Investigating the Cognitions and Practices of Iranian Language Teachers’ and Content Teachers’ Materials Preparation in EAP Courses at Medical Sciences Universities: A Nationwide Study

Document Type : research article

Author

Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan,Iran

Abstract

Materials preparation is an important stage in EAP curriculum. Therefore, there is a pressing need to explore EAP teachers’ materials preparation abilities, especially in Iran, where EAP courses are taught by two groups of teachers; that is, language teachers and content teachers. Therefore, this nationwide study explored the similarities and differences between the cognitions and practices of the two groups of EAP teachers concerning their materials preparation abilities, at medical sciences universities across Iran. Instruments included questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, observations and field notes. A representative sample of 128 language teachers and 190 content teachers from all medical sciences universities participated in the study. The results of the questionnaire indicated that there were no differences between language teachers and content teachers; however, the interviews and the observations revealed substantial differences between the two groups. The findings present some implications for the EAP community and a need to renew the current materials.

Keywords

References

Alexander, O. (2012). Exploring teacher beliefs in teaching EAP at low proficiency levels. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2),99-111.
Atai, M. R. (2002a). ESAP curriculum planning in Iran: An incoherent educational experience. Special Issue of the Journal of Persian Literature and Human Sciences of Tehran Teacher Training University, 1, 17-34.
Atai, M. R. (2002b). Iranian EAP programs in practice: A study of key methodological aspects. Sheikhbahaee Research Bulletin, 1(2), 1-15.
Atai, M. R. (2006). EAP teacher education: Searching for an effective model integrating content and language teachers’ schemes. Proceedings of PAAL Conference, 23-41.Kangwong National University, Chuncheon, Korea. 
Atai, M. R., & Fatahi-Majd, M. (2014). Exploring the practices and cognitions of Iranian ELT instructors and subject teachers in teaching EAP reading comprehension. English for Specific Purposes, 33(4), 27-38. 
Atai, M. R., & Tahririan, M. H. (2003). Assessment of the Status of ESP in the Current Iranian Higher Educational System. Proceedings of the 14th European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes: Communication, culture, and knowledge. University of Surrey, Guilford, UK.  
Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16 (Series B), 296-298.
Bernard, R. & Zemach, D. (2005). Materials for Specific Purposes. In B. Tomlinson (Eds.), Developing Materials for Language Teaching. (pp. 306-324). London: Continuum.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher Cognition and Language Education: Research and Practice. London: Continuum.
Brookhart, S. M., & Freeman, D. J. (1992). Characteristics of entering teacher candidates. Review of Educational Research, 62(1), 37-60.
Charles, M. (2013). English for Academic Purposes. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes,(pp. 136-153). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.
Crookes, G., & Arakaki, L. (1999). Teaching idea resources and work conditions in an ESL program. TESOL Journal, 8(1),15-19.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing. London: Routledge.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Development in English for Specific Purposes: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farhady, H., Sajadi Hezaveh, F., & Hedayati, H. (2010). Reflections on Foreign Language Education in Iran. TESL-EJ, 13(4).
Farrell, T. S. C., & Ives, J. (2015). Exploring teacher beliefs and classroom practices through reflective practice: A case study. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 594-610.
Freeman, D. (2002). The hidden side of the work: Teacher knowledge and learning to teach. A perspective from North American educational research on teacher education in English language teaching. Language Teaching, 35(1), ­1-13.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2014). Teaching reading for academic purposes. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. (4th ed., pp. 189-205). Boston: National Geographic Learning. 
Gray, J. (2000). The ELT coursebook as cultural artifact: How teachers censor and adapt. ELT Journal, 54(3), 274-283.
Harmer, J. (2001). Coursebooks: A human, cultural and linguistic disaster? Modern English Teacher, 10(3), 5-10.
Harwood, N. (2005). What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 149-161.
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The Research Manual: Design & Statistics for Applied Linguistics. New York: Newbury Jouse Publishers.
Hutchinson, H., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-328.
Hyland, K. (2006). English for Academic Purposes. London: Routledge.
Johnson, K. E. (2006). The Sociocultural Turn and Its Challenges for Second Language Teacher Education. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1),235-257.  
Jordan, R. (1997). English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kaiser, H. (1970). A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401-415.
Kaiser, H. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W., (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.
Kubanyiova, M., & Feryok, A. (2015). Language Teacher Cognition in Applied Linguistics Research: Revisiting the Territory, Redrawing the Boundaries, Reclaiming the Relevance. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 435-449.
Mazdayasna, G., & Tahririan, M. H. (2008). Developing a profile of the ESP needs of Iranian students: The case of students of nursing and midwifery. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(4), 277-289.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning Up a Messy Construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS Survival Manual (5th ed.). New York: Open University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1993). Beyond the text book: The role of commercial materials in language teaching. RELC Journal, 24(1), 1-14.
Robinson, P. C. (1991). ESP Today: A practitioner’s guide. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.  
Smit, U., & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating content and language in higher education: An introduction to English-medium policies, conceptual issues and research practices across Europe. AILA Review, 25(1), 1-12. 
Swales, J. M. (1980). ESP: The textbook problem. The ESP Journal, 1(1), 11-23.
Woods, D. (1996). Teacher Cognition in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Journal of Foreign Language Research
Volume 8, Issue 1
August 2018
Pages 167-186

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics