AN EVALUATION OF ESP COURSE DESIGN FOR BIOLOGY STUDENTS.
ABSTRACT
Lubis, Baby Arlita. An Evaluation of ESP Course Design for Biology Students.
A nesis: English Applied Linguistics Study Program Postgraduate School.
State University ofMedan. 2009
This study was intended to evaluate ESP course design for Biology students whether
the planning and the implementation of it match the theoretical requirements or not.
The data were collected from the interview with three lecturers from Biology
Department and six Biology students from Academic year 200712008 at State
University of Medan and also documentary technique. From the data analysis it was
found that the planning and the implementation of ESP course design for Biology
students did not fulfill the whole requirements in designing an ESP course design
because the lecturers as course designers used a skill-centered approach in
interpreting the data which came from the needs analysis and reviewed the theoretical
models of learning. They did not use a learning-centered approach which should be
used in designing an ESP course. The writer also found that the right lecturer for ESP
course must be a lecturer from the department itself because they master the
knowledge deeply.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................."".......................................
ABSTRACT·············································----·············································
TABLE OF CONTENTS •....•...••.•....•••.•.•••_............................................
iii
iv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................
vii
LIST OF FIGU.RES ···································-·-...··-············································
LIST OF APPENDICES ...............................................................................
viii
ix
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study.............................................
1.2 The Problems of the Study.................................................
3
1.3 The Objectives of the Study...............................................
4
1.4 The Scope of the Study ......................................................
4
1.5 The Significance of the Study............................................
5
CHAPTER II: .REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Evaluation...........................................................................
6
2.2 The ESP and Language Descriptions.................................
6
2.2.1 ESP............................................................................
7
2.2.2 Classification ofESP.................................................
10
2.3 Course Design ...................................................................
13
2.3.1 Language Descriptions..............................................
15
2.3.2 Theories ofLearning.................................................
17
2.3.3 Needs Analysis..........................................................
19
2.3.3.1 Target Situation Analysis or Target Needs......
20
2.3.3.2 Present Situation Analysis................................
22
2.3.3.3 Learning Needs................................................
23
iv
2.3.4 Approaches to Course Design...................................
24
2.4 Application .........................................................................
27
2.4.1 The Syllabus..............................................................
27
2.4.2 Materials Design .......................................................
28
2.4.3 Teaching-Learning Method.......................................
28
2.5 Reading...............................................................................
29
2.5.1 Processes in Reading.................................................
31
2.5.1.1 Word Recognition ............................................
31
2.5.1.2 Syntactic Processing.........................................
32
2.5.1.3 Semantic Processing.........................................
32
2.6 Levels of Comprehension...................................................
33
2.7 Models of Reading.............................................................
35
2.7.1 Bottom-Up Model .....................................................
35
2.7.2 Top-Down Model ......................................................
37
2.7.3 Interactive Model......................................................
39
.
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH MEmOD
3.1 Research Design.................................................................
41
3.2 The Subjects ofthe Study...................................................
41
3.3 Data and Instrument of Data Collection.............................
41
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis ........................................
42
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
4.1 The Data.............................................................................
43
4.2 Data Analysis .....................................................................
43
4.3 Research Findings..............................................................
54
v
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions ........................................................................
5.2 Suggestions.........................................................................
REFERENCES···································-······································ ...····················
APPENDICES.................................................................................................
vi
56
57
58
61-76
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1
Interview with the lecturers about the objective of English
for Biology subject
44
4.2
Interview with the students about the language they always
use in the classroom
45
4.2
Interview with the lecturers about the implementation of
English for Biology syllabus in the classroom
47
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure
2.1
Classification by experience
10
2.2
The Classification of ESP by professional area
II
2.3
Factors affecting ESP course design
14
2.4
A learning-centered approach to course design
26
2.5
A simplified interactive parallel processing sketch
40
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix
Interview 1
61
2
Interview2
65
3
Interview 3
67
4
Interview4
68
5
Interview 5
70
6
Interview6
70
7
Interview 7
71
8
Interview 8
72
9
Interview 9
73
10
English for Biology syllabus
74
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
lJ The Background of the Study
English has shown a very significant position in this era of globalization. It is
widely used in every walk of life such as for education, communication, infonnation,
and especially in the job market. To fulfill the requirements for the middle-up
positions, fluency of spoken and written English is a major requirement. Even, those
people who wish to work overseas will require a certain amount of knowledge of
English in order to 'survive' in the wide force.
As a means of communication, English has been one of the prestigious
languages used for many years almost all over the world. It has been accepted as the
international language of technology and commerce. Thus, more and more people are
motivated to learn English, and in its development, English is learnt for different
purposes, which is especially based on the field of one's work as the reason for them
to study the language. For this reason, there are learners who learn Business English,
Medical English, Technical English, etc, and it is known as English for Specific
Purposes (ESP).
ESP is based on needs analysis, which is aimed at specifying what exactly the
needs of the students are in studying English. In order to meet the learners' needs, a
course designer is required to contribute her skill to design a specific syllabus and
2
materials for the specific purpose of learning English. This is likely to give an
optimal result to achieve the intended goals.
Developments in the theoretical bases of language teaching indicates a need to
pay more attention to the individual Ieamer, and at the same time the world of
commerce and technology are producing a host of people with specific language
learning needs. A demand is generated as a result for courses, which would equip
particular learners with the necessary skills to carry out particular tasks in English (or
any other specified language). These same pressures have generated an equally strong
need for a more open and coherent approach to evaluation.
Any language teaching course has certain evaluation requirements, but in ESP
these requirements are brought sharply into focus by the fact that the ESP course
nonnally has specified objectives. ESP is accountable teaching. ESP learners and
sponsors are investors in the ESP course and they want to see a return on their
investment of time and/or money. The managers of the ESP course are accountable to
these investors. This accountability has produced a demand for more and better
evaluation procedures. Two levels of evaluation have thus been brought into
prominence: learner assessment and course evaluation. These two fonns of evaluation
are not always distinct. Evaluation of the learners reflects not just the learners'
performance but to some extent the effectiveness or otherwise of the course too. An
ESP course is, after all, supposed to be successful: it is set up in order to enable
particular learners to do particular things with language. If it consistently fails to meet
this objective, then something must be wrong with the course design: the objectives
3
may be too ambitious given the resources available; the analysis of the learners'
initial competence may be wrong; the methodology may be inappropriate. Evaluation
of the learners is unlikely to indicate exactly where a fault lies, but it will at least
indicate the existence of a fault somewhere.
The explanation above reminds the writer about the teaching-learning process
when she attended English for biology subject in S1 program. In this situation she
needs to clarify that she was graduated from Biology Department of State University
of Medan. When she continued her study at the English Applied Linguistics Study
Program she realizes that English for biology subject is a part of ESP. The objective
of the subject was the ability to comprehend the text material about biology in
English; but till the end of the semester she couldn't achieve the objective. This
condition made her curious to take it as a problem to be investigated. That is the
reason why she chosen the title "An Evaluation of ESP Course Design for Biology
Students".
t.l ne Problems of tbe Study
In relation to the background of the study, there are three problems to be
identified namely:
1. How is the ESP course design for Biology students planned?
2. How is the ESP course design for Biology students implemented?
3. How do the planning and the implementation of ESP course design for
Biology students match the theoretical requirements?
4
1.3 The Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are fonnulated as the following:
I. To find out how the ESP course design for Biology students is planned.
2. To find out how the ESP course design for Biology students is implemented.
3. To find out how the planning and the implementation of ESP course design
for Biology students match the theoretical requirements.
1.4 The Stope of the Study
ESP is a major activity around the world today. It is an enterprise involving
education, training and practice, and drawing upon three major realms of knowledge:
language, pedagogy and the participants' specialist areas of interest. There are two
types of ESP, namely English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for
Occupational Purposes (EOP). Realizing the importance of ESP today, the writer
assumes that it is necessary to discuss EAP. The study is mainly focused on ESP
course design for Biology students, which is done by the three lecturers in Biology
Department
5
tS The Signifance of tbe Study
A study that is designed to discover some intended results should have some
significance. In this study, it is hoped that it will give some relevant contributions to:
1. English for Biology lecturers as an input for them in designing ESP course
design in the future.
2. Other writers or readers who want to continue this study in the fonn of
designing the appropriate course design that can be meet the needs of Biology
students.
CHAPTERV
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
After conducting the research and the process of analyzing the data it was
found that the lecturers only used just one kind of models of reading that was bottomup approach. They have not yet used the top-down approach as the other part of
models of reading. The writer assumed that the lecturers had used a skill-centered
approach to accomplish the ESP course design for Biology students. It means that the
planning and the implementation of ESP course design for Biology subject was not
fulfilled the whole requirements in designing an ESP course because the course
designer better use a learning-centered approach as a suitable approach in interpreting
the data which came from the needs analysis and reviewed the theoretical models of
learning and language available to maximize the potential of the learning situation.
In order to fulfill the requirements to achieve the target in reading
comprehension the lecturers from Biology Department itself better teach English for
Biology subject not lecturers from English Department because the only lecturers
from Biology Department who mastered the knowledge of Biology deeply. It was
done by the Biology Department in placing the right persons as the lecturers for
English for Biology subject. It can be argued that the opinion which is said that the
right lecturer for ESP course must be a member of English Department, but according
56
57
to the data analysis it was inappropriate because it is impossible for one lecturer to
comprehend many kinds of knowledge deeply.
5.2 SUGGESTIONS
To achieve the ability in the process of reading comprehension beside reading
skills such as skimming, scanning, paraphrasing, etc it is suggested to the Biology
lecturers to use other activities such as using schemata in exploring their background
knowledge to interpret text in order to construe meaning. It is also suggested that the
right lecturer for ESP course must be a lecturer from the department itself because
they master the knowledge deeply.
58
REFERENCES
Adams, M. Jr.1980. Failures to Comprehend and Levels ofProcessing in Reading. In
Rand J.Spiro, Bertram C. Bruce and William F. Brewer (Eds.) Theoretical
lssues in Reading Comprehension. Hills Dale, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Ary, D.,et.al. 1979. Introduction to Research in Education. (2nd Ed.). New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Berwick, R. 1989. Needs Assessment in lAnguage Programming: From Theory to
Practice, in Johnson (297), pp.48-62.
Bogdan, R.C. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Carrel, P.L., Joanne, D. and David, E.E. {Eds.) 1988. Interactive Approaches to
Second lAnguage Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T. and Johns, A. 1998. English for Specific Purposes: International in
Scope, Specific in Purpose. TESOL Quarterly.
Dudley-Evans, T. and St John, MJ. 1998. Developments in English for Specific
Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge Language Teaching Library.
Goodman, K.S. 1988. The Reading Process. In Carell, P.L., Joanne, D. and David,
E.E (Eds.). Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. Cambridge
University Press.
Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. 1986. English for Specific Purposes: A Learning
Centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kennedy, C. and Bolitho, R. 1984. English for Specific Purposes. New York:
Macmillan Publishers.
Kustaryo, S. 1988. Reading Techniques ofCollege Students. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Maria, K. 1990. Reading Comprehension Instruction, Issues and Strategies. Parkton
MD: New York Press
59
Mountford, A. 1981. The what, the why and the way, In Aupelf/Goethe
Institute/British Council (1), pp.19-34.
Munby, J. 1978. Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Murphy and Cooper. 1995. Teaching Reading Slcills in A Foreign Language. London:
Heineman.
Neufeldt, V. and Guralnik, D.B. 1996. Webster 's New World College Dictionary (3"'
Ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Nuffall, Christine. 1982. Teaching Reading Slcills in A Foreign Language. London:
The Chaucer Press. Ltd.
Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Massachusetts: Heinle
and Heinle Publishers.
Pillbeam, A. 1979. The Language Audit. Language Training I (2): 4-5.
Richards, J.C., et.al. 1992. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics. London: Longman.
Richterich, R. and Chancerel, J.L. 1980. Identifying the Needs ofAdults Learning A
Foreign Language. Pergamon.
Robinson, P.C. 1991. ESP Today: A Practitioner's Guide. Hampstead: Prentice Hall
International Ltd.
Rodgers, T.S.P., Richards, J.C. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strevens, P. 1998. ESP After Twenty Years: A Re-Appraisal. Singapore: SEA Meo
Regional Centre.
Swales, J.M. 1985. Episodes in ESP. New York: Pergamon Press.
Tan, A. 2003. Effective Model of Teaching Reading Strategies for Accelerate
Students. Medan: PPs Unimed
Widdowson, H.G. 1983. Learning Purpose and Language Use. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
60
Williams, E. 1989. Reading in the lAnguage Classroom. Hongkong: Macmillan.
Zakaluk, B. L. 1982. A Theoretical Overview of the Reading Process: Factors which
Influence Performance and Implications for Instruction. University of
Manitobu.
Lubis, Baby Arlita. An Evaluation of ESP Course Design for Biology Students.
A nesis: English Applied Linguistics Study Program Postgraduate School.
State University ofMedan. 2009
This study was intended to evaluate ESP course design for Biology students whether
the planning and the implementation of it match the theoretical requirements or not.
The data were collected from the interview with three lecturers from Biology
Department and six Biology students from Academic year 200712008 at State
University of Medan and also documentary technique. From the data analysis it was
found that the planning and the implementation of ESP course design for Biology
students did not fulfill the whole requirements in designing an ESP course design
because the lecturers as course designers used a skill-centered approach in
interpreting the data which came from the needs analysis and reviewed the theoretical
models of learning. They did not use a learning-centered approach which should be
used in designing an ESP course. The writer also found that the right lecturer for ESP
course must be a lecturer from the department itself because they master the
knowledge deeply.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..................................."".......................................
ABSTRACT·············································----·············································
TABLE OF CONTENTS •....•...••.•....•••.•.•••_............................................
iii
iv
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................
vii
LIST OF FIGU.RES ···································-·-...··-············································
LIST OF APPENDICES ...............................................................................
viii
ix
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Background of the Study.............................................
1.2 The Problems of the Study.................................................
3
1.3 The Objectives of the Study...............................................
4
1.4 The Scope of the Study ......................................................
4
1.5 The Significance of the Study............................................
5
CHAPTER II: .REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Evaluation...........................................................................
6
2.2 The ESP and Language Descriptions.................................
6
2.2.1 ESP............................................................................
7
2.2.2 Classification ofESP.................................................
10
2.3 Course Design ...................................................................
13
2.3.1 Language Descriptions..............................................
15
2.3.2 Theories ofLearning.................................................
17
2.3.3 Needs Analysis..........................................................
19
2.3.3.1 Target Situation Analysis or Target Needs......
20
2.3.3.2 Present Situation Analysis................................
22
2.3.3.3 Learning Needs................................................
23
iv
2.3.4 Approaches to Course Design...................................
24
2.4 Application .........................................................................
27
2.4.1 The Syllabus..............................................................
27
2.4.2 Materials Design .......................................................
28
2.4.3 Teaching-Learning Method.......................................
28
2.5 Reading...............................................................................
29
2.5.1 Processes in Reading.................................................
31
2.5.1.1 Word Recognition ............................................
31
2.5.1.2 Syntactic Processing.........................................
32
2.5.1.3 Semantic Processing.........................................
32
2.6 Levels of Comprehension...................................................
33
2.7 Models of Reading.............................................................
35
2.7.1 Bottom-Up Model .....................................................
35
2.7.2 Top-Down Model ......................................................
37
2.7.3 Interactive Model......................................................
39
.
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH MEmOD
3.1 Research Design.................................................................
41
3.2 The Subjects ofthe Study...................................................
41
3.3 Data and Instrument of Data Collection.............................
41
3.4 The Technique of Data Analysis ........................................
42
CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
4.1 The Data.............................................................................
43
4.2 Data Analysis .....................................................................
43
4.3 Research Findings..............................................................
54
v
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 Conclusions ........................................................................
5.2 Suggestions.........................................................................
REFERENCES···································-······································ ...····················
APPENDICES.................................................................................................
vi
56
57
58
61-76
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
4.1
Interview with the lecturers about the objective of English
for Biology subject
44
4.2
Interview with the students about the language they always
use in the classroom
45
4.2
Interview with the lecturers about the implementation of
English for Biology syllabus in the classroom
47
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure
2.1
Classification by experience
10
2.2
The Classification of ESP by professional area
II
2.3
Factors affecting ESP course design
14
2.4
A learning-centered approach to course design
26
2.5
A simplified interactive parallel processing sketch
40
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix
Interview 1
61
2
Interview2
65
3
Interview 3
67
4
Interview4
68
5
Interview 5
70
6
Interview6
70
7
Interview 7
71
8
Interview 8
72
9
Interview 9
73
10
English for Biology syllabus
74
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
lJ The Background of the Study
English has shown a very significant position in this era of globalization. It is
widely used in every walk of life such as for education, communication, infonnation,
and especially in the job market. To fulfill the requirements for the middle-up
positions, fluency of spoken and written English is a major requirement. Even, those
people who wish to work overseas will require a certain amount of knowledge of
English in order to 'survive' in the wide force.
As a means of communication, English has been one of the prestigious
languages used for many years almost all over the world. It has been accepted as the
international language of technology and commerce. Thus, more and more people are
motivated to learn English, and in its development, English is learnt for different
purposes, which is especially based on the field of one's work as the reason for them
to study the language. For this reason, there are learners who learn Business English,
Medical English, Technical English, etc, and it is known as English for Specific
Purposes (ESP).
ESP is based on needs analysis, which is aimed at specifying what exactly the
needs of the students are in studying English. In order to meet the learners' needs, a
course designer is required to contribute her skill to design a specific syllabus and
2
materials for the specific purpose of learning English. This is likely to give an
optimal result to achieve the intended goals.
Developments in the theoretical bases of language teaching indicates a need to
pay more attention to the individual Ieamer, and at the same time the world of
commerce and technology are producing a host of people with specific language
learning needs. A demand is generated as a result for courses, which would equip
particular learners with the necessary skills to carry out particular tasks in English (or
any other specified language). These same pressures have generated an equally strong
need for a more open and coherent approach to evaluation.
Any language teaching course has certain evaluation requirements, but in ESP
these requirements are brought sharply into focus by the fact that the ESP course
nonnally has specified objectives. ESP is accountable teaching. ESP learners and
sponsors are investors in the ESP course and they want to see a return on their
investment of time and/or money. The managers of the ESP course are accountable to
these investors. This accountability has produced a demand for more and better
evaluation procedures. Two levels of evaluation have thus been brought into
prominence: learner assessment and course evaluation. These two fonns of evaluation
are not always distinct. Evaluation of the learners reflects not just the learners'
performance but to some extent the effectiveness or otherwise of the course too. An
ESP course is, after all, supposed to be successful: it is set up in order to enable
particular learners to do particular things with language. If it consistently fails to meet
this objective, then something must be wrong with the course design: the objectives
3
may be too ambitious given the resources available; the analysis of the learners'
initial competence may be wrong; the methodology may be inappropriate. Evaluation
of the learners is unlikely to indicate exactly where a fault lies, but it will at least
indicate the existence of a fault somewhere.
The explanation above reminds the writer about the teaching-learning process
when she attended English for biology subject in S1 program. In this situation she
needs to clarify that she was graduated from Biology Department of State University
of Medan. When she continued her study at the English Applied Linguistics Study
Program she realizes that English for biology subject is a part of ESP. The objective
of the subject was the ability to comprehend the text material about biology in
English; but till the end of the semester she couldn't achieve the objective. This
condition made her curious to take it as a problem to be investigated. That is the
reason why she chosen the title "An Evaluation of ESP Course Design for Biology
Students".
t.l ne Problems of tbe Study
In relation to the background of the study, there are three problems to be
identified namely:
1. How is the ESP course design for Biology students planned?
2. How is the ESP course design for Biology students implemented?
3. How do the planning and the implementation of ESP course design for
Biology students match the theoretical requirements?
4
1.3 The Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study are fonnulated as the following:
I. To find out how the ESP course design for Biology students is planned.
2. To find out how the ESP course design for Biology students is implemented.
3. To find out how the planning and the implementation of ESP course design
for Biology students match the theoretical requirements.
1.4 The Stope of the Study
ESP is a major activity around the world today. It is an enterprise involving
education, training and practice, and drawing upon three major realms of knowledge:
language, pedagogy and the participants' specialist areas of interest. There are two
types of ESP, namely English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for
Occupational Purposes (EOP). Realizing the importance of ESP today, the writer
assumes that it is necessary to discuss EAP. The study is mainly focused on ESP
course design for Biology students, which is done by the three lecturers in Biology
Department
5
tS The Signifance of tbe Study
A study that is designed to discover some intended results should have some
significance. In this study, it is hoped that it will give some relevant contributions to:
1. English for Biology lecturers as an input for them in designing ESP course
design in the future.
2. Other writers or readers who want to continue this study in the fonn of
designing the appropriate course design that can be meet the needs of Biology
students.
CHAPTERV
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
After conducting the research and the process of analyzing the data it was
found that the lecturers only used just one kind of models of reading that was bottomup approach. They have not yet used the top-down approach as the other part of
models of reading. The writer assumed that the lecturers had used a skill-centered
approach to accomplish the ESP course design for Biology students. It means that the
planning and the implementation of ESP course design for Biology subject was not
fulfilled the whole requirements in designing an ESP course because the course
designer better use a learning-centered approach as a suitable approach in interpreting
the data which came from the needs analysis and reviewed the theoretical models of
learning and language available to maximize the potential of the learning situation.
In order to fulfill the requirements to achieve the target in reading
comprehension the lecturers from Biology Department itself better teach English for
Biology subject not lecturers from English Department because the only lecturers
from Biology Department who mastered the knowledge of Biology deeply. It was
done by the Biology Department in placing the right persons as the lecturers for
English for Biology subject. It can be argued that the opinion which is said that the
right lecturer for ESP course must be a member of English Department, but according
56
57
to the data analysis it was inappropriate because it is impossible for one lecturer to
comprehend many kinds of knowledge deeply.
5.2 SUGGESTIONS
To achieve the ability in the process of reading comprehension beside reading
skills such as skimming, scanning, paraphrasing, etc it is suggested to the Biology
lecturers to use other activities such as using schemata in exploring their background
knowledge to interpret text in order to construe meaning. It is also suggested that the
right lecturer for ESP course must be a lecturer from the department itself because
they master the knowledge deeply.
58
REFERENCES
Adams, M. Jr.1980. Failures to Comprehend and Levels ofProcessing in Reading. In
Rand J.Spiro, Bertram C. Bruce and William F. Brewer (Eds.) Theoretical
lssues in Reading Comprehension. Hills Dale, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Ary, D.,et.al. 1979. Introduction to Research in Education. (2nd Ed.). New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Berwick, R. 1989. Needs Assessment in lAnguage Programming: From Theory to
Practice, in Johnson (297), pp.48-62.
Bogdan, R.C. 1992. Qualitative Research for Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Carrel, P.L., Joanne, D. and David, E.E. {Eds.) 1988. Interactive Approaches to
Second lAnguage Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dudley-Evans, T. and Johns, A. 1998. English for Specific Purposes: International in
Scope, Specific in Purpose. TESOL Quarterly.
Dudley-Evans, T. and St John, MJ. 1998. Developments in English for Specific
Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge Language Teaching Library.
Goodman, K.S. 1988. The Reading Process. In Carell, P.L., Joanne, D. and David,
E.E (Eds.). Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. Cambridge
University Press.
Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. 1986. English for Specific Purposes: A Learning
Centered Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kennedy, C. and Bolitho, R. 1984. English for Specific Purposes. New York:
Macmillan Publishers.
Kustaryo, S. 1988. Reading Techniques ofCollege Students. Jakarta: Depdikbud.
Maria, K. 1990. Reading Comprehension Instruction, Issues and Strategies. Parkton
MD: New York Press
59
Mountford, A. 1981. The what, the why and the way, In Aupelf/Goethe
Institute/British Council (1), pp.19-34.
Munby, J. 1978. Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Murphy and Cooper. 1995. Teaching Reading Slcills in A Foreign Language. London:
Heineman.
Neufeldt, V. and Guralnik, D.B. 1996. Webster 's New World College Dictionary (3"'
Ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Nuffall, Christine. 1982. Teaching Reading Slcills in A Foreign Language. London:
The Chaucer Press. Ltd.
Nunan, D. 1999. Second Language Teaching and Learning. Massachusetts: Heinle
and Heinle Publishers.
Pillbeam, A. 1979. The Language Audit. Language Training I (2): 4-5.
Richards, J.C., et.al. 1992. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics. London: Longman.
Richterich, R. and Chancerel, J.L. 1980. Identifying the Needs ofAdults Learning A
Foreign Language. Pergamon.
Robinson, P.C. 1991. ESP Today: A Practitioner's Guide. Hampstead: Prentice Hall
International Ltd.
Rodgers, T.S.P., Richards, J.C. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strevens, P. 1998. ESP After Twenty Years: A Re-Appraisal. Singapore: SEA Meo
Regional Centre.
Swales, J.M. 1985. Episodes in ESP. New York: Pergamon Press.
Tan, A. 2003. Effective Model of Teaching Reading Strategies for Accelerate
Students. Medan: PPs Unimed
Widdowson, H.G. 1983. Learning Purpose and Language Use. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
60
Williams, E. 1989. Reading in the lAnguage Classroom. Hongkong: Macmillan.
Zakaluk, B. L. 1982. A Theoretical Overview of the Reading Process: Factors which
Influence Performance and Implications for Instruction. University of
Manitobu.