力珈

Introduction

In the field of curriculum design， ESP （English for Specific Purpose） has always been demonstrated with certain kind of clear purpose of preparing apprentices to fit into their “target academic， professional， or workplace environment”， although under variable settings， its goals and objectives will be slightly different （Basturkmen， 2006， p.140）. However， with the ongoing development of critical theories and critical approaches in ELT （Dozier， Johnston &Rogers， 2006； Hammond & Horarik， 1999； Pennycook， 1999； Stephens， 2000； Wallace， 1999）， the traditional view about the role of ESP has been challenged. Some researchers， such as， Dudley-Evans （2001） points out that the students responsibilities should not be limited to grasp the academic rules simply as “apprentices”， instead they may also actively participate in the academic process in order to shape or boost “the nature of the course” and the “forms of assessment” （p.x）. The main advantages of such “critical instruction” is to raise students critical awareness in that it may encourage or stimulate them to reconsider the established norms， and try to change the negative aspects to better position themselves in a target environment （Benesch， 2001）. At this point， there are still some questions， for example， how can teachers use the critical approach under the curriculum design？ When can it be used？ To what extent can teachers use it in a certain classroom？ Nevertheless， different contexts promote different strategies. This paper tries to explore the current issues about ESP through a basic aspect—objectives， which is always considered to be one of the primary points for most ESP course designers. It will firstly demonstrate the differences between ESP and ELT teaching， and then provides frameworks for ESP study in order to further analyze one case study in a Chinese context. Finally， it will discuss some potential recommendations which could be possibly applied to my future teaching.

Literature Review

People who are confronting with ESP may initially become a little bit confused by “S” （Specific）. Mackay and Mountford （1978 & 1978a） put forward， this so called “Specific” could mean “special”， in contrast with “general” English language teaching （ELT）， ESP particularly emphasizes on learners needs and purposes. ESP can be divided into two categories. One is EAP （English for academic purposes）， aiming to help students， especially those international students （non-native speakers） better comprehend the subject matters at foreign universities. While the other one is EOP （English for occupational purposes）. EOP is often studied by learners for a certain kinds of occupational requirement （Qattous， 1995）.

Since its nature of pragmatism， ESP course design is followed by a genre-based approach. A lot of attention has been paid by learners on the certain text types within their target discourse communities （Basturkmen， 2006）. For instance， Swales （1990） claims that “genre analysis” based on academic and research setting； “text and contextual layers” are academic writing in content courses （Samraj， 2002）； “approaching genre”： prewriting as apprenticeship to communities of practice （Guleff， 2002）； and Dudley-Evans （2002） declares that “the teaching of the academic essay： is a genre approach possible？” All the above mentioned statements are exploring the possibilities of using genre under current course settings.

According to Basturkmen （2006）， very limited papers are working on the respect of the objectives of ESP teaching， and even fewer are exploring the different goals and objectives between general ELT and ESP. Just as Ewer （1981） argues that ESP should shift from “general” to “specific” with more emphasis on the target performance objectives （Qattous， 1995）. Historically， the objectives of ESP has been moving from transferring students “l(fā)inguistics features of subjective-specific language” or cultivate them the “communicative repertories characteristics of target situations” to develop students “underlying competence” from their discipline and language （Basturkmen， 2006， p.5）. Recently， a critical tendency emerges in some scholars research， e.g， Basturkmen （2006）， Master （1998） and Swales （1998）， this threes studies are all discussing the role of ESP in the world today. Dominate questions， based on Basturkmens statement contain， does ESP teaching help to serve the interests of those target communities through functioning language learners to fit into their different profession， disciplines or workplaces？ Should ESP teaching only focus on “hard language functions？ What is the importance of “soft” social functions in ESP teaching and learning？ Is it true that social functions are less important than referential or instrumental functions in teaching ESP course？ According to Claphams （2001） presenting question： how can we choose between ESAP （English for Specific Academic Purposes） and EGAP （English for General Academic Purposes）？ Thus， the next thing that people want to know is what is happening in real ESP cases.

There are two frameworks that original developed for examining ELT really influence the ESP study a lot. One is Sterns （1983， 1992） “general conceptual framework for language teaching”， the other is called “framework for analyzing ESP” （Richards & Rodgers， 1986）. Basturkmen （2006） also establishes a framework which can not only compare various ESP projects bur also value different issues in the language teaching and learning field.

One Case Study in China

This is a case study carried on in China， which is teaching aviation English in the Chinese context： developing ESP theory in a non-English speaking country （Wang， 2007）. This is an experimental aviation language course conducted in colleges and universities of China with the purpose of exploring a more suitable way to ESP teaching in an EFL context. The framework of the curriculum can be summarized into the following formula （Wang， 2007， p.123）. In this case， Wang （2007） states that “Grammar-translation” is the dominating method among ESP classes in China and the focusing of these classes is still at the at age of vocabularies and grammar points. Hence， students can seldom use English to exchange information or ideas related with their occupation. Wang also points out that western ESP methodologies are quite hard to be adopted in China due to the different settings between east and west. Therefore， he tries a “contrastive approach terminologies at proper times” （p.126）. By using Basturkmens （2006） framework， Wangs curriculum still pays high attention to the words expressions and grammar points of sentence structure. Basically， there is no critical task for developing students critical awareness but the activities are based on students real needs as well as the actual context. For instance， it makes a comparison with international phonetics and the Chinese phonetic system （Pingyin） has its own characters. For example， in the Chinese language， “0” is read out /dong/ instead of /ling/； “1” is read out as /yao/ instead of /yi/ in Chinese air communication in order to avoid the misunderstanding during the flight deck communication. Similarly， in English people usually confused with “4” and the proposition “for”， so /er/ is added to form /fow-er/ with the same purpose. During the semantic contrast， a real case is provided to students in 1977. 533 people were dead just because of the misunderstanding of the phrase “at takeoff”. The flight crew intended to “taking off” but the tower controller interpreted it as “at the takeoff point”， while at the same time， another flight was on the runway. Students not only learn English phrases at this part， but also absorb the bilingual knowledge by comparing between Chinese and English phrases. However， in this case， the instructors provide authentic materials for students and also combine the linguistic skills with students professional knowledge very well.

Adaptation to My Teaching Context

I have some experience teaching EAP/ESP courses at a university in recent years. Based on my learning and teaching experience in China， in a college， especially for the non-English majored students， whose English language proficiency is really a little bit low. There is no difference between students majors or disciplines for they all could be treated as “general English learners” rather than the “professionals” in their fields. In China， the national syllabus for the tertiary level English teaching， which is called College English Teaching. It aims at “cultivating in students a relatively high ability in reading， and a moderate ability in listening， speaking， writing and translation. Thus they will be able to employ English as a tool for exchanging communication…and college English teaching should help students build up a solid language base， master sound language learning skills， and enhance their cultural knowledge， in order to meet the needs of “social progress and economic construction” （You， 2003，p.203）. In my understanding， accompany with the goals and requirements stated in the syllabus， there is a so called standardized test： CET （College English Test）， promoted by our education government. Yet with the power force from CET， the primary goal in nearly all of the college English classes is examination-oriented， which is only preparing students to pass the CET. Although the textbooks used nowadays in China are improved a little bit both at its topic diversity and content organization， the methodologies used by teachers could hardly fulfill the overall goals according to the national syllabus. Therefore， it still has a deep gap between expectation and reality. Because most Chinese English teachers are teaching students “text English”， but not authentic English or real communicative language. Thus， as I concerned here， in terms of the non-English majored college students， whether the college English teachers could combine English language knowledge 8with the professional academic study together.

Conclusion

In this paper， it talked about the differences between ESP and ELT teaching， provided frameworks for ESP study， and then further analyzed one case study in a Chinese context. Finally， according to my reading and research in ESP teaching and learning， it pointed out some personal ideas and towards the college English language teaching in China， which could be possibly applied to my future teaching as well.

References：

[1]Basturkmen，H.（2006）.Ideas and options in English for specific purposes.New Jersey：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[2]Benesch，S.（2001）.Critical English for Academic Purposes：Theory， Politics，and Practice.New Jersey：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[3]Clapham，C.（2001）.Discipline specificity and EAP.In J.Flowerdew & M.Peacock（Eds.），Research perspectives in English for Academic Purposes，Cambridge：Cambridge University Press.

[4]Dozier，C.，Johnston，P.，& Rogers，R.（2006）.Critical Literacy/ Critical Teaching：Tools for preparing Responsive Teachers.New York：Teachers College Columbia University.

[5]Dudley-Evans，T.（2002）.The Teaching of the Academic Essay：In a Genre Approach Possible？ In Johns，M.A.（Eds.），Genre in the Classroom：Multiple Perspectives.New Jersey：LEA.

[6]Guleff，V（2002）.Approaching Genre：Prewriting as Apprenticeship to Communities of Practice.In Johns，M.A.（Eds.），Genre in the Classroom：Multiple Perspectives.New Jersey：LEA.

[7]You.（2003）.“The choice made from no choice”：English writing instruction in a Chinese university.Journal of Second Language Writing，13（2004），97-110.

*本文為南京曉莊學院青年基金項目階段性成果，立項編號：2015NXY50。