New registrations are now closed for the 2009 IATEFL site. The forum content is for reference only.
EAP vs ESP
- Login to post comments
Fri, 03/13/2009 - 13:40
Dear All
How do you think can EAP be seen as ESP? I am doubting about whether Academic Purposes are not the Specific Purposes of learners.
How do you think can ESP be taught for students who are lacking study skills?
I will be very grateful for your answers as I am mainly ESP teacher, but sometimes I am involved in teaching EAP.
Thanks in advance for your answers :)
All the best.
Wed, 04/08/2009 - 18:51
#2
Hi Zira and Andrea,
I attended a symposium on Content-based Instruction which had several presentations on CLIL. It was not altogether clear to me exactly what CLIL is and how it is different from other types of conten-based instruction and I'm not really certain that I was any clearer after the symposium.
It seems that CLIL at the moment is for young learners in primary and secondary education but as these learners move through the school system and into university in countries where English is not the first language then there will be a pressure on universities to also teach though the medium of English and for langauge development to be driven by the subject.
There was a lot of discussion about how teachers can cope with CLIL. As an EAP teacher at a university, I do not think I would ever be able to deliver subjects such as maths, computer science and chemistry, but I am not the type of teacher being targeted by CLIL. It is the lecturers of maths, computer science and chemistry who will have to learn how to deliver their subjects through English (or other languages if required) and who will need to rely on teachers like me to help them, both with the language and with the teaching approaches.
I believe that there is a lot of discussion in contexts like Hong Kong about just this kind of pressure and it would be good to hear from someone with experience of that.
Olwyn
Tue, 03/17/2009 - 13:13
#3
Hi Andrea and Zira,
I think the question is about specificity. Ken Hyland wrote an article in English for Specific Purposes
Volume 21, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 385-395, called 'Specificity revisited: how far should we go now?'. His abstract started out by saying:
'ESP has become central to the teaching of English in university contexts and there can be little doubt of its success as an approach to understanding language use. This success is largely due to ESP's distinctive approach to language teaching based on identification of the specific language features, discourse practices and communicative skills of target groups, and on teaching practices that recognize the particular subject-matter needs and expertise of learners.'
He went on to argue against a move towards making EAP/ESP less specific by focusing on ‘generic’ skills and features which are transferable across different disciplines or occupations. However, I think there has to be a balance. In the ESP forum people are discussing whether a teacher needs to know the subject discipline of her students. In my view it is impossible to know in detail all the subjects (or occupations) students might be going on to. So you have to find 'generic' transferrable skills and features.
I think these skills and features consist of the ability to analyse texts in the disciplines (occupations) to understand how they communicate their ideas and purposes. This is what we can teach and we can watch as students transfer these skills to their own texts.
Perhaps CLiL is easier becasue, as I understand it, it is more related to young learners being immersed in the target language in their subject classes. Content classes at lower levels are more accessible to English teachers than subject disciplines at work or university.
Olwyn
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 04:52
#4
Hi all. I was left thinking about this distinction between ESP/ CLIL. I know CLIL refers to 11 to 18 year-olds in general, but shouldn´t this distinction -as you suggested somewhere Olwyn- be based on the mothodology used rather than on the age group? I see CLIL as including deeper immersion in the language and ESP as something more Ad hoc.
How do you all see this?
Best
Andrea
Tue, 04/21/2009 - 06:08
#5
Dear all,
Let me describe a course I've taught that I suppose could be categorised as CLIL.
The name of the course is Business Communication - a core course for Business Administration majors at a college in China where I used to teach. In principle, English is the medium of instruction at this college. Although I'm an EFL teacher, I was asked to teach this core subject to the third-year BA students. I soon realised that this course was different from other Business English courses for EFL students. Not only was the textbook written for Canadian English as a first language university students, it also had such a content-heavy syllabus - in just 15 or 16 weeks (3 hours per week) students were required to learn various different types of oral and written communications in business, ranging from writing e-mails, letters, reports, proposals, meeting agenda and minutes to telephoning, conducting meetings and oral presentations.
Therefore, I realised that the teaching approach would have to be different from a 'typical' English class. Due to the time constraint, I had to use lectures as the mode of teaching. A lot of contents and information had to be delivered via lectures, which we rarely do in EFL classes. At the same time, however, I needed to take into consideration that English is a foreign language to the students - which means part of the class time had to be spent on dealing with language issues (vocabulary and sentence structures). I also had to incorporate second language teaching techniques in class such as checking understanding frequently, allowing time for dictionary use etc.
From this experience, it seems to me that CLIL is a teaching approach somewhere in between teaching learners of English as a first and teaching learners of English as a second / foreign language; between teaching English as a subject and using English to teach a subject.
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 03:49
#6
Hi!! Yes, and it sounds very interesting, and challenging! How did the students react to this?
best
Andrea
Wed, 04/22/2009 - 18:59
#7
Greetings.
This is my first appearance here, largely because I was fully occupied looking after the YL forum, with two other moderators, I should add.
Now, as Moderator Discussions for the YLT SIG (young learners and teenagers) we are into the third day of a fielded discussion on CLIL being fielded by Keith Kelly.
It would be marvellous if any of you could join us for the the last couple of days.
You have to join the Yahoogroup to be able to do this - it costs nothing - and the quickest way to do this is to write to me at:
making sure to give as the subject: CLIL
Do, please, consider visiting us. You would be most welcome.
Dennis
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 06:50
#8
Hi Andrea,
The students' responses were ok, mainly because the class size wasn't too big and I incorporated interactive style of lecturing with PowerPoint presentations instead of the more traditional 'one-way talk' lectures. However, I noticed the students' performances depended a lot on their level of English proficiency.
Chwa
Thu, 04/23/2009 - 06:51
#9
Hi Andrea,
The students' responses were ok, mainly because the class size wasn't too big and I incorporated interactive style of lecturing with PowerPoint presentations instead of the more traditional 'one-way talk' lectures. However, I noticed the students' performances depended a lot on their level of English proficiency.
Chwa
Hi Zira. I believe your questions are wonderful! And I would add, how would you all relate EAP, ESP and CLIL?
Best
Andrea
EAP Forum Moderator