Efforts to make EAP courses more effective and pedagogically enriched have a long pedigree. While there is much research concerning various aspects of this branch, there is little consensus on which kinds of programs can guarantee a high degree of language proficiency.
The twin purposes of this paper are to review some of the contemporary research findings in relation to the general linguistic expectations and outcomes of EAP courses in Hong Kong, as well as to examine the applicability of some of the field-tested experiences in the Hong Kong context. Concretely, the study reveals that EAP courses in Hong Kong are a hybrid of general ESL and EAP programs. Owing to the students, insufficient oracy skills, one training focus is to upgrade their listening and speaking competence. Hence, there is a cogent argument that the training of basic language skills should receive priority in general EAP courses. Although team-teaching between language instructors and subject teachers may be a desirable model for teaching, it is of limited use in Hong Kong for various reasons.
Flowing from the research, some teaching strategies are examined, which include the use of a variety of general sources rather than the use of subject-specific materials, integrating field observation with the analysis of student needs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atkinson, D.1997. A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL . TESOL Quarterly, 31,71-94.
2.
Atkinson, D. & Ramanathan, V.1995. Cultures of writing: An ethnographic comparison ofLl and L2 university writing/language programs. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 539-568.
3.
Bazerman, C.1988. Shaping written knowledge. Wisconsin : University of Wisconsin Press.
4.
Christison, M.A. & Krahnke, K.J.1986. Student perceptions of academic language study . TESOL Quarterly, 20 (1),61-81.
5.
Cummins, J.1984a. Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy .Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
6.
Cummins, J.1984b. Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed) Language proficiency and academic achievement. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
7.
Dudley-Evans, T.1993. Variation in communication patterns between discourse communities: The case of highway engineering and plant biology. In G. M. Blue (Ed.) Language, learning and success: Studying through English, pp. 141-147. London: Modem English Publications in association with the British Council.
8.
Dudley-Evans, T.1984. The team teaching of writing skills. In R. Williams, J. Swales and J. Kirkman (Eds.), Common ground: Shared interests in ESP and communication skills. ELT Documents117.
9.
Dudley-Evans, T. & Johns, T.F.1981. A team teaching approach to lecture comprehension for overseas students. The teaching of listening comprehension. EL T Documents Special.
10.
Education Commission.1995. Education Commission Report No.6. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Printer.
11.
Falvey, P.1998. ESL, EFL and language acquisition in the context of Hong Kong. In B. Asker (Ed. ) Building Hong Kong on education, pp. 73-85. Hong Kong: Longman.
12.
Ferris, D.1998. Students' views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (2), 289-318.
13.
Ferris, D. & Tagg, T.1996. Academic oral communication needs ofEAP learners: What subject-matter instructors actually require. TESOL Quarterly , 30 (I), 31-55.
14.
Flowerdew, J., Li, D. & Miller, L.1998. Attitudes towards English and Chinese among Hong Kong Chinese university lecturers. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (2), 201-132.
15.
Flowerdew, J. & Miller, L.1995. On the notion of culture in L2 lectures. TESOL Quarterly, 29 (2), 345-373.
16.
Gee, S., Huxley, M. & Johnson, D.1984. Teaching communication skills and English for Academic purposes: A case study of a problem shared. In R. Williams, J. Swales, and J. Kirkman (Eds.), Common ground: shared interests in ESP and communication s kills. EL T Documents117.
17.
Gieve, S.1998. Comments on Dwight Atkinson's "A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL": Another reader reacts TESOL Quarterly , 32, 123-129.
18.
Henderson, W. & Skehan, P.1980. The team teaching of introductory economics to overseas students. Team teaching in ESP. ELT Documents 106.
19.
Higgins, J.J.1966. Hard facts: Notes on teaching English to science students . ELT Journal, 21 (1),55-60.
20.
Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A.1987. Englishfor academic purposes: A learning-centered approach . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Johns, A.1988. The discourse communities dilemma: Identifying transferable skills for the academic milieu. English for Specific Purposes , 7 (1),55-59.
22.
Johns, T.F. & Dudley-Evans, A.1980. An experiment in team teaching of overseas postgraduate students of transportation and plant biology. Team teaching in ESP. ELT Docwnents106.
23.
Jordan, R.R.1997. English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Littlewood, W. & Liu N.F.1996. Hong Kong students and their English. Hong Kong: Macmillan.
25.
Lynch, T.1995a. The development of interactive listening strategies in second language academic settings. In D. J. Mendelsohn & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guidefor the teaching of academic listening, pp. 166-185. San Diego, CA: Dominie Press.
26.
Lynch, T.1995b. Training lecturers for international audiences . In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives, pp. 269-289. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
27.
Mason, A.1995. By dint of: Student and lecturer perceptions of lecture comprehension strategies in first-term graduate study. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives, pp. 199-218. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Ostler, S.E.1980. A survey of academic needs for advanced ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 14, 489-502.
29.
Raimers, A. & Zamel, v.1997. Response to Ramanathan an d Kaplan. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6,79-81.
30.
Ramanathan, V. & Kaplan, R.1996. Some problematic "channels" in the teaching of critical thinking in current L1 composition textbooks: Implications for L2 student- writers. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 7,225-249.
31.
Robinson, P.C.1991. ESP today: A practitioner's guide. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.
32.
Skehan, P.1980. Team teaching and the role of the ESP teacher. In G. M. Greenall and J.E. Price (Eds.), Study modes and academic development of overseas students. ELT Documents109.
33.
Spack, R.1988. Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TES OL Quarterly, 22 (1),29-51.
34.
Spack, R.1997. The rhetorical construction of multilingual students . TESOL Quarterly, 31,765- 774.
35.
Tajino, A. & Tajino, Y.2000. Native and non-native: What can they offer? Lessons from team-teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 54 (1),3-11.
36.
Waiters, S. & Balla, J.1998. Medium of instruction: Policy and reality at one Hong Kong tertiary institution. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.) Language in Hong Kong at Century's End, pp. 366-389. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
