Research Article
PDF Zotero Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study

Year 2020, Volume 13, Issue 2, 424 - 439, 17.04.2020
https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.629689

Abstract

This paper reports on both the process and findings of curriculum innovation towards a defensible EAP curriculum in Eskisehir Osmangazi University Foreign Languages Department. In addition, it illustrates the evaluation of the newly introduced innovations by the students. Brown’s (2009) framework was used for NA studies. Needs analysis studies were conducted in 2016-2017 academic year with the students and the teaching staff employed in the department. Focus group technique was used to take views and opinions of teaching staff about components of the curriculum and opinions of the students were taken through workshop technique. In 2016-2017 academic year, repeat students’ opinions regarding the curriculum in practice were taken through an open ended questionnaire. The data was analyzed by using content analysis technique. Emerging themes in the NA study are need for clarification of the program objectives, need for revision of teaching materials, need for improvement in teaching and learning practices, and need for improvement in assessment practices. Last, emerging themes in open ended questionnaire (evaluation of the NA study) are ‘materials’ and ‘assessment procedures’, and ‘overall structure of the EAP curriculum’.

References

  • Afshar, S.H., & Movassagh, H. (2016). EAP in Iran: Where does the problem lie? Where are we heading? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 132-151.
  • Benesch, S. (1996). Needs analysis and curriculum development in EAP: An example of a critical approach. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 723-738.
  • Braine, G. (2001). Twenty years of needs analysis: Reflections on a personal journey. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (eds.), Research perspectives on English for Academic Purposes (pp. 195–207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Brown, J.D. (2009). Foreign and second language needs analysis. In M.H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 269-293). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Chostelidou, D. (2010). A needs analysis approach to ESP syllabus design in Greek tertiary education: a descriptive account of students’ needs. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4507-4512.
  • Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: a multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Fox, J.D. (2009). Moderating top-down policy impact and supporting EAP curricular renewal: Exploring the potential of diagnostic assessment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 26-42.
  • Helmer, K.A. (2013). Critical English for academic purposes: Building on learner, teacher, and program strengths. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 273-287.
  • Henson, K.T. (1995). Curriculum development for education reform. New York: HarperCollins College.
  • Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: issues and directions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 1-12.
  • Karatas, H., & Fer, S. (2009). Evaluation of English curriculum at Yıldız Technical University using CIPP model. Education and Science, 34(153), 47-60.
  • Kirkgoz, Y. (2009). The challenge of developing and maintaining curriculum innovation at higher education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 73-78.
  • Kirkgoz, Y. (2008). A case study of teachers’ implementation of curriculum innovation in English language teaching in Turkish primary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1859-1875.
  • Markee, N.(1997). Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nation, I.S.P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge.
  • Ornstein, A., & Hunkins, F. (2009) Curriculum design. In Curriculum: Foundations, Principles and Issues (5th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
  • Richards, J.C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Salter-Dvorak, H. (2016). Learning to argue in EAP: Evaluating a curriculum innovation from the inside. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 19-31.
  • Schilling, J. (2006). On the pragmatics of qualitative assessment: Designing the process for content analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 28.
  • Stufflebeam, D.L. (2003) The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In: Kellaghan T., Stufflebeam D.L. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht.
  • White, R.V. (1988). The ELT Curriculum: Design, innovation and management. New York: Basil Blackwell.

Yüksek Öğretim Düzeyinde Savunulabilir Akademik Amaçlı Bir İngilizce Öğretim Programı: İhtiyaç Analizi Çalışması

Year 2020, Volume 13, Issue 2, 424 - 439, 17.04.2020
https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.629689

Abstract

Bu çalışma Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Yabancı Diller Bölümü İngilizce Hazırlık Programında program geliştirme çalışmaları kapsamında gerçekleştirilen ihtiyaç analizi çalışması sonuçlarını ve ihtiyaç analizi sonucunda yapılan yeniliklerin değerlendirilmesi için yapılan açık uçlu anket çalışmasının sonuçlarını açıklamaktadır. İhtiyaç analizi çalışması Brown (2009) modeli kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. İhtiyaç analizi çalışmaları 2016-2017 akademik yılında bölümde öğrenim gören öğrenciler ve öğretim elemanları ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öğretim elemanlarının öğretim programına ilişkin görüşleri odak grup görüşmeleri yolu ile alınırken, öğrenci görüşlerinin alınabilmesi için çalıştay tekniği kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca, ihtiyaç analizi sonucunda gerçekleştirilen yeniliklerin değerlendirilmesi için 2016-2017 akademik yılının sonunda tekrar öğrencilerine açık uçlu bir anket uygulanmıştır ve tekrar öğrencilerinin görüşleri alınmıştır. Çalışmanın verilerinin analizinde içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. İhtiyaç analizi çalışmasının sonuçları 4 tema altında sunulmuştur. Bu temalar şu biçimdedir: programın amaçlarının belirlenmesine ilişkin ihtiyaçlar, öğretim materyallerinin yeniden düzenlenmesine ilişkin ihtiyaçlar, öğrenme öğretme süreçlerinin iyileştirilmesine ilişkin ihtiyaçlar ve ölçme değerlendirme süreçlerinin iyileştirilmesine ilişkin ihtiyaçlar. Son olarak, açık uçlu anket sonuçlarına göre ortaya çıkan temalar şu biçimdedir: öğretim materyalleri, ölçme değerlendirme süreçleri ve öğretim programının genel yapısı.

References

  • Afshar, S.H., & Movassagh, H. (2016). EAP in Iran: Where does the problem lie? Where are we heading? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 132-151.
  • Benesch, S. (1996). Needs analysis and curriculum development in EAP: An example of a critical approach. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 723-738.
  • Braine, G. (2001). Twenty years of needs analysis: Reflections on a personal journey. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (eds.), Research perspectives on English for Academic Purposes (pp. 195–207). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Brown, J.D. (2009). Foreign and second language needs analysis. In M.H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp. 269-293). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Chostelidou, D. (2010). A needs analysis approach to ESP syllabus design in Greek tertiary education: a descriptive account of students’ needs. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4507-4512.
  • Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: a multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Fox, J.D. (2009). Moderating top-down policy impact and supporting EAP curricular renewal: Exploring the potential of diagnostic assessment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 26-42.
  • Helmer, K.A. (2013). Critical English for academic purposes: Building on learner, teacher, and program strengths. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 273-287.
  • Henson, K.T. (1995). Curriculum development for education reform. New York: HarperCollins College.
  • Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: issues and directions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1, 1-12.
  • Karatas, H., & Fer, S. (2009). Evaluation of English curriculum at Yıldız Technical University using CIPP model. Education and Science, 34(153), 47-60.
  • Kirkgoz, Y. (2009). The challenge of developing and maintaining curriculum innovation at higher education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 73-78.
  • Kirkgoz, Y. (2008). A case study of teachers’ implementation of curriculum innovation in English language teaching in Turkish primary education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1859-1875.
  • Markee, N.(1997). Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nation, I.S.P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge.
  • Ornstein, A., & Hunkins, F. (2009) Curriculum design. In Curriculum: Foundations, Principles and Issues (5th Ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
  • Richards, J.C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Salter-Dvorak, H. (2016). Learning to argue in EAP: Evaluating a curriculum innovation from the inside. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 19-31.
  • Schilling, J. (2006). On the pragmatics of qualitative assessment: Designing the process for content analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 28.
  • Stufflebeam, D.L. (2003) The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In: Kellaghan T., Stufflebeam D.L. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht.
  • White, R.V. (1988). The ELT Curriculum: Design, innovation and management. New York: Basil Blackwell.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Education, Scientific Disciplines
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Onur ERGÜNAY (Primary Author)
ESKISEHIR OSMANGAZI UNIVERSITY
0000-0002-1688-0458
Türkiye


Derya UYSAL
ESKİŞEHİR OSMANGAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0001-5393-5211
Türkiye

Publication Date April 17, 2020
Application Date October 5, 2019
Acceptance Date December 9, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2020, Volume 13, Issue 2

Cite

Bibtex @research article { akukeg629689, journal = {Journal of Theoretical Educational Science}, issn = {1308-1659}, eissn = {1308-1659}, address = {Eğitim Fakültesi, Eğitim 1 Binası, ANS Kampusu, 03200 / Afyonkarahisar}, publisher = {Afyon Kocatepe University}, year = {2020}, volume = {13}, pages = {424 - 439}, doi = {10.30831/akukeg.629689}, title = {Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study}, key = {cite}, author = {Ergünay, Onur and Uysal, Derya} }
APA Ergünay, O. & Uysal, D. (2020). Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study . Journal of Theoretical Educational Science , 13 (2) , 424-439 . DOI: 10.30831/akukeg.629689
MLA Ergünay, O. , Uysal, D. "Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study" . Journal of Theoretical Educational Science 13 (2020 ): 424-439 <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/akukeg/issue/53290/629689>
Chicago Ergünay, O. , Uysal, D. "Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study". Journal of Theoretical Educational Science 13 (2020 ): 424-439
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study AU - Onur Ergünay , Derya Uysal Y1 - 2020 PY - 2020 N1 - doi: 10.30831/akukeg.629689 DO - 10.30831/akukeg.629689 T2 - Journal of Theoretical Educational Science JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 424 EP - 439 VL - 13 IS - 2 SN - 1308-1659-1308-1659 M3 - doi: 10.30831/akukeg.629689 UR - https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.629689 Y2 - 2019 ER -
EndNote %0 Journal of Theoretical Educational Science Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study %A Onur Ergünay , Derya Uysal %T Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study %D 2020 %J Journal of Theoretical Educational Science %P 1308-1659-1308-1659 %V 13 %N 2 %R doi: 10.30831/akukeg.629689 %U 10.30831/akukeg.629689
ISNAD Ergünay, Onur , Uysal, Derya . "Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study". Journal of Theoretical Educational Science 13 / 2 (April 2020): 424-439 . https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.629689
AMA Ergünay O. , Uysal D. Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science. 2020; 13(2): 424-439.
Vancouver Ergünay O. , Uysal D. Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science. 2020; 13(2): 424-439.
IEEE O. Ergünay and D. Uysal , "Towards a Defensible Tertiary-level EAP Curriculum: A Needs Analysis Study", Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 424-439, Apr. 2020, doi:10.30831/akukeg.629689