English for Specific Purposes: A Study Investigating the Mismatch between the “Cutting Edge” Course Book and the Needs of Prince Sultan Air Base Students

Abstract

Needs analysis is generally believed to be important in an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) context because it enables practitioners and material writers to find out about their learners' needs. Thus, the main research question focuses on the perceived English language needs of the learners at Prince Sultan Air Base (PSAB), and the study involves an investigation into the mismatch between the Cutting Edge course book and the needs of PSAB students. A total of 70 students from different technical sections at Prince Sultan Air Base (PSAB), Saudi Arabia participated in the study. Two types of data collection methods were used in this study: quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (interviews). The results obtained reveal that the current course book being used at PSAB does not meet their needs because the activities provided are not relevant to the specific context of their field, which is mainly military and aviation. Finding and adapting a textbook that is clearly linked to these students' needs and to the course objectives is suggested as one possible solution. In the context of PSAB, data from the interviews and surveys shows the need to assess the content of the course book in relation to the needs of the learners. It also indicates the strong demand of the students for supplementary materials that provide linguistic input to match their needs. Finally, offering supplementary materials and content-based instructions for those students would help to bridge the gap between language training and practical performance needs in real situations.

Professional communication competence in English for occupational purposes (EOP) courses: A systematic literature review and proposal of a framework

“…From the analysis conducted, the studies were done in various contexts, including maritime (Ahmmed et al, 2020;Alibakhshi & Labbafi, 2021), engineering (Adnan, 2019;Baklazhenko, 2018;Gözüyeşil, 2014;Masduki & Zakaria, 2020;Panyawong-Ngam et al, 2015;Spence & Liu, 2013), medicine (Arumugam & Kaur, 2011), mechatronics (Ranasuriya & Herath, 2020), pest control (Hee & Zainal, 2018), human resource (Moslehifar & Ibrahim, 2012), information technology (Fareen, 2018), military and/or aviation (Alshabeb et al, 2017;Sari & Sari, 2020), architecture (Palea et al, 2012) and a combination of multiple industries (Al-Buainain, 2011).…”

“…The figure below shows the types of research methods that have been conducted to identify the English communication needs of the workplace. A number of studies examined the needs, wants and lacks of language using the model of Hutchinson and Waters (1987) (Arumugam & Kaur, 2011;Liu et al, 2011;Sari & Sari, 2020) as well as Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) (Alshabeb et al, 2017;Arumugam & Kaur, 2011;Hee & Zainal, 2018). However, it should be noted also that the majority of the research analysed did not even mention a guiding needs analysis method in their report.…”

“…In examining the individual skills required, many claim that the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) are equally important (Adnan, 2019;Alshabeb et al, 2017;Arumugam & Kaur, 2011;Ranasuriya & Herath, 2020). Others reported the perception that productive skills (speaking and writing) are the most essential for business communication (Baklazhenko, 2018;Fareen, 2018;Singh & Raja Harun, 2020).…”

“…Writing emails (Adnan, 2019;Ahmmed et al, 2020;Chan, 2014;Fareen, 2018;Hee & Zainal, 2018;Masduki & Zakaria, 2020;Ranasuriya & Herath, 2020;Spence & Liu, 2013;Thomas et al, 2016) Writing reports (Ahmmed et al, 2020;Alshabeb et al, 2017;Chan, 2014;Fareen, 2018;Masduki & Zakaria, 2020;Singh & Raja Harun, 2020;Spence & Liu, 2013) Writing business letters (Fareen, 2018;Spence & Liu, 2013) Writing proposals (Spence & Liu, 2013;Thomas et al, 2016) Writing memos (Alshabeb et al, 2017;Ranasuriya & Herath, 2020;Spence & Liu, 2013) Preparing presentation slides (Spence & Liu, 2013;Thomas et al, 2016) One study that examined the competence level required for writing tasks was conducted by Attan et al (2013), who provided written scripts to industry practitioners to obtain their feedback regarding the written quality of the scripts. Based on a scale rating of '1 = Extremely Limited Writer' to '6 = Effective Writer', the study found that the respondents believed a '3 = Functional Writer' could satisfactorily meet the workplace requirements if given extra assistance and time to learn in the workplace.…”

“…In terms of challenges in using the English language, studies have found that graduates face challenges in sustaining conversations (Alshabeb et al, 2017;Arumugam & Kaur, 2011), comprehending and answering questions (Arumugam & Kaur, 2011), giving instructions (Arumugam & Kaur, 2011), organising ideas (Moslehifar & Ibrahim, 2012), explaining logically (Moslehifar & Ibrahim, 2012) and paraphrasing (Moslehifar & Ibrahim, 2012). Some studies also found that respondents feel a lack of vocabulary is a challenge (Gözüyeşil, 2014) especially for spoken language (Adnan, 2019;Alshabeb et al, 2017;Sari & Sari, 2020), and some reported spelling mistakes (Fareen, 2018), inaccurate grammar use (Sari & Sari, 2020) and pronunciation issues (Fareen, 2018;Sari & Sari, 2020) as issues to be solved. Interestingly, a study by Chan (2014) also found writing negative messages to be a particularly challenging task for written communication.…”