A Needs Analysis of the Adjustment of BE Curriculum Design

调整商务英语课程设置的需求分析

李立欣 (东北师范大学 )

E-mail:lilx151@nenu.edu.cn2012.10.28

1

Outline

Introduction Literature ReviewResearch DesignResults and DiscussionConclusion

2

1. Introduction Aim of my paper ： 1st Business English Major (BEM) in 2006

Teaching Requirements of Business English Major (TRBEM) as a guideline for BE teaching in China—a general BEM curriculum design model (4 modules)—12 core courses (Chen & Wang 2009)--only serves as a reference rather than a standardized model

My paper aims to analyze/discuss the necessary adjustment of BE curriculum design—needs analysis principles—questionnaire surveys on BE Graduates 2005-2009 and 2011-2012 in NENU—some helpful suggestions can be provided for the improvement of BE curriculum design in the future.

3

2. Literature Review▲ Studies on Needs Analysis of BE Curriculum Design at

Home

(CNKI) Importance and needs analysis were introduced and discussed by Yu (2003), Guan (2005), Ni & Liu (2006) and Chen (2010), Zhao (2006), Yang (2011).

• Discussion on BE curriculum design based on needs analysis were covered by Xu (2009), Ruan (2009) and Zheng & Lu (2011)—had a questionnaire survey on the social needs of employing units in Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei Province in addition to an interview, discussed the rationality of subject knowledge and abilities stated in 4 modules (TRBEM) and 15 reference items to specify the 4 modules.

• While the gap between the guidelines and practical BE curriculum design models is still untouched and needed to be researched.. 4

▲Needs Analysis and its• One of the earliest models of needs analysis for language syllabus design was developed by Munby (1978)• Hutchinson & Waters (2002) generalized needs in ESP into target needs & learning needs—served as a kind of model for ESP needs analysis. • Brindley (1989) and Robinson (1991) put forward “objective needs” and “subjective needs”. • Chambers (1980) called the needs analysis that focused on students’ needs at the end of a language course as target situation analysis (TSA). Present situation analysis (PSA) was discussed by Richterich and Chancerel (1977)—3 basic sources of information—students themselves, language teaching establishment, user institution

5

• A comprehensive needs analysis shall include “present situation analysis” and “target situation analysis (Robinson 8-9). “In practice, one is likely to seek and find information relating to both TSA and PSA simultaneously. Thus needs analysis may be seen as a combination of TSA and PSA” (Yu 43).

Learner-oriented Model of Needs Analysis for BE Curriculum Design

Types of needs analysis

Kinds of needs

Sources of information

Objective Subjective

Present situation analysis (PSA)

Learning needs

Course designers’ perceived needs

Learners’ perceived needs

Target situation analysis (TSA)

Target needs

Institutional or social needs

Learners’ qualities or employment needs

3.Research Design▲ Research questions (1) How much does BE curriculum design meet learners’

learning needs? (2) What adjustment does the BE curriculum design need to

have in order to satisfy learners’ target needs?

▲ Participants : BE graduates (4-year undergraduate program in NENU in the questionnaire surveys

—562 graduates involved— 81.82% (2005), 23.95% (2006), 71.43% (2007), 98.96%

(2008), 89.11% (2009), 82.52% (2011) ,79.66% (2012) of graduates against all students (yearly) in 7 years.

Course design: 3 parts (English, Business, Computer)=4 modules (include 12 core courses in Teaching Requirements of Business English Major.

8

▲ InstrumentsPilot questionnaire was designed with 9 questions in 2005 in Chinese. Cronbach'sαis 0.867 (reliability) acceptable. A questionnaire with 7 questions was finalized for surveys.Q1 & 2 are about learning needs—time (length since 2011) to offer each course & its difficulty level to be met or not—perceived by designers & learnersQ3 & 4 about target needs—helpful degree of each course & ability trained by course design can satisfy social & employment needs or not, what adjustment were needed.Q5 about satisfactory degree of graduates—as a comprehen-sive evaluation on learning & targets needs simultaneously. (Q2, 3& 5 used 5-point Likert scale, Q1 &4 multiple choices)Q6 & 7 open questions—what courses added or deleted Microsoft Excel and SPSS12 used in statistics and analysis.

▲ Data Collection

9

YearGraduate

SentNo.

Returned% Valid No.

Valid %

2005June 135 89.6% 109 90.1%

2006June 40 100% 32 80%

2007June 70 92.9% 63 96.9%

2008June 95 97.9% 93 100%

2009June 90 77.8% 62 88.6%

2011June 85 81.2% 61 88.4%

2012March 47 85.1% 33 82.5%

Number and Valid Rate of Sent and Collected Questionnaires

4 ． Results and Discussion

10

▲ BE Curriculum Design for Learning Needs Perceived Learning Needs (Time & Length of Each Course) (Q1)

( Notes: indicates some difference among yearly curriculum design.★(E)=English, (B)=Business, (C)=Computer; Y1=Year One; T1= One term )

Course 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

(E) Y1+Y2 Y1 Y1+ Y2 Y1+Y2 Y3 Y4,Y2★ Y1+Y2,Y4

★ Y3 Y3 Y2 Y3

(B) Y1, Y2★ Y3 Y2 Y3 Y1 Y3 Y3 Y3 Y4 Y4 Y2,Y3

★

(C) Y1 Y1 Y3, Y4★ Y2,Y3

★ Y2,Y3

(E) T4 T1 T4 T3 T2 T1 T4★ T2 T2 T1 T1

(B) T1★ T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 T1

(C) T1 T1 T1 T1 T1

Course 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

(E) Y1.2 Y1.1 Y1.0 Y1.8 Y2.4 Y2.6★ Y2.2★ Y2.8 Y2.5

(B) Y1.7 Y2.7 Y2.2 Y2.4 Y1.5★ Y2.7 Y2.3 Y2.2 Y3.1

(C) Y1.2 Y2.1★ Y2.5 Y2.4 Y3.0

(E) T3.9 T2.8★ T3.6 T3.6 T2.4 T1.6 T2.6★ T2.6 T1.7 T1.4 T1.5

(B) T2.3★ T1.8★ T1.5 T1.6 T1.4 T1.6 T1.5 T1.3 T1.2 T1.4 T1.4

(C) T1.4 T1.3 T1.2 T1.3 T1.3

11

Q2 Learners’ Perceived Difficulty Level of 3 Parts in Course Design (vs. Designer’s—appropriate—3 )

Comments:1.E1(42.86% surveyed graduates) & E2 (64.09%) ≤2; E8 & E9(38.84% & 39.77%) ≥4. E10 (45.16% of Graduates 2011-12)≤2, while 27.96%(≤2) & 29.04%(≥4) of Graduates 2011-12 perceived E11 inappropriate to their learning needs. 2.B1, B2, B5 (36.55%, 36.37%, 36.85%) >3, while 21.56% (B5) easier. B9 ( 45.89%) ≤2, although 37.35% =3, standard deviation=0.97. 3. C2, C3, C4 & C5 ( 40.47%, 53.66%, 31.95%, 48.52%)≥4)

Course No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Mean 2.22 2.15 2.61 2.96 3.07 2.81 2.65 3.28 3.26 2.61 3.01 (E)

StdDev. 0.80 0.94 0.83 0.78 0.92 0.82 0.75 0.84 0.91 0.86 0.95

Mean 3.20 3.22 2.80 2.85 3.10 2.94 2.96 2.71 2.60 2.86 2.97 (B)

StdDev. 0.95 0.87 0.88 0.81 1.11 0.76 0.75 0.93 0.97 0.81 0.98

Mean 2.19 3.22 3.45 3.10 3.43 (C)

StdDev. 1.04 1.08 1.09 0.99 0.98

12

▲ Adjustment of BE Curriculum Design for Target NeedsQ3: helpfulness of each course (1-5=very helpful to use-less).

Group1=Graduates06+07, Group2=08+09, Group3=11+12). Scatter plot of helpful degree of each English course

1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

2.50

E1

E2

E3E4

E5E6

E7

E8

E9

E1

E2

E3

E4

E5E6

E7

E8

E9E1

E2

E3

E4

E5

E6

E7 E8

E9

Helpful Degree of E CoursesG06G07G08G09G11G12

1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

B1

B2

B3

B4

B5

B6

B7

B8

B9

B1B2

B3B4

B5

B6B7

B8

B9B1

B2B3

B4

B5

B6

B7

B8

B9

G06G07G08G09G11G12

Helpful Degree of B Courses

2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25

2.00

2.20

2.40

2.60

2.80

3.00

3.20

3.40

C1C2

C3C4

C5C1

C2

C3C4

C5C1

C2C3

C4

C5G06G07G08G09G11G12

Helpful Degree of C Courses

13

Apart from the above scatter plots, the following table of helpful degree of 3 parts summarized the mean values of six years’ graduates’ evaluation on all courses in curriculum design, proved the results of the above 3 scatter plots and showed what courses needed necessary adjustment.Learners’ Perceived Helpful Degree of 3 Parts in Course Design

Courses (E10, E11, B10 & B11) were added to data collection for they had become required selective courses in the past 4 years, they were perceived by designers as necessary courses. But most of them (except E11) still needed minor adjustment about every two years.

Part Course 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Mean 1.64 1.61 1.65 1.52 1.93 2.11 1.92 1.66 2.17 2.13★ 1.09★ (E)

StdDev. 0.77 0.92 0.81 0.72 0.86 0.90 0.85 0.86 0.97 2.26 1.23

Mean 1.89 2.05 2.07 1.96 2.66 1.67 1.78 2.44 2.62 2.54★ 2.46★ (B)

StdDev. 0.87 0.96 0.92 0.84 1.13 0.80 0.86 1.10 1.10 1.08 1.11

Mean 2.20 2.72 2.72 2.39 2.59 (C)

StdDev. 1.08 1.07 1.09 0.96 0.99

14

Q4 asked learners to choose ability/skill/knowledge in curriculum design more helpful in job-hunting process or employment—learners’ target needs.

E Courses More Helpful in Job-hunting Process

Comment:1. Target needs (listening &speaking, translation) higher by Graduates 2006-09 & 2011due to their more helpfulness in job-hunting. Bu needs for communication became higher for Graduates 2011-12. 2.The adjustment of communication-related E courses urgently needed.

B Courses More Helpful in Job-hunting ProcessComment: 1. Courses (trade and business practice) had greater change for

every 3 years in the past, if the statistical result of Graduates 2005 was considered. Social needs for business and trade practice was stronger for Graduates 2005-07, fell down for Graduates 2008-11 (a bit lower than the needs for marketing in 2008 and 2011), yet seem to regain its leading position in 2012, influenced by global economic situation.

2. B courses (more dynamic areas in business field), needs for accounting was worth our attention, how to coordinate the target needs for business practice, marketing, management & accounting aspects in one BE curriculum design –difficult task 15

C Courses More Helpful in Job-hunting Process

Comment ： 1. 75% (2006), 73% (2007), 81.7% (2008), 75.8% (2009), 73.8% (2011), 87.9% (2012) of the surveyed graduates thought they were helpful in job-hunting process, C course was an inseparable part in BE curriculum design.

2. Learners’ target needs for software using and network knowledge were higher, the needs for database technology in the rising trend in recent two years.

3. Adjustment of C course—needs for computer theory & programming courses, for theory and programming knowledge might be more basic on one hand & more professional on the other hand, so two courses needed more adjustment according to learners’ target needs..

16

Q5 graduates’ satisfactory degree towards their employment or the situation after graduation—a comprehensive evaluation on learning and target needs (1-5 from very satisfactory to very unsatisfactory degree)

Comment ： 1. Mean values in Table were≤3, indicated that BE learners’ learning and target needs were met by our curriculum design, yet not so satisfactory as curriculum designers had perceived (satisfactory value was intended ≤2), some adjustment needed to better meet learners’ needs.

2. Although BE curriculum design needed to keep stable for some period of time, but it was more important to remain open and flexible according to learners’ needs.

Since the courses to add or delete in Q6 &7 got the support from less than 11.3% of the surveyed graduates at most, did not have any statistical meaning, omitted in the discussion of this paper.

17

Graduate 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012

Mean 2.53 2.38 2.62 2.68 2.62 2.94

StdDev. 1.05 0.69 0.90 1.02 0.82 0.93

5 ． ConclusionIt could be conclude that NENU’s BE curriculum design me

t learners’ learning and target needs, yet necessary adjustment was needed for every 2 or 3 years for most courses in the curriculum design on average. Curriculum designers need to pay attention to the following aspects.

▲First, learning needs perceived by designers were different from that perceived by learners—can not satisfy the learning needs of BE learners in the time & length & difficulty level of each course. Since BE was a multi-disciplinary subject, needed more researches and needs analysis to combine all courses into BE curriculum design with BE characteristics rather than a loose combination of related courses.

18

19

▲Second, target needs of BE learners for social needs and employment should be considered in curriculum design, though it was different from the employment-oriented course design of vocational schools, BE curriculum design had to be more helpful or satisfy learners’ needs for employment . So necessary adjustment was constantly needed according to learners’ target needs.

▲ Finally, the present BE curriculum design in China was based on the learning needs perceived by designers mainly, more subjective than objective, especially lacked the statistical support of empirical studies and needs analysis, would have kind of negative impact on the BE Major development and teaching as well.

Curriculum design is not a finished product & in a dynamic process, shall look far ahead rather than lag behind so as to meet learners’ learning needs & target needs, need more efforts on the adjustment of BE curriculum design based on needs analysis in the future.

20

Your comments and questions are welcome.