REVIEWER IN ESP

LESSON 2 (TYPES AND REASONS FOR

ESP EVOLUTION) TYPES OF ESP
REASONS FOR THE EVOLUTION OF ESP • EAP (English for Academic
- Hutchinson and Waters outline three Purposes):
major reasons: For students needing English in
• The demands of a Brave New academic settings (e.g., law, medicine,
World (post-WWII, oil crisis) engineering).
• A revolution in linguistics (shifts • EOP (English for Occupational
in language usage studies). Purposes):
• Focus on the learner (emphasis on For professionals needing English for
individual learning needs). work (e.g., airline pilots, hotel staff).

THE DEMANDS OF A BRAVE NEW ESP CLASSIFICATIONS

WORLD - Mackay & Mountford and
Munby’s classifications
• Post-WWII expansion in science, • Occupational (workplace-
technology, and economics. focused).
• The Oil Crisis brought Western • Vocational (training for a
knowledge into oil-rich nations. specific trade).
• English became the international • Academic (supporting
language of commerce and professional studies).
technology.
HUTCHINSON AND WATERS' "TREE OF
REVOLUTION IN LINGUISTICS ELT"
• Linguists shifted focus from the rules ESP divided into:
of grammar to how language is used in • English for Science and Technology
real communication. (EST)
• Language varies by situation, leading • English for Business and Economics
to tailored courses based on specific (EBE)
contexts (e.g., English for Science and • English for Social Studies (ESS)
Technology). • Further divided into EAP and EOP.

FOCUS ON LEARNER
• Emergence of learner-centered
approaches in the 1970s.
• ESP courses are designed around
learners’ specific needs and interests,
which improves motivation.

- STREVEN’S TYPE OF ESP

 • Lorenzo (2005) ESP is for learners
who already have a basic
understanding of English and need
to learn it to perform specific job-
related tasks or communicate
professional skills.
• ESP is about language in context
PRE- AND POST-EXPERIENCE ESP
• GE typically focuses on teaching
• Pre-experience: Learners gain English the basic grammar and structure of
skills while learning a job (e.g., oil the language without targeting a
field workers). specific professional use.
• Post-experience: Learners already in a • ESP programs are task-based and
job adding English as an additional interactive.
skill (e.g., air traffic controllers).
• Small groups of students work
together on tasks that simulate
real-world professional scenarios,
SUMMARY
which engage both cognitive and
• ESP emerged due to global demand socio-cultural learning processes
and practical needs in technology, (Mitchell & Myles, 2004).
business, and academia.
• On the other hand, GE courses, as
• Tailored ESP courses are critical to described by Wright (1992), focus
meet learner-specific goals. on “universal topics” like
• ESP has grown due to global market socializing, shopping, traveling, or
forces and the need for specialized basic communication needs.
English.
• It focuses on the learner’s specific STUDENT NEEDS AND CONTEXT
academic or occupational needs. • ESP learners are typically adults
who have specific professional or
LESSON 3 GENERAL ENGLISH VS. ESP academic goals.
PROGRAMS • As Belcher (2006) points out, ESP
instruction must address the
- Purpose and Focus unique needs of each learner in
• The key difference between ESP their specific context, making it
and GE lies in the purpose for highly tailored and focused.
learning English and the focus of • In contrast, GE is for learners at
the language instruction. different levels of proficiency and
is taught without a focus on a
specific profession.
• GE courses, often referred to as
English as a Second Language
(ESL) or English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) are broader and
aim to give students a general
command of the language that can
CURRICULUM AND METHODOLOGY be used in everyday situations.
• GE courses have pre-planned
curriculums that cover grammar,
 vocabulary, listening, reading, • Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
speaking, and writing skills sum up the difference by saying
• ESP programs are built on needs that, in theory, there is nothing that
analysis. separates ESP from GE, but in
• The methodology in ESP is flexible practice, the difference is
and varies based on the learners’ significant. ESP caters to effective
goals, unlike GE, which follows a communication in specific
more standardized approach. contexts, while GE aims to build a
• Strevens (1977) emphasizes that in general foundation for
ESP, the content and aims are shaped communication in everyday
by the learner’s needs rather than by situations.
external criteria, which is often the
case in GE. ESP TEACHER VS GE TEACHER
• This makes ESP more dynamic and • A GE teacher typically focuses on
adaptable, but also more challenging helping students improve their general
for the teacher, who must be language skills—listening, speaking,
knowledgeable about both English reading, and writing—following a set
teaching and the specific field in syllabus.
which the learners operate. • An ESP teacher, on the other hand,
plays multiple roles.
LANGUAGE IN CONTEXT
• Another key difference is the - Dudley-Evans (1998) describes the
context in which the language is ESP teacher as the following:
taught. ESP focuses on the • Teacher
language used in specific • Collaborator
professional or academic settings, • Course Designer
whereas GE focuses on language • Materials Provider
used in general, everyday • Researcher
communication. • Evaluator
• As Dudley-Evans (1998) explains,
ESP can include English for very
specific disciplines, like law or •
In contrast, GE teachers
engineering, but it can also include usually have a more fixed
broader academic purposes, as syllabus and don’t need to
seen in English for Academic customize their courses to fit
Purposes (EAP).
specific professional or
academic needs.
CONCLUSION • The collaborative role of an
ESP teacher is essential
• while both ESP and GE aim to because ESP practitioners
teach English, the difference lies often need to work closely
in the purpose for learning, the with specialists from the fields
focus of instruction, and the they are teaching, to ensure the
methodology used. ESP is learner-
language being taught is
centered and context-driven,
relevant and accurate.
aiming to meet the specific
WHY NOT CHOOSE SUBJECT
language needs of professionals or TEACHERS WITH FIELD EXPERTISE?
 academics. GE, on the other hand, • A 1990 survey by Venkatraman and
is broader and aims to build a Prema, focused on identifying English
general command of the language Language Needs in Technical
that can be used in everyday life. Education, found that 74.2% of
students believed that both English
and subject teachers should be
CAN GE TEACHERS TEACH ESP responsible for teaching the language
COURSES? of science and technology.
• While General English (GE) •
teachers are skilled at teaching basic • This suggests that both language and
language skills, they may not be content teachers have crucial roles, but
prepared to teach English for Specific neither alone can adequately meet the
Purposes (ESP). needs of ESP learners.
• ESP requires specialized knowledge • The challenges that arise when
of both language and content in teachers are not fully prepared for ESP
specific fields like science, teaching include reliance on
engineering, law, or medicine. translation activities or overly
• Most GE teachers lack familiarity with simplified reading tasks. GE teachers
the subject matter of these fields and may not have enough content
may feel unprepared to incorporate knowledge to explain technical texts,
authentic texts, tasks, or assessments while content teachers may not have
that require such knowledge. the linguistic tools to guide students
• Without proper training, they may through complex language issues.
struggle to teach the specific language • This leads to a passive learning
skills needed for success in these experience, where students only
areas. comprehend the surface meaning of
• Subject teachers with expertise in texts without developing the
technical fields may also struggle to productive skills needed for real-world
teach ESP. communication in their field.
• While they understand the content, • Swain’s Output Theory suggests that
they often lack formal training in learning a language requires
language teaching. This makes it productive activities, such as speaking
difficult for them to effectively teach and writing, where learners actively
both the subject matter and the construct language and get feedback.
language skills students need to • This highlights the need for training
communicate about it in English. ESP teachers who can facilitate not
only understanding but also active use
of English in academic and
professional contexts.

HOW TO TRAIN ESP TEACHERS

• Training ESP teachers requires a WAYS OF EQUIPPING ESP TEACHERS
specialized approach, recognizing that • ESP teachers can be equipped with
EFL (English as a Foreign Language) the necessary tools and knowledge
teachers, who are experts in language through two main approaches: Pre-
 instruction, are often not experts in the service/In-service training and
specialized fields their students are Collaborative work (Team teaching).
studying. 1. PRE-SERVICE/IN-SERVICE
• The goal of ESP training is to equip TRAINING:
teachers with enough knowledge of - Many current teacher training
the specific field to support their programs do not offer ESP-
students’ language development specific methodology courses.
within that context. Therefore, offering pre-service
• Training ESP teachers requires a training programs after teachers
specialized approach, recognizing that complete their undergraduate
EFL (English as a Foreign Language) studies could help fill this gap.
teachers, who are experts in language - For teachers already in the
instruction, are often not experts in the profession, in-service training
specialized fields their students are workshops can be an effective way
studying. to build expertise in a second field.
• The goal of ESP training is to equip - By participating in professional
teachers with enough knowledge of development related to fields like
the specific field to support their engineering or law, teachers can
students’ language development gain a deeper understanding of the
within that context. content their students need to
• Training ESP teachers requires a master.
specialized approach, recognizing that 2. COLLABORATIVE WORK (TEAM
EFL (English as a Foreign Language) TEACHING):
teachers, who are experts in language - Chen (2000) highlights the
instruction, are often not experts in the importance of collaboration
specialized fields their students are between language and content
studying. teachers.
• The goal of ESP training is to equip - Language teachers should not be
teachers with enough knowledge of expected to master complex
the specific field to support their subject knowledge, but they
students’ language development should have enough familiarity
within that context. with basic concepts to design an
ESP syllabus that supports the
content course.
- Through collaboration, both
content and language teachers can
benefit. Content teachers can help
language teachers develop the
knowledge they need to teach the
language of their field, while
language teachers can help
CONCLUSION
- content teachers understand the • There are both short-term and long-
specific language skills students term solutions to the lack of qualified
need to succeed. ESP teachers. In the short term,
- This approach can include: collaboration between ELT and
content teachers can help bridge the
gap.
 • Analysis of texts, materials, • Content teachers working on advanced
and curricula degrees could assist ELT teachers in
• Classroom observation, ESP classes, providing content
reflection, and feedback expertise while gaining experience in
• Collaborative action research teaching language.
• Development of integrated • Over time, this kind of collaboration
lessons and curricula could serve as informal in-service
• Team teaching training for both groups, helping to
- Crandall (1998) suggests that this address the need for specialized ESP
collaborative approach fosters teaching.
confidence and competence in
both content and language
instruction. Over time, ESP LESSON 4 DEFINITIONS OF COURSE,
teachers can develop the expertise SYLLABUS, ESP CURRICULUM AND
to teach language in the context of ESP COURSE/SYLLABUS DESIGN
specific disciplines effectively.
• CURRICULUM
- SPECIALIZED TRAINING - A broad term that refers to the
• Specialized training during study of goals, content,
undergraduate programs could also implementation, and evaluation of
be beneficial. For example, an educational system (Stern,
language teachers interested in 1983). It encompasses all planned
teaching ESP could take learning experiences.
introductory courses in fields like • SYLLABUS
engineering or medicine. - A narrower concept focusing on
• This could help them build a the content of a specific course
foundational understanding of the (Graves, 1996; Shaw, 1975). It
content, making it easier to teach outlines what will be taught and
ESP in those areas. Similarly, the order of content.
students from technical fields who CURRICULUM VS. SYLLABUS
plan to pursue graduate degrees - Curriculum involves overall
could benefit from training in educational goals, while the
language teaching methodologies, syllabus specifies the teaching
preparing them to teach ESP in content for a particular subject
their subject areas. (Stern, 1983)

and real-world applications

SYLLABUS (P’Rayan, 2008).
• Content specification (Graves, 1996;
Noss & Rodgers, 1976). • General English
• Administrative tool for structuring - More focused on specific
lessons (Strevens, 1977). vocabulary and language contexts
• Inventory of items to be taught (Higgins in Swales, 1988).
(Crombie, 1985). ✓ Key Aspect of ESP
 • Social construction shaped by teachers - Learner-centered, with focus
and students (Candlin, 1984). on operational,
LEARNING GOALS communicative, and notional
The syllabus reflects what is to be syllabi tailored to job-specific
achieved through teaching, needs (Richards, 2001).
emphasizing outcomes over
processes (Hutchinson & Waters, Syllabus Design Process
1987). - Involves specifying content and
organizing it for effective teaching
CURRICULUM – PHILOSOPHICAL AND (Munby, 1984; Webb, 1976).
PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS - Key Criteria for Design (Webb,1976):
• General Definition • Progression from known to
- Curriculum refers to philosophical, unknown.
social, and administrative factors • Proper size of teaching units.
in educational planning (Allen, • Variety in activities.
1984). It includes all the planned • Focus on teachability and student
experiences within an institution engagement.
(Shaw, 1975). ✓ Comprehensive Design Consideration:
• Broader View - Must take into account social,
- Modern curriculum design cultural, and linguistic factors
includes ongoing evaluation, (Garcia, 1976; Halim, 1976).
adaptability, and learner-centered
approaches (Brown, 1995; Nunan, Course Design and Flexibility
1988) • Course Design
• Process/Product Approach - The development of a series of lessons
- Curriculum is planned before based on a syllabus (Taba, 1962).
classes but should adapt based on Flexibility in course design allows
real classroom situations teachers to adjust content based on
(Shavelson & Stern, 1981). real-time feedback.
• Negotiation in Learning
ESP Curriculum vs. General English - Learner-centered design means
Curriculum some content is predetermined,
while other elements are
• ESP Curriculum negotiated with learners (Nunan,
- Designed for practical language 1988).
use in job-related settings. External and Internal
- Curriculum starts with learners' • External Syllabus
background knowledge - This syllabus outlines the content
CONCLUSION- CURRICULUM AND that learners are expected to learn,
SYLLABUS INTEGRATION typically designed by course
designers or regulatory bodies. It
• Integration of Elements focuses on external factors and
- Curriculum and syllabus design serves as a guide for course
are interconnected, with content.
curriculum covering the broad • Internal Syllabus
educational goals and syllabus - Developed internally by learners,
this syllabus represents how
 specifying content. Effective learners process and internalize
design involves: language knowledge. It reflects the
✓ Needs Analysis- learner’s understanding and
Understanding what learners retention of the content presented
require to them.
✓ Content Selection- Choosing
appropriate material for Evaluation Syllabus
specific goals • The evaluation syllabus is an official
✓ Evaluation- Continuously document stating what learners should
assessing the success of the know by the end of the course. It is
curriculumm and syllabus handed down by external bodies like
ministries and is "uninterpreted,"
LESSON 5 TYPES AND IMPORTANCE meaning the teacher has no input in its
OF SYLLABUS design and must implement it as is.
• Hutchinson & Waters (1987) describe
Type of Syllabus this syllabus as reflecting the
• Linear Syllabus regulatory authority’s view of
- Content is presented sequentially, language and linguistic performance.
where each language item (e.g., It is highly structured and rigid,
grammar, vocabulary) is taught leaving no room for modification.
fully before moving on to the next.
There is no revisiting of previous Organizational Syllabus
content. This type of syllabus • The organizational syllabus specifies
requires a lot of practice before not only the content to be learned but
proceeding to the next item. also the sequence in which it should
• Spiral (Cyclical) Syllabus be taught. It considers learning
- Language items are revisited and priorities, such as what is easier to
reviewed multiple times learn or more fundamental to
throughout the course. This understanding.
reflects a more natural process of • Hutchinson & Waters (1987):
language learning, where repeated Organizational syllabi include
exposure to the same concepts in assumptions about how people learn.
different contexts helps learners For instance, certain items may need
retain and understand language. to be taught before others for
Though more challenging to Learner Syllabus
organize, spiral syllabi offer • The learner syllabus refers to the
pedagogical advantages over linear internal process through which
syllabi. learners construct and store
better comprehension. This type of syllabus knowledge. It reflects how learners
is also uninterpreted, meaning the teacher organize and retain the language they
must follow its guidelines without input. are exposed to.
• Candlin (1984) describes the learner
Material Syllabus syllabus as a "retrospective record of
• Materials syllabi are created by what has been learned," showing how
material writers, who interpret the learners interpret and apply the
organizational syllabus when knowledge gained in class.
designing course materials. Writers
make decisions about language Other Types of Syllabus
 content, learning activities, exercises, • Structural/ Situational Syllabus
revisions, and testing. - Focuses on language structure and
• Hutchinson & Waters (1987) situational contexts.
categorize material syllabus into • Functional/Notional Syllabus
different types, such as topic-based, - Centers around language functions
skills-based, and functional-notional (e.g., requesting, apologizing) and
syllabi. These syllabi combine various notions (e.g., time, quantity).
learning criteria, such as grammar, • Task-Based Syllabus
tasks, or language skills. - Organizes learning around tasks
and activities that require language
Teacher Syllabus use in practical situations.
• The teacher also interprets the • Skills Syllabus
syllabus, adapting it to meet the needs - Emphasizes language skills, such
of the students in the classroom. as listening, speaking, reading, and
Teachers influence the clarity, writing.
intensity, and frequency of language
items presented to learners.
• Hutchinson & Waters (1987) explain
that while a syllabus may provide
structure, the teacher plays a crucial P.S: Mag-Blush on ha!
role in how effectively the content is -FP
delivered and understood by learners.

Classroom Syllabus
• The classroom syllabus is shaped by
real-life classroom dynamics, such as
noise, interruptions, or the mood of
students. Conditions within the
classroom often alter the way lessons
are delivered and received.
• Breen (1984) states that "the
classroom generates its own syllabus"
as learning is influenced by both
internal (learner-related) and external
(environment-related) factors.