63 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

 

 

Students’ Voice:  A Need Analysis on Teaching and Learning English at 

Islamic University 
 

Alfian, alfian@uinjambi.ac.id, State Islamic University STS Jambi, Indonesia 

 

Abstract. This paper provides a detailed description of the need analysis for 

designing English teaching and learning activities for non-English major 

learners. This case study research highlights the need analysis for English 

teaching and learning by involving students of Tarbiyah and Teacher 

Science Faculty at one of Islamic University in Indonesia. The data were 

collected by conducting Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and survey. 

Thematic methods analyzed the data from FGD, and the survey data were 

analyzed using Microsoft Excel. It was found that speaking and developing 

vocabulary are the most important language skills and components to be 

improved. The result also indicated that various activities should be 

implemented in the classroom, such as a game, pair works, and group 

discussion and presentation. Furthermore, improving four language skills 

and vocabulary was the target of learning English. This study is crucially 

important for the process of teaching and learning English and for designing 

curriculum and course delivery of English for non-majoring students. 

Keywords:  Need analysis, ESP, language skills, language components 

 

1. INTRODUCTION

 

A successful learner is not the one who instantly master the language by her/himself and 

picks up the language easily from the learning process in the classroom, however,  mastering 

and picking up the language from the teaching and learning process are influenced by a lot of 

factors, such as teacher,  learning materials,  teaching methods, learning strategies, learning 

environment, and learner`s need. Learners often neglected these factors, s a result, the success 

in language learning could not be achieved. However, the involvement of the above factor 

needs to be investigated in a particular context to optimize learning opportunities in learning 

English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and  English for Specific Purposes (ESP). The purpose 

of investigating these factors is in two folds. First, it is to see whether the goal of learning is 

achieved. Second, it is to see whether the students fulfill their need for learning. 

Within the Indonesian context of English learning, especially at Islamic institutions, it is 

considered that the present material, student activities in learning, and teaching methods used 

by the teacher have not yielded the desired results of learning English and have not addressed 

the learners' both professional and academic goal. This situation happens because teaching 

materials, especially for the non-English major learner, are mostly in the form of handouts 

and sheets of paper and developed into the powerpoint. They collected many different 

sources, such as a book and internet (Rizal, S, 2019; Yaumi, M, 2012). These learning 

materials may not fulfill the need of the student because what the students need may not cover 

in the material, whereas learning material is the crucial thing in the teaching and learning 

process (Rohmah, Z, 2015). Besides, learning material, the teaching methods, and other 

learning activities do not encourage the learners to learn. This situation happens because it 

seems that need analysis was absent (NA) before preparing the teaching and learning 

activities. Thus, formal needs analysis procedures for teaching and learning activities and 

processes are urgently required to meet the needs of a target group of learners (Chostelidou, 

2010). 

mailto:alfian@uinjambi.ac.id


 

 

 

64 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

It is important to note that needs analysis is the foundation of creating a  “focused 

course” (Dudley-Evans T & Saint John, M. J, 1998).  Furthermore, need analysis is used as 

the foundation in designing tests, evaluating teaching strategies, designing teaching materials, 

designing teaching, and learning activities (Diana and Mansur, 2018). Thus, Need Analysis 

(NA)  is important to make the teaching and learning activities run well and to fulfill the 

student's needs. As a result, their motivation to study raise (Yaumi, 2012).  

Need Analysis (NA) is the process of collecting information from the learners about 

what needs to be taught and learned by the learners for the course. NA is the identification of 

what is needed by the learner in learning the lesson (Sholikhah, 2016). Previously, Richards 

(2001) emphasized that need analysis refers to“the procedures and activities that collect 

information about students’ needs, then validate and prioritize those needs to be the 

foundation for designing and evolving a curriculum that matches those needs. In this 

definition, it was emphasized that every learner has their different needs, and what is taught 

must match the learner`s needs. From this definition, it is clear that the benefit and function of 

need analysis are apparent: Need analysis is needed for determining the success of learning 

(Richards, 2002). NA is also to see the accuracy and suitability of learning programs, such as 

curriculum and the situations where English is used. Therefore teachers would be 

considerably easy in designing learning materials and textbooks for fulfilling the needs of 

students (Kusumaningputri, 2011). Furthermore, Richards (2013) emphasized that the 

learning objectives are depending on the system analysis or need analysis is part of the proses 

in determining learning aims and objectives. NA is also tremendously important to consider to 

meet academic requirements and satisfy the specific needs of students (Nurie, 2017). 

Sholikhah (2016) emphasized that need analysis could be done through Identifying the 

learner's communicative need, determining general and specific objectives, determining the 

content of learning material and the language skills, arranging the outline of the material in 

the form of the syllabus and selecting teaching material and appropriate teaching methods. 

Adhabiyyah (2014) stated that there are three components of NA, which are “Target analysis, 

current situation analysis, and teaching and learning situation analysis.” English for specific 

purposes (ESP) has a difference from General English.  According to Robinson (1990), the 

main goal of ESP  is to master English in the learners` field of study. Thus, the ESP 

curriculum and its syllabus should be designed to be learner-centered. It is related to the terms 

used or the vocabulary and the type of discourse that is or the type of conversation that 

usually occurs in different disciplines (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987). For example Chemistry 

students, then they should have to acquire materials and understand English for Chemistry, or 

if they are students of Islamic Religious Education, they should know English terms related to 

Islamic Education, if they are economics students, economic terms in English. 

Similarly, Donough (1984) states that the communication need of the learners is 

prioritized by syllabus and materials. Donough (1984) suggests that objectives, syllabus, and 

the material of ESP should be developed and designed based on the students` needs and the 

“graduate users.” So ESP is a special approach that is bottom-up in learning. ESP refers to 

focused learning, which is oriented to the specific field in English. It is focused on the 

sciences and the field of the work of the graduate. In order to implement English as a specific 

objective, it is necessary to have the right teaching material because the teaching material has 

a crucial role in determining the success of learning (Harmer, 2009; Hutchinson & Torres 

1994; Cunningsworth 1995; Richard 2001; and Karomouzian 2010). Thus, non-English major 

learners should have different purposes for learning English. It is essential to place ESP as a 

tool for Islamic university students to support their studies. The emphasis on teaching English 

on content and learning materials demands the need for the development of good teaching 

materials. 



 

 

 

65 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

Most studies on need analysis of language skills conducted by the researchers all over 

the world (Aeni N, Jabu B, Rahman M. A, Ismail H, & Bin-Tahir S. Z, n.d.; Alqunayeer & 

Zamir S, 2016; Bae D, 2017; Diana S & Mansur M, 2018) found that Speaking skills was 

given to be the highest consideration to be improved and the top one in their list for making 

improvement. For example, Boroujeni and Fard (2013), who conducted a need analysis study 

in Iran, found that speaking was to be the first rank in the list needed by the learners. These 

findings indicated that the student's main purpose in learning English is to communicate in 

English, and students believed that learning a language should be started by using it in 

speaking  (Poedjiastutie & Oliver 2017). Furthermore,  speaking skill is also believed as the 

basic in language skill for making interaction with other speakers (Abrar, 2018).  However, 

some studies demonstrated a different finding. For example, Luankanokrat (2011) in Thailand 

found that reading was the most important skill needed by the learners, and speaking skill was 

the least one. This study, similar to the finding of the study conducted by  Wu & Lou (2018).  

Their finding revealed that reading skills were the most needed by the students who learn 

English for Specific Purposes ( ESP). Different from previous studies, Aklilu (2015) showed 

that writing skills and subskills were most needed by civil engineering students, followed by 

reading and speaking skills in Ethiopia.  

Besides the importance of speaking skills,  improving vocabulary was another concern 

of the learners.  Studies indicated that acquiring vocabulary were also the special concerns of 

learners (Evan, S & Green, C, 2007; Hyland, K, 1997; Jalil, N & Kamarudin, M, 2009; 

Littlewood, W & Liu, N, 1996). Kaur et al. (2013) also found that vocabulary development is 

also one of the most important activities to be improved. This finding is supported by Diana 

and Mansur (2018), which found that improving vocabulary is given the highest priority 

among grammar and pronunciation. These findings support that to speak English well, and a 

learner should have a great number of vocabulary, which is around 3000-5000 vocabularies 

(Nurweni and Read, 1999). 

Another concern of the studies on need analysis is varieties of learning activities, 

learning strategies, and teaching methods.  Aeni, et al. (2018) found that varieties of learning 

activities and teaching methods need to be implemented in teaching and learning. This finding 

also supported by a study Boroujeni and Fard (2013) which shows that student likes active 

roles in the classroom. Diana and Mansur (2018) found that students prefer to have learning 

activities by the oral report, role play, game, and out of Class activity. However, it is reported 

that Roleplay (50%) was the most favored learning activity chosen by the participant. In terms 

of learning strategies, most studies found that language learners have used a variety of 

strategies in learning English (Alfian 2018; Annurahman et al. 2013; Hayati 2015; Kartika 

and Emaliana 2016; Idham 2014). 

In light of all the empirical evidence reported above and the literature reviewed on the 

role of needs analysis for the success of English learning, the researcher proposed that it is 

tremendously important to consider learner needs analysis to meet academic requirements and 

satisfy the specific needs of students in a certain context of study because NA is defined as 

context-specific (Ferris 1998). Therefore, a similar study on the need analysis in a certain 

context such as at the  Islamic Higher Education Institution is urgently needed in order to 

hinder the discrepancies between students’ language learning needs and issues on English 

instruction and delivery in the global perspectives. The results of the need analysis of the 

present study could be used by the lecturer in designing English teaching material and 

activities for non-English majors. 

This paper presents the results of a current study on need analysis related to learning 

purposes and learning outcomes, language learning materials, teaching techniques, and 

students` learning strategies of non-English majors. This need analysis is required to obtain 



 

 

 

66 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

information about the students' needs used for developing teaching and learning activities. 

This need analysis is theoretically very useful as an input in the development of teaching and 

learning activities, developing textbooks related to English for  Islamic religious majors. 

Practically this research will be eventually important for an English lecturer and students, 

especially students learning strategies. 

 

2. METHODS 

 

A case study method employing both qualitative and quantitative techniques of data 

collection was adopted in this research. Thus, the data were collected by distributing a 

questionnaire to 456  participants at the Faculty of Tarbiyah of State Islamic University. The 

participants, as the population, was chosen by employing a purposive sampling technique. 

Therefore, the population of this study was in the 1 st and 3rd semester.  The selection of the 

third semester was that because they have taken English subjects, and the 1st was taken as a 

population because they were taking this subject. The questionnaire Another method of data 

collection was done by conducting a focus group discussion. The focus group discussion was 

conducted with four groups of students in which each group consists of 5 participants. Forty 

students to answer research questions related to the strategy used and the teaching method 

used by the teacher.  The descriptive and frequences analysis were employed to analyzed that 

data from the questionnaire and focus group interviews were analyzed by using thematic 

methods of data analysis, including coding, categorizing, and emerging themes (Braun and 

Clarke 2006; Fielding 2008; Miles and Huberman 1994; Seale 2004). 

 

3. RESULTS 

  

The results of the study are presented based on the research questions which are focused 

on the learning purpose, learning material, and teaching methods, and learning strategies. 

The first research question of the study is about learning objectives and targets in 

learning  English. The result of the analysis is presented in table 1 below. 

 

 

Table 1. Learning objectives and outputs 

 

No Statements Choice Percentage 

1 Purpose of 

learning 

 

Higher education 10,29 

Future career 34,56 

Understanding text 45,59 

Other 9,56 

2 Target in learning  Improving 4 skills 60,47 

Pass TOEFL 9,30 

Improved grammar 0 

Improved vocabulary 30,23 

 

Table 1 above indicated that the majority of the students (45,9%) believed that 

understanding English text is the main objective for studying English at the university level. 

Besides understanding the English text,  Success for a future career  (34,56%) is the student's 

main dream in learning English. The other 10% of the students believed that learning English 

is one of the requirements for pursuing higher education, while 9.6% of the students have 

other goals for learning English. 



 

 

 

67 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

Related to learning targets,  the majority of the learners (60,47%) expected to improve 

the four language skills (Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing). This finding shows that four 

language skills are very vital things in learning a language. Furthermore, the second highly 

desirable output in learning English is to increase vocabulary (30.23%). This finding supports 

the finding of other studies (Hyland, 1997. Jalil & Kamarudin, 2009; Littlewood & Liu, 1996; 

Evans & Green, 2007).  These studies show that vocabulary acquisition was the most concern 

of the students. This concern is very reasonable because to communicate well in English, and 

a learner should have around 3000- 5000 vocabularies (Nurweni, A & Read, J, 1999). 

Interestingly, students do not have a target to improve their grammar in learning English.  

The finding of this study is very synchronous with the objective of the learners in which 

to understand English text, so it cannot be questions that the target is to improve their 

language skills and enrich the vocabulary.  This finding means that the lecturers need to 

design the lesson, which emphasizes on four language skills and vocabulary enhancement. 

The result of data analysis of student surveys related to the importance of language 

skills and components consists of 2 parts, namely: The language skills and language 

component, such as Grammar and vocabulary needed by students, which are presented in 

table 2 below. 

 

Table 2. Language skills and components and type of English material 

 

1 Language skills and 

language component  

 

Listening 8,57 

Speaking 42,86 

Reading 2,86 

Writing 11,43 

Vocabulary 28,57 

Grammar 5,7 

2 Type of Teaching Material General English 67,18 

Esp 32,06 

Others 0,76 

 

Table 2 demonstrates that the majority of students believed that speaking skills 

(42,86%) are the most essential skill, while Vocabulary development (28,57%) is the most 

important language component to be developed. Therefore, speaking and developing 

vocabulary must be the focus of the lecturer in developing learning material and making 

activities for students. However, it can be concluded that students are convinced that all 

language skills and components need to be taught into language learning materials.  This 

finding is in line with other studies (Alqunayeer & Zamir S, 2016; Bae D, 2017), indicating 

that speaking skill was the most favored skill chosen by the participants.  The reason why 

students prioritize Speaking skill is that they need for communication. This finding also 

assumed that students believed that by improving their speaking skills and increasing their 

vocabulary, learners would be able to communicate in English by the objectives of learning 

English, which is to be able to communicate well in English both oral and written 

(Permendikbud, 2013). 

. From table 2 above, it can be seen that almost 67% of students believed that the 

content of English teaching materials for students of the first semester is general English. This 

opinion confirms that the basic English subject, according to the student, is to be general 

English. This means that from the beginning, learning should get basic English before moving 

on to the next English that suits their department. Meanwhile, 32.06% stated that the content 

of English learning materials should be under their majors (32, 06%). While 0.76 students 



 

 

 

68 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

have not been very familiar with what material should be included in English learning 

materials. 

These significant findings on learning materials suggest that both language skills and 

language components (vocabulary and grammar)  should be included in learning material and 

activities, which can language skills and vocabulary and grammar enhancement.  

According to these findings, lecturers must formulate a good learning syllabus that 

covers all language skills and language components, particularly speaking and vocabulary 

improvement. In other words, the syllabus should be implemented by designing the Semester 

Learning Plan (Rencana Pembelajaran Semester/RPS). Furthermore, the teaching and learning 

process should use appropriate teaching materials, such as textbooks, modules, and handouts. 

These teaching materials should also be designed at least through 4 stages: (1) the stage of 

designing the learning objectives, (2) the stage of designing the learning materials, (3) the 

stage of designing the strategy learning, and (4) the design stage of learning evaluation (Rizal, 

2019). 

The findings from the interviews referred to the lecture teaching techniques, activities, 

and student learning strategy that can be seen in Table 3 below. 

 

Table 3. Teaching techniques and learning strategies 

 

1 Teaching techniques 

and activities 

More game 

Relax and happy 

Using song 

Question and answer 

explanation 

using English 

Teaching more vocabularies 

Asking students to practice 

Presentation 

Lecture 

Pair work  

Group discussion 

Individual presentation 

 

2 Learning strategies Watching movie 

Memorizing vocabularies 

practicing 

writing 

speaking 

reading article, novel, story 

Repetition 

using youtube  

listening to music 

question and answer 

make humor 

Taking English Course 

imitating 

game 

using social media 

pronouncing the words 

 

 



 

 

 

69 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

 

The findings of lecturer teaching techniques and activities are various. As can be seen 

from Table 3 above that there are a lot of teaching techniques and learning activities 

suggested by the learners. For example, an English lecturer should be able to create a good 

class atmosphere that varies and fun. This technique can be done with questioning,  

asking/reproducing students to practice, sufficient — explanations/ presentations from 

classroom lecturers, making games,  and other activities that can add their vocabulary. 

These teaching techniques and classroom activities are also in line with the survey of 

language learning strategies proposed by the students. The results show (see table 3 above) 

the various ways or strategies undertaken by students in improving their English skills. More 

than ten strategies or ways they do in improving their English are among the most important 

and appropriate teaching methods they expect to practice English, practice four language 

skills, and memorize or add to their vocabulary.  Besides, to improve their English, they use 

media and technology, such as TV, tape recorder, social media like Youtube and Facebook. 

The students use various ways to improve their English language ability. This finding 

supported the previous studies on language learning strategies which were indicated that good 

learner uses many strategies in learning (Alfian A, 2018; Annurahman, Kurniawati, & 

Ramadhiyanti Y, 2013; Hayati, N, 2015; Idham, S, 2014; Kartika, T & Emaliana, L, 2016). 

The variety of strategies of students is closely related to "strategy awareness" or awareness in 

searching for strategies to improve the student's overall ability. (Lee & Oxford, 2008) 

emphasized that strategy awareness or awareness about the importance of strategy greatly 

helps language learners use these strategies. This strategy will bring the student into a good 

learner. 

 

4. CONCLUSION 

 

The findings from the data analysis have demonstrated several issues related to the need 

of the learners need in learning. These issues need to take account because they provide 

important implications for improving teaching and learning in English and the changing of the 

curriculum of English for no English major. 

First, the finding indicated that the main objective of learning is to understand the text in 

English of their major.  This finding means that there is a call for a highly specific syllabus, 

which is emphasized reading comprehension and vocabulary enrichment on their major. 

Second, the finding demonstrated that all four language skills are essential for learners. 

Thus, it is needed to set up the course and the learning material with a clear focus on 4 

English skills, especially speaking skills and vocabulary development.  It is also suggested 

that the activities, such as making a presentation, public speaking, independent task on 

vocabularies enrichment should be included in the syllabus designed both for in-class and out 

of class activities. This will encourage the students to be autonomous learners. 

Third, in terms of teaching methods and learning activities, most participants agree that 

the teaching method and learning activities should have variations. This is to accommodate 

the participants who have different strategies concerning the approach of learning.  

Fourth, the analysis of student needs in this study is expected to provide a reference for 

lecturers to develop language teaching language.  This need analysis also provides a call for a 

highly specific syllabus which is needed to be designed, which emphasizes both the receptive 

and productive skills and language components. As a result,  the needs syllabus document is 

expected to reflect the student's need by using authentic material because it was felt that the 

current English syllabus and material used by the lecturer are not at all matched with the 

student's need. 



 

 

 

70 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

Finally, this study has limitations in terms of population and sample in which there were 

only two study programs are in close consultation. Further research is expected to involve 

more study programs so that the data can be crossed checked. 

 

REFERENCES 

 

Abrar, M. (2018). An Investigation Into Indonesian EFL University Student’ Speaking 

Anxiety. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 221–248. 

Adhabiyyah, R. Mahanum, & Nor A.M. (2014). Needs Analysis and Material Development in 

English for Specific Purposes in Relation to English for Islamic Studies. E-Proceedings 

of the Conference on Management and Muamalah, 26–27. 

Aeni N, Jabu B, Rahman M. A, Ismail H, & Bin-Tahir S. Z. (n.d.). The Students’ Needs in 

Maritime English Class at Ami Aipi Makassar, Indonesia. Journal of Language 

Teaching and Research, 1284–1292. 

Ahmed Alsamadani, H. (2017). Needs Analysis in ESP Context: Saudi Engineering Students 

as a Case Study. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 8(6), 58. 

https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.6p.58 

Alfian A. (2018). Proficiency level and language learning strategy choice of Islamic 

University learners in Indonesia. TEFLIN Journal, 1–18. 

Alqunayeer, & Zamir S. (2016). Needs Analysis of Saudi EFL Female Students: A Case Study 

of Qassim University. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 

Annurahman, Kurniawati, & Ramadhiyanti Y. (2013). Exploring Indonesian college students’ 

strategies in Learning English Language. AWEJ. 317–330. 

https://doi.org/10.26858/eltww.v4i1.3209 

Bae D. (2017). Designing an English Syllabus for Nursing Students based on need analysis in 

Indonesia. ELT WORLDWIDE, 4(1), 87–104. 

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research 

in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa 

Chostelidou, D. (2010). A needs analysis approach to ESP syllabus design in Greek tertiary 

education: A descriptive account of students’ needs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral 

Sciences, 2(2), 4507–4512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.721 

Diana S, & Mansur M. (2018). Need Analysis of English Teaching Materials for ICT 

Students. ETERNAL (English, Teaching, Learning, and Research Journal), 4(3). 

Donough, J. (1984). ESP in Perspective A Practical Guide. London: Collin ELT. 

Dudley-Evans T, & Saint John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: 

A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge university press. 

Dudley-Evans, T, & St John, M. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes- a 

multi-disciplinary  approach. London: Cambridge University Press. 

Evan, S, & Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary 

students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3–17. 

Ferris, D. (1998). Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis. 

TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 289–318. 

Fielding, J. (2008). Coding and managing data. In G. N (Ed.), Researching social life. 

London: Sage Publication Ltd. 

Goto-Tamura, R., Takesue, Y., & Takesue, S. (1976). The immunological similarity between 

NADH-cytochrome b5 reductase of erythrocytes and liver microsomes. Biochimica Et 

Biophysica Acta, 423(2), 293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2728(76)90186-9 

Harmer, J. (2009). The practice of English Language Teaching. Edinburgh: Pearson Education 

Limited. 

https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.8n.6p.58
https://doi.org/10.26858/eltww.v4i1.3209
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.721
https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2728(76)90186-9


 

 

 

71 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

Hayati, N. (2015). A Study of English Language Learning Beliefs, Strategies, and English 

Academic  Achievement of the ESP Students of STIENAS Samarinda. Dinamika Ilmu, 

15(2), 297–323. 

Hutchinson, T, & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as an agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 

315–328. 

Hyland, K. (1997). Language attitudes at the handover: Communication and identity in 1997 

Hong Kong. English World-Wide, 18(2), 191–210. 

Idham, S. (2014). Language Learning Strategies: Gender and Proficiency. Marwah: Jurnal 

Perempuan, Agama Dan Gender, 13(1), 104–131. 

Jalil, N, & Kamarudin, M. (2009). ELAP needs analysis for law students. Journal of Human 

Capital Development, 2(2), 121–136. 

Karamouzian, F. (2010). A Post-Use Evaluation of Current Reading Comprehension 

Textbooks Used in TEFL Programs. The Iranian EFL Journal, 6(4), 24–62. 

Kartika, T, & Emaliana, L. (2016). Students’ Achievements and Learning Strategies Across 

Gender Differences. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 

3(2). 

Kaur, N. (2013). The need for autonomous vocabulary learners in the Malaysian ESL 

classroom. GEMA Online: Journal of Language Studies, 13(3). 

Kusumaningputri, R. (2011). Needanalysis dalam Mata Kuliah ‘English For Specific 

Purposes’’.’ Jurnal Pengembangan Pendidikan, 8(2). 

Littlewood, W & Liu, N. (1996). Hong Kong students and their English. Macmillan 

Publishers Limited. 

Luankanokrat, S. (2011). Needs analysis for English communication skills of employees at 

HSBC in Thailand. Language Institute Journal. 

Mahbub, M. (2019). English Teaching in Vocational High School: A Need Analysis. JEELS 

(Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 5(2), 229–258. 

Munby, J. (1978). Communicative Syllabus Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Nurie, Y. (2017). Analyzing the English Language Needs of University Law Students. The 

Internet Journal Language, Culture, and Society. 

Nurweni, A, & Read, J. (1999). The English vocabulary knowledge of Indonesian university 

students. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 161–175. 

Permendikbud. (2013). Permendikbud nomor 64 tahun 2013 tentang Standar isi. Jakarta: 

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan. 

Poedjiastutie, D, & Oliver, R. (2017). English Learning Needs of ESP Learners: Exploring 

Stakeholder Perceptions at An Indonesian University. TEFLIN Journal, 28(1), 1–21. 

Richard, Jack C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: 

Cambridge University Press. 

Rizal, S. (2019). Analisis Kebutuhan Bahan Ajar Bahasa Inggris IAIN Bengkulu Melalui 

Students’ Need Analysis. At-Ta’lim: Media Informasi Pendidikan Islam, 12(2), 232–

252. 

Robinson, Paulina. (1990). English for Specific Purposes. Oxford: Oxford: Pergamon Press, 

Ltd. 

Rohmah, Z. (2015). EFL Materials in Madrasah Tsanawiyah: What Do They Really Need? 

TEFLIN Journal, 20(1), 104–117. 

Seale, Clive. (2004). Coding and Analysing data In C. Seale. London: Sage Publication  Ltd. 

Solikhah, Imrotus. (2016). Pengembangan model kurikulum pendidikanbahasa Inggris 

berbasis KKNI. Konstruktivisme, 8(1). 

Tseng, S. (2012). The factors cause language anxiety for ESL/EFL learners in learning 

speaking. WHAMPOA-An Interdisciplinary Journal, 63(1), 75–90. 



 

 

 

72 | IJET| Volume. 8, Issue 2. December 2019 

Tsiplakides, I. (2011). Selecting an English Coursebook: Theory and Practice. Theory and 

Practice in Language Studies, 1(7), 758–764. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.7.758-764 

Wu, J, & Lou, Y. (2018). Needs Analysis of Chinese Chemical Engineering and Technology 

Undergraduate Students in Yangtze University in English for Specific Purposes. 

Creative Education, 9(15), 25–92. 

Yaumi, M. (2012). Pengembangan bahan ajar Englis for specific Purpose berbasis TIK. 

Lentera Pendidikan, 15(2), 144–160. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.7.758-764