds of strategies which adult learners should have, at least if they are good learners.

7. What is the CALLA model and how is it used?

We are looking at CALLA in this course, because it was borne out of the same frustration as ESP in general. This first frustration generally revolves around the readily apparent inefficiency of general English instruction. The authors of CALLA, Uhl and O`Malley, come to a similar realization as ESP practitioners that general English simply does not take the right path to language instruction, and particularly for ESL students. We need to acknowledge that their limitation of the program to ESL students is extremely old-fashioned type of concept. Read knowledge its usefulness in an ESL context, but are going to extend this to ESL, based on changing world linguistic scenarios. The problem with the EFL or English and general is that students are expected, even in an EFL situation, upon reaching a certain age or status in society, need to actually be able to function in this language: English. This is probably not true for many the other foreign languages that students will learn. For our purposes we are going to focus on the idea of trying to get students to either transfer their academic skills or to develop them simultaneously in Korean and English, additionally (maybe even principally) through the medium of English. CALLA works well for these initiatives. CALLA is also particularly interesting for us because it has a different historical development then ESP.

       Unlike ESP, which started to look at very specific types of content, CALLA began by looking at better ways of getting regular students to learn. CALLA was not looking at specialized uses so much as just more efficient ways of making general English work. Unlike ESP, again, the focus in CALLA is not on adults but on schoolchildren or university students. The first realization of the authors came to was that successful learners implement learning strategies and the best ones implement a wide variety of learning strategies and at the right occasion, or in the right circumstances. They therefore came to the simple conclusion that teachers need to start to actually teach their students learning strategies. This realization matches nicely with what we`ve been talking about in ESP and the general idea that the learners themselves control their own learning. Now we have a nice simple formalization for this observation. Another important realization which Uhl and O`Malley stumbled across was the basic idea of content. This of course also relates to what we`ve been talking about in ESP. Meaning as the basis of language and as such the input that learners get needs to be meaningful. Content is an obvious way of injecting meaning into the input we provide our students. From the content, as a third major realization, particular academic language skills can be developed.

       Looking at these three basic realizations we can see how CALLA is going to work as a bridge for us in this course linking ESP/EAP and Content-Based Instruction (CBI). CALLA seems to have one foot on either side. CALLA seemed to fit nicely into EAP in that its focus is on trying to get students to develop academic skills, similar to what we`ve been talking about already. CALLA also implement certain elements of CBI in that content itself is an extremely important element of CALLA. In this way, CALLA presents a good launching point for our movement into CBI.

8. How does CALLA deal with the issue of content?

CALLA advocates approaching the issue of content by breaking different types of contents into groups based in large part on the amount of contextualization within the group. Based then on the degree of contextualization students are expected to deal with different types of content in a specific sequence, which is shown below.

Science

Math

(Geography)

Social Studies

Language Arts (literary reading and composition)

       There are two basic reasons for breaking content areas down and sequencing them. The first thing to realize is that the purpose of content is to give students not only certain knowledge but is also to provide impetus for learning how to do things, that is developing strategies for learning. Different types of content not only relate differently to the level of contextualization as mentioned above, but they also contain different types of declarative as well as procedural knowledge-based operations. With each different content area we are trying to get our students to use different procedures and it is from this use of procedures that declarative knowledge is also used. Content allows us to not only first to encode certain declarative knowledge, but also allows us to practice certain procedures which reinforced that declarative knowledge. Thus, in order to deal with content students are going to need to develop learning strategies, and different learning strategies will probably be related to different content. CALLA is content driven and this means that all are other concerns are developed first and foremost from the content. In CALLA, instructors don`t choose content based on strategy goals but rather the other way around. This is based on the idea that content is generally more motivating than simple language facts.

       One tricky area related to content for us either in Korea is how we are actually going to match our content to the content of the curriculum. We obviously don’t have an English curriculum so we are going to have to match our content teaching with the general curriculum, which is conducted entirely in Korean. This is both an advantage and the disadvantage. Is an advantage in that we have an immediacy effect. We can try to link what we are teaching in English class with what students have recently learned in some of their other classes, thus forming a stronger link. At the same time it can be a disadvantage because obviously the things learned in Korean will be stored in Korean and it might be hard to jump from Korean to English, particularly if the English level is somewhat low and were starting this first time with students lacking any kind of experience in content-based instruction for English. There is one simple way of overcoming any potential problems here.

       When dealing with content is important to realize that we need to deal not with all the content that the students are getting in their Korean classes, but rather we need to pick and choose very specific bits of content and work in great detail and elaboration with those bits. We are not trying to reteach everything they have learned in Korean through English, rather we are trying to have them develop skills in English and content is the best way of doing this.

9. How does CALLA view the concept of academic language?

In CALLA, the idea of academic language is that it is more formal certainly, but that it is underlined by certain cognitive functions which make the language possible. We therefore need to try to think about some of the different functions which we will use in our academic language and how this relates back to thinking processes. In this model, following cognitive models of language and language learning in general, language and thought are believed to be connected. Thoughts aren`t merely coded into language. The language we use helps us to organize our thoughts. This is an important underlying foundation in the idea of academic language and the functions which they mention on page 42. By teaching these functions through academic language we are actually teach in our students how to think in more formal academic type of ways. These functions as well can be linked to the development of problem-solving skills.

       One potential problem which we may face an our Korean setting is that our students might not have very much social language in English. It should be clear that academic language in the functions of academic language are we based on social language and social language functions. They are not totally separate, but rather academic language is built upon social language. Based on this observation we need to think about how possible it will be for us to develop academic language with our students without first having them develop some, at least, social language.

10. How does CALLA endeavor to teach learning strategies?

In the CALLA model, learning strategies should be taught overtly. Students should be aware of the strategies they are using or could be using in the process of doing tasks and th only way of ensuring such awareness is if they are able to positively identify different strategies. Like everything else, however, this does not mean learning these strategies through docontextualized practice. The strategies which are being taught need to be simultaneously practiced in context as determined by the materials themselves.

       In the CALLA model, they advocate moving through five different stages in the teaching of learning strategies. These stages are easily defined as a move from more dependent to independent activities.