Beyond ‘Needs Analysis’
Negotiating the Constraints & Affordances
of ‘College-prep’ ESL
Michael N. Trottier (PhD Candidate)
Department of Language and Literacy Education
Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia
TESL CANADA CONFERENCE 2012
Thompson Rivers University
October 11-13
Guiding research Qs
Q1 What is the purpose of ‘College-prep’ ESL, how is it structured?
Q2 How are the program’s resources (e.g., curricular, instructional)
used to socialize learners into new academic practices?
Q3 How do learners take up/respond to intense EAP practices
(e.g., teaching, assessment) across program levels?
Theoretical frameworks
1. Globalization and postsecondary education
(Levin, 2002; Ninnes & Hellstén, 2005; Singh, 2005)
2. Second language socialization (SLS)
(Duff, 2003, 2010; Zuengler & Cole, 2005)
3. Critical applied linguistics (CALx)
(Pennycook, 1997; Benesch, 2001; Hyland, 2006; Belcher, 2009)
Second language socialization (SLS)
Origins
SLS
- based on early LS scholarship, which focused on research in
L1 socialization (Ochs & Schieffelin, 1984; Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986)
- takes a holistic ‘social practices’ approach to language learning
= language is constitutive of social life & identity
- concerns the process whereby non-native speakers of a language seek
greater access & participation in those linguistic practices which lead to
membership in target (desired) L2 communities (Duff, 2003, 2010)
- poses “particular challenges for...transnational sojourners who may have
…complex histories, conflicted identities, and often uncertain trajectories
and/or investments in the target language and its communities” (Duff, 2010: 5)
= contingency & variability in L2 learning process/outcomes
An ethnographic, multi-case look at EAP
Study design
- ethnographic, multiple case study (6 focal + non-focal subjects)
- 1-year in duration (intensive EAP + transitions to regular programs)
Data sources
- classroom observation/field notes (general + critical events)
- participant-generated texts (assignments, projects, evaluations)
- course syllabuses and evaluations (e.g., rubrics, feedback)
- one-on-one, semi-structured interviews (+ focus groups)
(triangulated)
Analysis
‘emic’
perspective
- grounded, reflexive (constructionist) approach to data
- thematic/discourse analysis: positioning, identity,
attribution theory, etc.
“What is going on here?
- emphasis on participant-driven views (Ss + teachers + me)
- an alternative, bottom-up view of ‘Needs Analysis’
EAP as a form of L2 socialization
A Social Practices Approach
MACRO
General educ. discourse
& institutional policies
- globalization, marketing
- ideologies of L2, culture
EAP Practices
Teaching: content choice/
MICRO
- group/pair interaction
- communicative events
- mutual scaffolding
- learning strategies
control of texts, cultural
content, scaffolding, etc)
Assessment: feedback..,
power/knowledge, etc.
The ‘whats’ of EAP
Main curricular features & focal activities
Levels 3-4
• .Introductory ESL
…- everyday English comm.
....- supportive classroom
....- varied levels of literacy
•..
Levels 1-2
• Introduction to EAP
- Speaking (survey project/PP)
- Listening(TED, notetaking )
- Writing (sentence structure,
..TS, 3-7 paragraphs essay)
- Reading (academic word list,
..business/tech/globaliz. articles)
•Intense EAP
- Speaking (corporate sim,
...survey project, PPoint
...presentation & response)
- Listening (notetaking/main
...ideas, summary + response)
- Reading (scan/skimming, ..
...summary/response, notes)
- Writing (vocab in context, ..
..+major research paper:
….locating sources, quoting/
….paraphrasing, essay outline
. ……………….
Levels 5-6
Saudi/Chinese representation across programs levels
N =1924 (2011 program intake)
Saudi
Chinese
60%
50%
40%
54%
49%
48%
44%
39%
33%
30%
23%
20%
10%
5%
4%
0%
Level 1
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
(50/60%) (60/70%)
M:
Are there certain kinds of students, certain sociocultural backgrounds which are better
suited to this kind of intensive ESL program. (1.7) And I’ll invite you to respond to each
other’s answers as well (interviewees discuss turn-taking)
T1: → °all right° (1.2) My- my impression is that ehm::: there are certain (.) what did you call them,
sociocultural groups, that tend to do better in certain skill areas. Um- One of the things that I’ve
noticed is that students who::: who come from Middle-Eastern backgrounds tend to do better,
uhm, especially in speaking skills areas. (.9) Uhm (.6) and tend not to do so well in- in things l
like writing. That’s just (.5) [my] overall view of being here for 2 years now and looking at the
usual range of outcomes.
T2: →
Yeah I would agree with that, and it- I believe it reflects their own educational background (.) in
their own (.) language even, that there’s not as much emphasis on .hhhh reading and’uh
writing as- from what I’ve gathered f- ( ) from talking to the students .hhh And it- it bears itself
out in the number of- (.) uhm, Arabic students:: Arabic speaking students who finally
graduate from Level 6. It’s a- (.8) much smaller % than (.) the numbers that (.) begin the program
M:
T2:
M:
T2:
M:
T2:
You mentioned that you had seen two:: (.) Saudi m::ales or fe- females=
=females=
=at Level 6 at some point.
Yes:: (.) (unequivocally) who were both quite successful.
And [how many times had you taught Level 6.
[But
F:our.
Four. Had you heard of other cases?
Um:: no, I’m- that’s just my own (.) [observation of (
)
[yeah
and yourself (to T1)?
.hhhhh Um: I only ever ONCE had a Saudi student when I was teaching Level 6
M:
T2:
M:
T1:
Saudi/Chinese academic trajectories across levels
N =1924 (2011 program intake)
Saudi
Chinese
60%
50%
40%
54%
49%
48%
44%
39%
33%
30%
23%
20%
10%
5%
4%
0%
Level 1
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
(50/60%) (60/70%)
Participant profiles (N = 6)
*Name
sex/age nation
education
EAP experience
Current program
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ASSEER
M-22
S/Arabia
Business
Rep. L4, L6 Rdg
P/T (Business/Finance)
ARCHIE
M-26
*China
Business
Rep. L5 X2, L6 Writg
P/T (Architecture)
JACK
M-19
*China
High school
Repeating L6
Business (Jan/13 start)
MANDY
F-20
*China
High school
------
Business//Finance
BENJIE
M-22
*China
High school
Rep. L6 Writing
Engineering
SEAN
M-40
Korea
Electrical Eng
Repeated L6
Engineering
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Kadrye
F-23
Turkey
B.A . Int’l Relations
(Business)
Completed 6 (returned home)
Shamsi
F-22
S/Arabia
Medical
(Business)
Completed 6 (changed schools)
* Names and other information has been made anonymous to protect individual/program identities
Q: How do different learners respond to intense EAP?
N =1924 (2011 intake)
Saudi
Chinese
60%
50%
40%
54%
49%
48%
44%
39%
33%
30%
23%
20%
10%
5%
4%
0%
Level 1
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
(50/60%) (60/70%)
The ‘hows’ of intensive EAP:
Access & participation
(LS perspective)
“[Access and participation]…lies at the core of Language Socialization (LS) studies as
well as other alternative approaches to SLA” (Duff & Talmy 2011:104, ref to Ortega 2009)
(SLA perspective)
“ …the influence of broader macrosocial and cultural processes should not
be underestimated in either cognitivist SLA or language socialization. After all,
current mainstream SLA theory holds that opportunities for appropriate input/
intake, interaction, and output, plus feedback of particular types, are
indispensable for SLA.” (ibid.)
Access → Participation → Assessment → Access
Participation
• input
• intake
Access
• roles, genres
• mono/dialogic
activities
Evaluation
Assessment
Reading Comp: Gap-fill & paraphrase
Asseer
Archie
The ‘whats’ of EAP
Main curricular features & focal activities
Levels 3-4
• .Introductory ESL
…- everyday English comm.
....- supportive classroom
....- varied levels of literacy
•..
Levels 1-2
• Introduction to EAP
- Speaking (survey project/PP)
- Listening(TED, notetaking )
- Writing (sentence structure,
..TS, 3-7 paragraphs essay)
- Reading (academic word list,
..business/tech/globaliz. articles)
•Intense EAP
- Speaking (corporate sim,
...survey project, PPoint
...presentation & response)
- Listening (notetaking/main
...ideas, summary + response)
- Reading (scan/skimming, ..
...summary/response, notes)
- Writing (vocab in context, ..
..+major research paper:
….locating sources, quoting/
….paraphrasing, essay outline
. ……………….
Levels 5-6
‘Needs Analysis’ from below
What KIND of Access & Participation are possible?
What does (should?) it mean to “learn a language”
1- What are the ‘costs’ of intense ‘decontextualized’ EAP?
2- how to move beyond a largely ‘skills’ orientation to EAP?
3- negotiation of otherwise ‘fixed’ (academic) linguistic meaning (NofM)
4- participation as ‘investment’ in emerging L2 identities (Norton 2000)
5- opportunities to share/explore (multi)cultural themes academically
The Six Thinking Hats
White Hat
Black Hat
Focuses on data, facts,
information known or needed.
Focuses on potential difficulties,
why something may not work.
Red Hat
Focuses on feelings, hunches,
gut instinct, and intuition.
Yellow Hat
Focuses on values and benefits.
Why something may work.
Green Hat
Focuses on creativity: possibilities,
alternatives, solutions, new ideas.
Blue Hat
Focuses on manage the thinking
process, focus, next steps, action
plans.
The Cost of Intensity:
Feedback & scaffolding
Level/learner
assignment
feedback type/source
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L-4 ‘Jack’
multi-paragraph essay
holistic (rubric) & written
L-4 ‘Jack’
interactive survey Qs
survey team (+instructor )
L-6 ‘Sean’
major research paper
written
(week 6 of 7, draft #1)
Access
Assessment
Asseer, on the challenges of Level 4
- part of a 25-member cohort of Saudi men, 90% of whom failed L4
- special group sponsored by the Saudi government (max. 1.5 yrs)
- admitted based on 2.5 yrs of college in KSA,
*Accommodation: All eventually passed L4, and are now receiving
extra coursework in Reading & Writing (L5)
*Archie – on the program’s Chinese-style speaking competition
- on the value of `partial marks` in grading (reading comp)
*Jack - on the affective impact of neg. instructor feedback (L4 Writing)
Participation
*Archie – on cultural content, `Anything but Chinese` classmates
*Saudi Focus Group - on the for social ‘costs’ of intensive EAP
*Asseer - on the mix of Saudi & Arab students in classes
- on his lack of fluency and desire to be casual in English
Identity and
Desire
*Archie - Change in career options (Architectural Mgmt → Chef)
Presentation goals
1 Context
Post-secondary, intensive EAP
2 Theoretical framework/methodology
(Second) Language Socialization
3 Case study data
Qualitative interviews (individual, focus groups)
‘Needs analysis’ and the disembodied learner?
“…SLA research has traditionally given more attention to the process
of acquisition than to the flesh-and-blood individuals who are doing
the learning” (p. 2)
“Success in language learning is an artifact of schooling, of the need
for institutions to demarcate those who know from those who don’t,
but the language learning experience itself is neither successful nor
unsuccessful. It can be lived more or less meaningfully, no matter
what level of proficiency has been attained” (p. 4)
Claire Kramsch (2006)
The Multilingual Subject: What Foreign Language Learners Say
about their Experience and Why it Matters
Instructor’s email reply, following receipt of student’s email + attachment
Hello Archie,
First of all, never just attach a document to me through email without writing me a polite
note. You can follow the format of my email to you to learn to write a proper
email. Just use the letter format.
Please find attached my feedback.
Regards,
Beyond ‘Needs Analysis’
Negotiating the Constraints/Affordances of ‘College-prep’ ESL
Thank you!
Michael N. Trottier
meetmnt@interchange.ubc.ca
* Special thanks to my research committee, Drs Patsy Duff, Steven Talmy, and Bonny Norton,
for their inspiring work & ongoing guidance.
The ‘hows’ of intensive EAP
Access & participation
Role of the social
• Culture as a resource
• Motivational aspects
Scaffolding
• feedback practices
• cognitive load
Role of
assessment
• discrete L2 ‘skills’
• role of assessment