Effectively
Implementing a Collaborative Task-based Syllabus (CTBA) in EFL Large-sized Business
English Classes
Pi-Ching
Chen
Department
of Foreign Languages and Literature
BRIEF PROFESSIONAL BIODATA
Dr. Pi-Ching Chen, Associate
Professor and Department Head of Foreign Languages and Literature at
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study is
to design a collaborative task-based syllabus (CTBS) for achieving a more
holistic college Business English instruction in an EFL large-sized classroom.
The CTBS integrated teacher-directed content-based instruction and
student-centered task-based instruction. The distinctive characteristic of the CTBS
is the application of the “simulation companies” established by learners themselves,
actively involving their specific creativity and cooperation. To create a more collaborative
authentic learning setting, the CTBS applies various interactive teaching
techniques in the four-stage learning activities: company establishment,
staff recruitment, business transaction, and feedback and evaluation.
INTRODUCTION
To cope with increasingly fierce international competition,
EFL business-major students are asked to enhance their English skills and
abilities in international business communication. However, there is a critical
problem in the teaching of business English courses at colleges or universities
in the EFL surroundings, resulting from inappropriate teaching materials and
instructional techniques. Traditionally, the most common teaching approach
applied in the business English classes is teacher-centered and
lecture-oriented.
Effective instructional tasks allow more room for learners
to have something of their own to express in their specific ideas (Langer &
Applebee, 1987). Fried-Booth (1986) proposed that the project-work approach to
overcome the difficulties in language teaching programs, stating that, “What is taught in the classroom may in theory be
useful, but the usefulness does not always extend to practice. Often, there is
a gap between the language the students are taught and the language they in
fact require. It is this gap that project work can help to bridge (p. 5).”
EFL instructors for the teaching of business English have
to make their efforts to create a learning environment that encourages learners
to actively transfer the language skills taught in the classroom to practical
business situations. In order to accomplish the goal of learning-for-application,
the author successfully designed a collaborative task-based syllabus (CTBS) for the
teaching of EFL business-major learners in large-sized classrooms.
The CTBS is divided
into four learning stages¾company establishment, staff recruitment, business
transaction, and feedback and
evaluation. All the projects in each learning stage are implemented task
by task, actively involving the creativity and cooperation of the learners. The
distinctive characteristic of the CTBS is the
application of the “simulation companies” established by learners
themselves. All of the learning activities are proceeding by using various
interactive techniques, such as role play, brainstorming, group decision-making,
and case study.
REVIEW
OF RELATED LITERATURE
Since the 1960s, English for specific purposes (ESP)
has become a vital and innovative activity within the teaching of English as a
foreign or second language movement (Howatt, 1984). ESP is regarded as an
“approach” not as a “product” (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987). It is an
approach to language teaching in which all decisions as to content and method
are based on the learner’s reason for learning.
Markee (1988) proposes that ESP is
communication not only because it is learner-centered but also because teaching
language as communication is an innovative activity. Based on this point of
view, ESP instructors characteristically use problem-solving methods and
techniques to promote the appropriate communicative development of individuals
in particular contexts of implementation.
The role of the ESP teacher differs from those of the General English teacher. With some reasonable justifications, Swales (1985) prefers to use the term “ESP practitioners” instead of “ESP teachers” to reflect this specific scope. It will already be much clearer that several researchers regard ESP teaching as extremely varied, and for this reason they use the term “practitioners” rather than “teachers” to emphasize that ESP teaching involves much more than writing. Commonly, an ESP practitioner acts at least seven key roles¾a course designer, a material provider, a facilitator, a consultant, a coordinator, an evaluator, and even a project researcher.
Dudley-Evans and
ELT: English Language Teaching
EMT: English as EFL:
English as a
a Mother Tongue Foreign Language
GE: ESP:
English for
General English Specific Purposes
EAP: English for EOP: English for
Academic
Purposes Occupational Purposes
EST: EMP: ELP: EMFE:
English for English for English for English for
Science and Medicine Legal Management,
Technology Purposes Purposes Finance and
Economics
EPP: EVP:
English for Professional Purposes
English for Vocational Purposes
EMP: English EBP: English
PVE: VE:
for Medical for Business Pre-Vocational Vocational Purposes Purposes English English
Figure
1. The Family of English Language
Teaching
The project-work instructional approach is a
student-centered rather than teacher-directed teaching method (Haines, 1989).
It is particularly effective in the ESP teaching settings, because it easily
lends itself to (1) learner centeredness (2) authentic language use, (3)
authentic tasks, and (4) a focus on language at the discourse rather than the
sentence level (Robinson, 1991). From the beginning of the project, learners
themselves have to decide what they will do and how they will do it (Sheppard &
Stoller, 1995). They also conclude that “though project work may not be the
easiest instructional approach to implement, the potential pay-offs are many”
(p.15).
There is a wide gap between the language the students
are taught and the language they in fact require. It is this gap that project
work can help to bridge (Fried-Booth, 1986). Any project work should give the ESP
learners opportunities for language use and development, Sometimes for project
work, they may have to use their mother tongue, but the outcome in writing will
always be in English (Byrne, 1988).
Zamel (1982) proposes that writing is essentially a
process of discovery. Based on the process-oriented writing approach, the
teaching of writing is regarded as a process, not a product. A reading-writing instructional
approach in the business English classroom can promote some writing improvement
for ESP learners (Cunninghan, 1994). She used qualitative research methods by
observing student interactions, making daily notes during and after each class
session, interviewing students in one-to-one conferences, collecting all the
written work, and extracting information from an end-of-quarter evaluation of
the course. The study concluded that most students significantly reduced the
number of errors in their work; at the same time, they developed a sense of
authority and ownership over their work.
In the early 1980s, peer editing has been used in ESL
writing classes, and has received increasing attention from teachers and
on-going research. Some of the studies compare teacher editing with peer
editing to find the effectiveness of the latter in ESL writing classes. Peer
editing has many advantages, inclusive of improving student involvement in the
writing activity, promoting student self-confidence, and adding perspective to
students’ perception of the writing process (Hafernic, 1983). Shi (1993) also concludes
that “peer editing not only could help students understand their past and present,
but could help them to choose the actions they want to take to transform
themselves and their life-world” (p. vi).
Furthermore a peer-reviewing conference refers to a
conference in which students review, discuss, and revise each other’s writings
one another in the process of completing their own written products. In the
process-oriented writing approach, each student reads his or her written draft
to peers in the group, who give the writer feedback. Revisions that students
make as a result of peer-reviewing responses are higher-level revisions than
those made when the individual student is working and reading alone (Wirth, 2004).
A feasible syllabus makes the language learning task seem more manageable. The syllabus is now
seen as an instrument by which the teacher can achieve a degree of ‘fit’
between the needs and aims of the learner and the activities which will take
place in the classroom” (Yalden, 1984).
It is clear that a syllabus is an important document in the teaching and
learning process. Candlin and Murphy
(1987) said that “task-based learning continues with and develops recent
attention to learner-centered approaches, and in particular the ideas of
differentiation and learner interdependence” (p. 3), adding that “tasks serve as compelling and
appropriate means for realizing certain characteristic principles of
communicative language teaching and learning” (p. 5).
Dam (1985) characterized language learning tasks
within a communication framework and found that “the central aim in my teaching
could be described as ‘autonomy’, which is building on the pupils’ own planning
of the teaching/learning process and the development/unfolding of their
awareness of aims and responsibility to the process” (p. 1). In consideration
of the learner-centered approach, task-based language learning is not only a
means to enhancing classroom communication and acquisition but also the means
to the development of classroom syllabuses (Candlin, 1987).
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CTBS
The collaborative task-based syllabus (CTBS) is
designed for business- or management-major EFL
learners in a large-sized Business English classroom. It is necessary for
them to enhance four
skills on business or commercial English. The CTBS
integrated teacher-directed content-based instruction and student-centered task-based
instruction.
Brown (2001) emphasizes that group work generates
interactive language and offers an embracing affective climate, and that it promotes
learner’s responsibility and autonomy. In implementing the proposed CTBS, group
work is widely used to create a more interactive learning environment for
learners to actively engage in. By adopting the interactive role play, each
group has to do both before-class practice and during-class oral presentation
on the different topics of the situational conversations. During the oral
presentation, EFL learners are encouraged to arrange an authentic environment
and atmosphere to experience the practical side of the language.
In the beginning of each project task for the CTBS, the
teacher has to clearly state the teaching objectives, project contents, and
task procedures. To distribute and balance the tasks, the teacher has to assign
the definite role to take the responsibility for finishing the draft of each
task product. All the members of each simulation company have to participate in
the peer-reviewing conference. The writing drafts are carefully revised through
the peer-reviewing conferences.
The CTBS consists of four projects: (1) company
establishment, (2) staff recruitment, (3) business transacting, and (4)
feedback and evaluation. Each project task is the result of coordinated actions
and collaborative activities undertaken by each member of the company. All the
activities in each stage are designed to train EFL learners as active and
creative participants, not passive and dull recipients of business knowledge.
The project tasks of the CTBS are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The Project Tasks
of the CTBS
|
Stage |
Project |
Task |
|
I |
Company
Establishment |
|
|
|
|
1-1 Forming Companies |
|
|
|
1-2 Constructing Organizational Charts |
|
II |
Staff
Recruitment |
|
|
|
|
2-1 Wanted Ads |
|
|
|
2-2 Cover Letter |
|
|
|
2-3 Resume |
|
|
|
2-4 Interview |
|
III |
Business
Transaction |
|
|
|
|
3-1 Looking for Customers |
|
|
|
3-2 Invitation Cards/Letters |
|
|
|
3-3 Fair & Customers’ Opinion Survey |
|
|
|
3-4 Survey Data Analysis |
|
|
|
3-5 Enquiry/Inquiry |
|
|
|
3-6 Quotation/Offer |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3-8 Placing an Order |
|
IV |
Feedback
and Evaluation |
|
|
|
|
4-1 Feedback & Comments |
|
|
|
4-2 Evaluation & Discussion |
Stage I: The Project for Company
Establishment
1. Teaching Objective:
The main teaching objective of the preliminary
stage is to assist each group of eight students to establish a simulation
company. Through conducting each project task, EFL learners can learn how to
form a new corporation and know the company organization as well as the
functions for each department of the company.
2. Project Contents:
In the first stage of the CTBS, the project is designed to establish new companies. It includes two tasks: forming companies (Task 1-1) and constructing organizational charts of the companies (Task 1-2).
3. Task Procedures:
Task
1-1 Forming Companies
(1) Divide the whole class into several
groups of eight students, and each small group establishes a simulation company;
(2) Arrange
the seats as the layout (see Figure 2) for each simulation company;
(3) Nominate general manager
(GM), executive secretary (ES), marketing manager (MM), marketing section chief
(MSC), finance manager (FM), finance section chief (FSC), human recourses
manager (HRM), and HR section chief (HRSC);
(4) Fill in
the resume forms and set up the personnel file of each company;
(5) Decide
the company name, address, phone and fax number, E-mail address, etc.;
(6) Design
individual name cards, and make title plates for each position.
|
General Manager (GM) |
Executive Secretary (ES) |
||
|
Marketing
(MM) |
|
|
Marketing
(MSC) |
|
Manager (FM) |
|
|
SC (FSC) |
|
Manager (HRM) |
|
|
Chief (HRSC) |
Figure 2.
Seat Layout of the Company
Task
1-2 Constructing Organizational Charts
(1) The organizational chart (see Figure 3) was drawn by the GM and the ES of each
company;
(2) Each company
sign board was designed by the MM and the FM;
(3) The envelope and letter paper are
designed by the MM and the HRM of each simulation company;
General Manager Executive Secretary
Marketing Finance HR
Manager Manager Manager
(MM) (FM) (HRM)
Marketing Finance HR
Section Section Section
Chief Chief Chief
(MSC) (FSC) (HRSC)
Figure 3. The Organizational Chart of the Simulation
Company
Stage II: The Project for Staff
Recruitment
1. Teaching Objective:
The main teaching objective of the second
stage is to guide EFL learners how to apply for
a job. Through the designed project tasks, they learn how to design wanted
advertisement for job opens, how to write resumes together with cover
letters, and how to achieve a successful interview.
2. Project Contents:
In the second stage of the communicative task-based syllabus, four project tasks are designed for the project for staff recruitment. They are wanted ads (Task 2-1), cover letter (Task 2-2), resume (Task 2-3), and interview (Task 2-4).
3. Task Procedures:
Task
2-1 Wanted Ads
(1) The ES of each company is responsible
for designing a wanted advertisement to recruit three section chiefs, including
MSC, FSC, and HRSC;
(2) The CEO committee (including GM, MM, FM,
and HRM) of each company revises the draft of the wanted advertisement.
(3) The MSC, the FSC, and the HRSC have to
draft their own resumes with cover letters and prepare for the coming
interviews.
Task
2-2 Cover Letter
(1) The teacher guides all the students to
read several cover-letter samples.
(2) Three section chiefs rewrite their cover
letters to apply for the positions.
(3) The GM chairs a reviewing conference
to revise the cover letters written by section chiefs with the MM, the FM, and the
HRM.
(4) The ES assists the GM and three
managers to revise and file the section chiefs’ resumes and cover letters.
Task
2-3 Resume
(1)
The teacher guides all the students to read resume samples.
(2) Three
section chiefs rewrite their resumes to apply for the positions.
(3) The GM chairs a reviewing conference
to revise the resumes written by section chiefs with the MM, FM, and HRM of
each company.
(4) The ES assists the GM and three
managers to revise and file the section chiefs’ resumes.
(5) The CEO committee (including GM, MM, FM,
and HRM) proposes a question list and the ES types the list to interview three section
chiefs.
Task
2-4 Interview
(1) The CEO committee of each company
reviews section chiefs’ resumes and cover letters.
(2) The CEO committee interviews all the
applicants in English.
(3) The ES records the whole process of
the interview.
(4) The ES arranges and files a written
record of the interview.
Stage III: The Project
for Business Transaction
1. Teaching Objective:
The main teaching objective of the third
stage is to teach EFL learners how to favorably conduct business transaction
for their simulation companies. Through the designed project tasks of this
stage, students can learn how to precede a successful sales promotion
presentation, how to write inquiry letters, how to offer quotations, how to
apply letter of credit (L/C) as well as Bill of Exchange (B/E), and how to
place an order.
2. Project Contents:
In the third stage of the CTBS, the project contains a series of business transaction. It includes eight project tasks: looking for customers (Task 3-1), invitation cards/letters (Task 3-2), fair & customers’ opinion survey (Task 3-3), survey data analysis (Task 3-4), enquiry/inquiry (Task 3-5), quotation/offer (Task 3-6), L/C and B/E (Task 3-7), and placing an order (Task 3-8).
3. Task Procedures:
To achieve the teaching
objective of this stage, the teacher encourage each simulation company to send
letters to other companies via E-mail. For practicing both the business of
exporting and importing, each company has to play as a role of “buyer/importer”
and “seller/exporter.” In the case study done by the researcher, the six food
companies (Company A, B, C, D, E, and F) are located in
A B
F C
E D
Figure 4.
The Exporting
A B
F C
E D
Figure 5. The Importing
Task
3-1 Looking for Customers
(1) The GM and the ES of each company write the draft of the looking-for-customer
letter;
(2) The MM and the MSC are responsible for
writing the draft of the sales letter;
(3) Both the looking-for-customer letter and
the sales letter are revised by all the
members of each company through a reviewing conference chaired by the
GM;
(4) The ES
sends the letters by E-mail and files the copies of the letters.
Task
3-2
Invitation Cards or Letters
(1) The FM and the FSC of each company design an invitation card for
the Fair;
(2) The HRM and the HRSC design the
questionnaire for “Customer Opinion Survey”;
(3) Both the invitation card and the
survey questionnaire are revised by all the
members of each company through a reviewing conference chaired by the
GM;
(4) The ES
sends the invitation cards of the Fair to all other companies.
Task
3-3 Fair & Customers’ Opinion Survey
A. Manpower Allocation:
(a)
Before the Fair: The MM, the MSC, the HRM, and the HRSC of each company decorate
the fair stand; the ES prepares the “Customer Opinion Survey”; the FM and the FSC
go shopping the things for exhibition.
(b)
During the Fair: The GM and the MM make a sales presentation for the products; the
ES distributes the opinion sheets to the visitors; the MSCs, FMs, FSCs, HRMs, and
HRSCs of all the companies act as the visitors and fill in the survey
questionnaires.
(c)
After the Fair: The ES of each company collects and arranges the questionnaires
for the further analysis. All the members of each company help clean up the
fair place.
B. Time
Allocation:
(a) Decorate the fair stand (30 minutes);
(b) Precede the Fair and filling in the survey
questionnaires (50 minutes);
(c) Clean up the fair place (20 minutes).
Task
3-4 Survey Data Analysis
(1) The GM, the MM, the FM, and the HRM of
each company are responsible for analyzing the data of the “Customer Opinion
Survey”;
(2) The GM chairs a meeting to make a
further discussion on the data as well as the descriptive opinions of the
customers;
(3) The MSC, the FSC, and the HRSC try to
propose the possible improvements for their own company.
(4) The ES records the whole process of
the meeting and writes an English report for a future improvement.
Task
3-5 Enquiry/Inquiry
(1) The teacher guides the students to read
some enquiry sample letters;
(2) Three managers of each company are
responsible for writing the draft of the enquiry letter;
(3) The enquiry letter draft is revised by
all the members of each company through a reviewing conference chaired by the
GM;
(4) The ES
sends the letter by E-mail and files the letter copy.
Task
3-6 Quotation/Offer
(1) The teacher guides the students to read
some quotation sample letters;
(2) Three section chiefs of each company are
responsible for writing the letter draft of the quotation;
(3) The quotation letter draft is revised
by all the members of each company through a reviewing conference chaired by
the GM;
(4) The ES sends
the letter by E-mail and files the letter copy.
Task
3-7 Letter of Credit (L/C) & Bill of Exchange (B/E)
(1)
The
teacher guides the students to read the sample of L/C and B/E;
(2)
Three
managers of each company are responsible for filling in the L/C form;
(3) Three
section chiefs are responsible for completing the B/E form;
(4) Two kinds of commercial documents are
revised by all the members of each company through a reviewing conference
chaired by the GM;
(5) The ES
is responsible for filing the copies of the documents.
Task
3-8 Placing an Order
(1) The teacher guides the students to read
sample letters for placing orders;
(2) The MM and the MSC of each company write
the letter draft to place an order;
(3) The letter for placing an order is
revised by all the members of each company through a reviewing conference
chaired by the GM;
(4) The ES
is responsible for sending the order by E-mail and filing the letter copy.
Stage IV: The Project for Feedback and Evaluation
1. Teaching Objective:
In order to guide EFL learners to make a
holistic feedback, a final oral presentation was arranged for the last stage of
the study. All the students are asked to fill in “The Final Evaluation Form”
to reflect the CTBS.
2. Project Contents:
In the fourth stage of the communicative task-based syllabus, the project is designed to assess and evaluate students’ learning performance and feedback. It includes two project tasks: feedback & comments (Task 4-1) and evaluation & discussion (Task 4-2).
3. Task Procedures:
Task 4-1 Feedback and Comments
(1) To foster the ability of oral presentation in English, each simulation
company is asked to make a thirty-minute oral presentation. The GM, MM, FM, and
HRM of each company have to make a five-minute oral presentation;
(2) After the presentation, the ES of each
company is responsible for arranging the written documents in the file of the
company to hand in by the due date.
(3) The teacher makes an over-all comment
for the oral presentation.
Task
4-2 Evaluation and Discussion
(1) Students are asked to fill in the “Final Evaluation Form” to assess
the effectiveness of the CTBS;
(2) The teacher collects all the opinions
and the data of the evaluation forms, makes a further discussion on the
implementation of the CTBS with the students, and regards all the information
as the references for the future teaching.
CONCLUSION
This collaborative task-based syllabus (CTBS)
for college business English class integrates instructional methods, teaching
materials, and academic fields that contain English language teaching,
international trade, and business administration. Therefore, business English instructors
need to absorb a wide scope of new knowledge on these aspects. This is just as
what Shappard and Stoller (1995) suggest that project work is not an easy
instructional approach to implement in an ESP classroom, but its potential
pay-offs are many.
REFERENCES
Byrne, D. (1988). Teaching writing skills.
Candlin, C. N. (1987). Towards task-based
language learning. In C. N. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks, (pp. 5-22).
Cunningham, L. M. (1994). A reading/writing
approach in the business English classroom. Masters
Abstracts. (University Microfilms No 1356995).
Dam, L. (1985). Strategies for the
correction of errors in different teaching situations and their implications
for initial and in-service teacher training. Greve Kommune,
Dudley-Evans, T., &
Fried-Booth, D. L. (1986). Project work.
Hafernic, J. J. (1983). The how and why of peer editing in the ESL writing class. Paper presented at the State Meeting of CATESOL.
Haines, S. (1989). Projects for the EFL classroom: Resource material for teachers.
Walton-0n-Thames
Howatt, A. P. R. (1984). A history of
English language teaching.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A
learning-centered approach.
Langer, J. A., & Applebee, A. N.
(1987). How writing shapes thinking.
Markee, N. P. P. (1988). An appropriate technology
model of communicative course design. Dissertation
Abstracts International. (University Microfilms No 8810697)
Robinson, P. (1991). ESP (English for specific purposes).
Shi, X. (1993). Ethnic identity and
acculturation: A sociocultural perspective on peer editing in ESL writing. Dissertation Abstracts International,
(University Microfilms No 9408348).
Swales. J. (ed.). (1985). Episodes in ESP. Pergamon.
Wirth, K. M. (2004). A study of rules
designed to increase peer-review accuracy in a computer-aided personalized
system of instruction course. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 42(06). (ProQuest No. 766844211)
Yalden, J. (1984). “Syllabus design in
general education.” In C. J. Brumfit (Ed.) General
English syllabus design.
Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: The process of
discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly,
16(2), 195-209.